Portrait of Frederick
ATTRIBUTED TO C. R. PARKER
Introduction
Neal Auction has sold notable American portraits for over forty years. Works by José Francisco Xavier de Salazar y Mendoza, Charles Willson Peale, Jacques Amans, and Jules Lion, to name a select few, have briefly graced our walls and subsequently joined important public and private collections. The “Portrait of Frederick” is one of only a handful of known portraits of individual enslaved sitters created prior to the Civil War in the South and represents perhaps the most significant work of American art that we have had the honor to offer to date. The painting represents the complex intersection of African American portraiture, American history, art history, race theory and personhood.
Displayed at Longwood, the famed historic, antebellum mansion, in Natchez, Mississippi since the 1860s, the “Portrait of Frederick” is an image that has been well-known to visitors and scholars for many decades yet simultaneously remains clouded in mystery and family lore. Nineteenth century portraiture was almost without fail relegated to those with means in the American South – particularly the wealthy planter class – and almost entirely reserved for white sitters, or in rare instances, free people of color. So how does this pre-Emancipation portrait of an enslaved man exist and why?
We felt that it was our duty to the consignor, the future buyer, and most especially to Frederick, that we do everything in our limited time with the portrait to uncover the truth. The first phone call was an obvious one. Katy Morlas Shannon, a Louisiana-based historian and author who has made it her life’s work to uncover the lost genealogies and stories of enslaved people, recently collaborated with art collector Jeremy K. Simien to uncover the identity of Bélizaire in the now famous “Bélizaire and the Frey Children” group portrait painting that was acquired by The Metropolitan Museum of Art in 2023. From my first communication with Morlas Shannon, I knew we had found someone who was as passionate about the project as we were – someone who joined us in our immediate obsession with Frederick’s story. Importantly, she also had in-depth knowledge of where to begin the research, and the skill set and relentless determination to wade through miles of archives, hundreds of practically illegible handwritten historic documents, and many emotionally wrenching histories.
Morlas Shannon’s research undertaken on behalf of Neal Auction is remarkable for the breadth and depth of information she has uncovered regarding Frederick’s life. Her discoveries shed new light on his role as an enslaved individual for the Nutt family, the type of work in which he was engaged and his family life both prior to and following the Civil War. This research allows for interpretative analysis, critical discussion and historical context in ways that have not been previously possible for this portrait and for the extraordinarily rare category of portraits of enslaved individuals. continues next page
The “Portrait of Frederick” is concurrently a classic three-quarter portrait of a man and a compelling demonstration of the power of portraits to shape our perception of history. The considerations of context, individuality, and societal status are more critical than ever when faced with a portrait of an individual who was denied personhood. As Dr. Jennifer Van Horn, author of Portraits of Resistance: Activating Art During Slavery (Yale University Press, 2022) states regarding the two known Mississippi portraits of enslaved people: “One could even imagine that Frederick and Delia were themselves the patrons as well as the subjects of these works. That is fiction…The portraits present a false agency, using the sitters’ seeming autonomy to bestow a freedom to refuse that they did not in reality possess.” Fredericks’ countenance is an enigmatic one, and one cannot help but try to imagine how this man might have felt when faced with the highly unusual task of sitting for a portrait. C.R. Parker presents him as composed, unsmiling and with his eyes directed to the side. He wears formal clothing that seems at odds with the job we now know he did for his enslavers, and while the process of having one’s portrait painted is, in its very nature, an objectifying one, nonetheless Frederick’s presence is commanding. His gaze is powerful though mysterious. What does the world look like from his eyes? What does it feel like? These are the questions that arise when one’s likeness, one’s humanity, is documented.
Over time and throughout generations, much like in a game of telephone, details were lost and his identity became blurry, until nothing but his name, Frederick, truly remained, along with the only narrative that could reconcile the history of the South as we are taught and the radical existence of this very artifact. While we may never know the reason why Haller Nutt commissioned this nuanced and sensitive portrait of Frederick, we have now at the very least revealed more of the truth of his story thanks to Morlas Shannon’s tireless work. There are likely answers that will never be found, but in the not knowing, and through its very existence, the legacy of the “Portrait of Frederick” will continue to challenge audiences and help us better understand and grapple with our unique and complicated history.
Neal Auction is honored to have played a small role in the long history of this portrait and wishes to thank the Pilgrimage Garden Club of Natchez for entrusting it to us. The “Portrait of Frederick” survives due to their stewardship, and we all hope it will continue to inform, inspire and be conserved for generations to come.
Marney Robinson, Director of Fine Art
LOT 220. Attributed to C.R. Parker (American/Louisiana, 1799-1849), “Portrait of Frederick,” oil on canvas, c. 1840, unsigned, 30 in. x 25 in., framed, overall 37 ½ in. x 32 ½ in. x 2 ½ in. [$300,000 / 500,000]
Provenance: Haller (1816-1864) and Julia Nutt (1822-1897); thence by descent in the Nutt family; Mr. and Mrs. Kelly McAdams, Austin, TX, August, 1968; McAdams Foundation, Austin, TX, December, 1968; Pilgrimage Garden Club of Natchez, MS, 1970.
to C. R. Parker
Portrait of Frederick
by Katy Morlas Shannon
The Existing Narrative
The portrait of Frederick, attributed to C. R. Parker, is one of only a few known portraits of a person enslaved in the American South. The painting is particularly exceptional in that Frederick is the sole subject, not included as a figure adjacent to white sitters or as an element to underscore white sitters’ status, and he is not portrayed as a servile caricature as was so often the case when people of African descent appeared in paintings of the era. Finally the portrait of Frederick possesses one of the rarest qualities of all: it is of an enslaved individual identified by name.
Much has been made of the fact that this portrait is one of only two known paintings of enslaved Mississippians. However, as Frederick spent the entirety of the second half of his life in Louisiana, a case could be made that it holds as much significance for Louisiana history. Ultimately this is not just a story of Mississippi or Louisiana, not just a painting that encapsulates so much about the American South, but a portrait that embodies an essentially American story.
Portraiture is a powerful medium. A portrait artist can transform a person into an object. It can sometimes become difficult to discern whether one is referring to Frederick the portrait or Frederick the man. In life Frederick was viewed by many around him as an object, a possession. In fact, for most of his life he was classified as property under the legal codes of Louisiana and Mississippi, the property of Haller Nutt, a plantation owner in Mississippi and Louisiana. In painting him, C. R. Parker turned his likeness into a piece of property, one that could be hung upon the wall of the home of the man who enslaved him. When we look into his eyes as they have been captured on the canvas, it is time we recognized his humanity and acknowledged that he has a story that goes far beyond the family who enslaved him.
In order to fully convey the magnitude of Frederick’s life and the survival of this painting, it is crucial to establish what has until this point been known about Frederick. Many false narratives have surrounded this portrait. Frederick has become the stuff of legend for Confederate apologists and tourists. Most of what has been said about him has been invented - either in an effort to explain why he was chosen to be painted or to whitewash a brutal past that disconcerts the tellers of the tales and would likely be unpalatable to an audience of tourists. This painting has been at Longwood mansion since the late 1860s, when Longwood’s owner, the Nutt family, became insolvent and sold their plantation holdings in Louisiana. When the Pilgrimage Garden Club of Natchez acquired Longwood in 1970, it also gained possession of the painting of Frederick. It was then the truth became embellished or sometimes categorically denied.
Attributed
Tour guides and docents informed the public that Haller Nutt had grown up alongside Frederick, and Frederick was portrayed as the subservient best friend of his enslaver. In fact, they claimed Haller Nutt had even freed Frederick. Visitors to Longwood were informed that Frederick had been the butler there. They went so far as to say that after Julia Nutt was widowed, Frederick remained a steadfast servant - loyal to the Nutts - helping the family get through the lean years of Reconstruction until his death, at which point he was buried in the family cemetery at Longwood. In his book The Heritage of Longwood, William L. Whitwell stated, “Dr. Nutt was a sober man who took his duties and obligations seriously. He felt deep concern for the approximately 800 slaves who worked his plantations and cared for the family’s homes. . .He was known as a kind master, fair and just toward his blacks. One long-term man-servant named Uncle Frederick, who continued to care for Julia and the children after Dr. Nutt died, is buried in the family graveyard at Longwood alongside members of the family.” Whitwell failed to support his statements with citations, and his book relied almost entirely upon secondary sources of dubious accuracy.
Recently under the guidance of now deceased curator James Wade, strides had been made in the interpretation of the portrait. A sign focused on slavery at Longwood appeared at the site. This would seem a rather minimal acknowledgment of a system that was the sole reason such a lavish dwelling could be constructed. Yet for Longwood, where discussion of enslaved people had been virtually non-existent, this was significant. The sign identified Frederick as the driver or foreman at Haller Nutt’s Araby Plantation. However, it still referred to him with the belittling moniker “Uncle Frederick.” While some might defend the terminology as endearing and familial, it is a condescending and overly familiar way to address Black men in the South instead of giving them the respect and dignity that the title “Mister” holds. Black men in the South were referred to as “boy” and “uncle” because the hierarchy of the racial caste system demanded they never be addressed as “Mister.”
Art historian Jennifer Van Horn discussed the portrait of Frederick in her book Portraits of Resistance. Although she laudably sought to address erasure in the historical narrative and provide new insights into paintings of enslaved people, Van Horn did not succeed in doing so for Frederick. She merely repeated the false narrative, adhering to the legend put forth at Longwood and citing questionable secondary sources. All that she wrote of the painting of Frederick—from
an analysis of the painting with the assumption that he is a butler to a discussion of the 1884 Exposition, in which she claimed the Colored People’s Department occupied 4,000 square feet when it was really 34,000—is riddled with inaccuracies. She did include the experiences of Thomas Norman DeWolf and Sharon Leslie Morgan during their tour at Longwood, which they wrote about at length in Gather at the Table. Descendants of enslaved people, DeWolf and Morgan expressed shock and anger at the narrative surrounding Frederick. Van Horn concluded her analysis of Frederick with an apt observation, stating, “The depiction of Frederick, however, spurs me to ask whether such ghosts in the visual archive---can ever be fully redeemed within the space of a historic house museum that narrates the life of the white family who lived there.” This essay will redeem this narrative through the use of ghosts in textual archives, informed by old letters and family papers in the Mississippi Department of Archives and History and the Huntington Library in California, probate records and inventories held in rural courthouses, a plantation journal in the special collections at Louisiana State University, old newspapers, government documents such as Freedmen’s Bureau records, and census and vital records. These primary source documents end the speculation surrounding Frederick’s life. He will no longer be the stuff of legend or merely a face on canvas but a flesh and blood man.
Frederick was born around 1802, likely in Virginia. His first known enslaver in the state of Mississippi was Dr. Rush Nutt. Born and raised in Virginia, Nutt moved to Mississippi around 1815 and established himself as a cotton planter. Among Nutt’s papers were a significant number of bills of sale of enslaved people. Almost all of these sales occurred in Virginia, indicating that Nutt purchased the enslaved work force for his plantation Laurel Hill in his native state and transported them to Mississippi. The domestic slave trade, which would result in the forced relocation of one million people from the upper to the lower South, was the source of the plantation labor for Nutt and his neighbors. With the closing of the African slave
Laurel Hill
trade in 1808 and the expansion of slavery into the Deep South, the domestic slave trade developed. The domestic slave trade provided a means of gaining ready capital for plantation owners in Virginia and the Carolinas whose land had worn out and who had an abundance of enslaved laborers. It is likely that Dr. Rush Nutt purchased Frederick in Virginia, but it is also possible that he was part of his inheritance. His father Richard Nutt’s will stipulated that after certain bequests made to his wife and individual children were rendered, the remainder of his estate, including enslaved people, was to be divided between his children.
Dr. Rush Nutt established Laurel Hill Plantation around 1815. It was located near Rodney, Mississippi, a thriving port that almost became the capital of the state in 1817, losing out by just three votes. Later when the Mississippi River changed its course, Rodney’s population rapidly declined, and it is now considered a ghost town. Although officially called Rodney, it was once known as Petit Gulph, referring to a small eddy in the river adjacent to it. Dr. Rush Nutt adopted this name for the cotton he cultivated there in 1833. In addition to owning a plantation, Nutt was a scientist and scholar. His Petit Gulph cotton proved more resistant to disease and less likely to rot. There were also claims that it was easier to pick. Cotton would dominate Frederick’s life. He was brought to Mississippi because of the rise of large-scale cotton cultivation on plantations, and he and his family would spend their lives toiling in cotton fields. Like cotton, according to the law of the state of Mississippi, Frederick was a commodity; both could be brought to market and the price of one depended upon the value assigned the other. For although Rush Nutt was a learned man of the world, extoling the glories of Paris and the beauty of cathedrals, he was also a capitalist intent upon making his fortune.
When Rush Nutt died in 1837, he left an estate of 1,599 acres of land and ninety-eight enslaved people. His son, Haller, inherited the bulk of his estate and was responsible for ensuring that his minor sisters received their share. Frederick appeared in an inventory taken of the estate. He was appraised at $2,000, the
equivalent of approximately $65,000 in 2025. Frederick was assigned the highest price of any enslaved person in the Nutt estate, indicating that he possessed highly prized skills and performed an important role on the plantation. In 1842, Haller Nutt had yet to distribute to his sisters their share of the estate. Another inventory was made of Laurel Hill to ensure that Nutt would soon give his sisters their inheritance, even if it necessitated a sale of the property. Frederick, age 40, appeared beside his wife, Maria, age 35, and their four children, son Clem, age eight, and daughters Dolly, age six, Lucinda, age four, and Esther, age two.
Araby
Aware that his father’s estate would have to be divided, and driven by his own ambitions for wealth and prestige, Haller Nutt purchased Araby Plantation in Madison Parish, Louisiana. He was newly married to Julia Williams, the granddaughter of Job Routh, one of the first settlers in Tensas Parish, Louisiana. The Rouths held a plantation dynasty along Lake St. Joseph. Haller Nutt spent the 1840s traveling between Laurel Hill in Mississippi, his motherin-law’s property Evergreen Plantation across the river in Tensas Parish, Louisiana, and Araby Plantation in Madison Parish. Nutt would frequently shift enslaved laborers from one plantation to the other, depending upon the work required and the size of the task. In 1843, he brought seventeen enslaved laborers from Laurel Hill to clear land. A significant part of Nutt’s new property had not previously been in cultivation. The land required trees to be felled and brush to be cleared in order for it to be used for agriculture. In the early days at Araby, Nutt visited occasionally but left the management to an overseer and an enslaved man named Jackson. Appraised second highest of the enslaved laborers in Rush Nutt’s succession inventory, Jackson acted as the driver, a kind of enslaved foreman. Nutt expressed dissatisfaction with the overseer and was critical of his care of the sick. Nutt had attended medical school in Kentucky and left lengthy notes in the back of his plantation journal regarding proper treatment for various ailments. He also criticized the overseer for “putting hearty strong negroes to do little simple jobs, which could be done equally as well by some feeble hand or cripple.” On Nutt’s plantations, not even the physically disabled were exempt from work. This would by no means be the last time Nutt would take issue with an overseer.
Despite his concerns, Nutt’s poor health prompted him to travel to New York from May until October of 1843. He did not return to Araby until November 1. He noted in the journal, “In my return home heard most terrible accounts of the severity, cruelty & bad management of my overseer at this place. . .I am to blame for trusting him again after his cruelty last winter.” Tom, Ben Parker, and August, enslaved workers at Araby, died as a result of brutal treatment from the overseer. Ben drowned, August was hanged, and Tom was beaten to death when he was “too sick to work.” He noted the deaths of children due to poor medical care and deemed all of it “a horrid
account of negligence and ill treatment.” Nutt discharged the overseer and hired a replacement. Nutt’s affairs at Araby were in disarray. He assessed the situation as being “horribly bad” and determined that the cotton crop was “a very miserable one.” The cotton gin and press were in poor condition. Morale amongst the enslaved workforce was seriously low, exacerbated by ill health and flooded fields in which they had to pick cotton in water up to their knees. Nutt recognized that a dramatic change was needed. In addition to the new overseer, Nutt had Frederick brought from Laurel Hill to take charge as driver at Araby. Frederick had likely been the driver at Laurel Hill. Now he was tasked with turning Araby around.
Frederick’s role as the driver of the plantation was the most significant job an enslaved man could hold on a plantation. The occupational title can be traced back to seventeenth-century South Carolina in which experienced enslaved men were tasked with supervising enslaved field laborers by “driving” or coercing them. Originally a role that involved training Africans brought through the transatlantic slave trade to work in the fields, by the time Frederick assumed the role, it had come to mean an enslaved foreman responsible for overseeing gangs of enslaved people in agricultural labor and other important tasks on the plantation. According to Juliet K. Walker in the Dictionary of Afro American Slavery, “Most slave drivers were intelligent individuals with forceful personalities and physical power or presence who also possessed leadership and management skills. Their major responsibility was to maintain a highly disciplined, efficient, and well-coordinated productive agricultural slave labor force.” Frederick was required to maintain strict discipline among the enslaved men and women he oversaw, a fact which may have alienated him from the community. “Rigid discipline was required to maintain assembly-line fieldwork to meet production goals,” Walker wrote. “Given authority to punish field hands, the driver
historically was often called ‘whipping man’ or ‘whipping boss.’” Historian Robert S. Starobin noted there were incidents in which enslaved drivers punished fellow laborers harshly, yet more often drivers “used their position to protect the slaves and ease the burden of bondage.” Frederick was more than just a taskmaster. He functioned as a kind of entrepreneur, collecting data on field production and analyzing conditions as well as employing managerial skills. Frederick would have had significant specialized knowledge of cotton cultivation and would have been intimately involved in the practicalities of the day-to-day affairs of the plantation. He would have excelled at motivating people and goal setting. Haller Nutt would have considered him indispensable, and Frederick and his family may have received better housing, rations, and clothing than their peers.
Frederick arrived at Araby Plantation on January 1, 1844, just in time to bring in the new year with a fresh start for Nutt, who had major plans for the place. In addition to cotton and corn production, Nutt intended to construct a sawmill to take advantage of the timber in the area, a brickworks, and a home for his family. Frederick and his wife Maria were among those given shoes for the year. Frederick wore a size 11, Maria a size 8. One of Frederick’s first tasks involved lumber. Three companies of ten men each transported logs to the sawmill, with Frederick “superintending [the] whole.” They did this without oxen, which Nutt recognized was “heavy labor.” By the end of the month, Frederick became ill with an intestinal condition. Fortunately, his recovery was swift.
The journal is full of references to “Frederick’s company” or “Frederick’s force,” indicating that he always held a leadership role. The jobs he supervised were as varied as possible given what it took to keep the plantation functional and carry out the ambitious plans Nutt had for the place. By February, Frederick was overseeing women and children clearing up ground. Later he was in charge of a force that stacked logs and was engaged in “ditching,” an important task on a plantation prone to flooding. By mid-February an entry in
the journal read, “Planting corn with all the ploughmen & Fred’s force.” On February 15, he and his company repaired fences around the corn field until noon, then burned cotton stalks and ditched the remainder of the day. One day Frederick and his team cleared a field to enable plowing; another day they chopped timber and made rails. He directed his team in clearing fields, repairing fences, making bridges, and planting corn. In March, he oversaw a force plowing a field, readying it for planting. Often certain skilled enslaved laborers were assigned to work with white men on the property who were building and repairing the gin, building the sawmill, constructing the house, or plowing fields. Yet Frederick was never assigned to work under a white man. He often received “the balance of the men” who were not employed with white men.
When Nutt returned to Araby in April, he immediately dismissed Mr. Cox, the overseer. Nutt wrote that Mr. Cox “wanted judgment, & [was] a bad disciplinarian—punished severely without discretion, & many escaped when they deserved a flogging—I find he had a great art of running headlong over every thing without seeing or looking—and when pointed out whipped severely.” Who was pointing out these errors to Mr. Cox in Nutt’s absence? The criticism must have come from an enslaved person with decades of experience in managing a plantation, someone like Frederick, who had been brought to the place to improve conditions and who had successfully earned the trust of Haller Nutt. In fact, assuming Frederick was the one who alerted the overseer to mishandling on the plantation would not be too great a stretch. His punishment for doing so was a severe whipping. Nutt was dismayed with the condition of the plows and ginning, deplored the “neglect & waste about [the] stables,” and was shocked to find that the cotton seed had been left to go bad. He believed that the fencing and ditching had not been properly conducted and deemed the plowing “miserably done” with “no regular system.” The planting also left much to be desired.
The following year it was necessary to address issues of flooding and drainage. Frederick and a force of women worked to strengthen the main levee and dig ditches around the side levees. They removed roots and stumps and filled in holes in an effort to reinforce the levee. Frederick oversaw a force of between twenty and twenty-five enslaved laborers in work on the levee and digging ditches. The plantation would be plagued with flooding the entirety of its time under Nutt’s ownership. Meanwhile Nutt had returned to Araby and was displeased with his latest overseer, Mr. Robinson. Although he described him as industrious, attentive, faithful, and conscientious, Nutt ultimately decided he was “too conceited” and lacking in judgment. Nutt noted the cause for Robinson’s dismissal and the poor condition of the plantation in his journal, writing, “Males get sick—never stop, go ahead until they can’t go longer—they must work this crop if they never work another. Ploughs are all broken up—torn to pieces and scattered all over the place---Wagons exposed to rot in the weather---stock neglected---sick not attended to. This all arises from negligence---thinking his whole salvation depends upon this crop alone—whatever the sacrifice to
me.” Frederick and his family must have found these conditions deplorable and exhausting. While Nutt professed to care about his plantation, he also did not wish to permanently reside upon it, thus always exposing it to neglect and cruelty at the hands of overseers, a common problem for absentee owners. Enslaved workers suffered greatly under these circumstances.
In 1846, Nutt sold Laurel Hill and transferred all his enslaved laborers and capital permanently to Araby. “Must now to hard work in order that the pecuniary advantages of the move may repay me in some measure of the sacrifice of a birthplace—a comfortable & happy Home,” Nutt wrote. “Since that time have been very busy in getting things properly arranged, or organized—Building overseers House— quarters—kitchen—now advancing and have sawed lumber for more houses.” He was now fully invested in making Araby a successful business enterprise. In fact, he intended his entire family to remain with him at Araby over the summer, wanting “to test the health of the swamps.” In the summer, illnesses like yellow fever drove people from New Orleans and Natchez to seek refuge in the countryside. Nutt’s family had experienced illness, and he thought they might be safer in isolation at Araby.
While Frederick had his force cleaning up branches and debris in a field, they drew too near to a burning tree. When it fell, they all ran; some in their panic ran under the tree. The tree fell upon one man, killing him instantly. Nutt considered this a “great oversight,” likely on Frederick’s part, though he also assigned blame to himself, noting that he was within 150 yards of the accident. “Altho’ I have always tried to be careful,” he said, “I hope this will prove a good lesson.”
By Christmas 1847, there were twenty-five cabins in the quarters for the enslaved at Araby Plantation. The cabins were divided in half, with a family or group living in each side. Frederick, his wife Maria, and their five children lived on one side of the eighth cabin; John, Sally, Henry, and Martha occupied the other side. The mention of five children in Frederick’s household indicated that his wife had given birth again since coming to Araby. These accommodations, though typical of housing for enslaved laborers throughout the South, were far from ideal. Nutt himself acknowledged this when he wrote of the enslaved laborers, “I think their sickness owing to working all day without rest & then sleeping in crowded dirty apartments.”
In the summer of 1848, Nutt dismissed yet another overseer. He claimed to be determined to finally manage his plantation himself. “Engaged this day a new overseer by the name of Haller Nutt,” he humorously noted in the plantation journal. “Will only take him on trust until I can select a better. Rather a poor chance---and can’t afford to pay him more than his board & horsefeed.” Araby Plantation continued to flounder. Nutt did not adhere to this plan. In less than three months’ time, he had engaged and dismissed another overseer. Four months later, yet another overseer was ordered off the place. Nutt accused him of being an alcoholic.
The new overseer assigned Frederick to supervise planting corn. They managed sixty-five acres one day, sixty the next, and one hundred and fifty the following day. Yet the overseer proved a sardonic and frustrated man. “This day by mutual consent Frederick’s hands are joined to Gim’s & both being blind unavoidably fell into the ditch,” he jotted on March 9, 1849. Later that month Frederick supervised twenty laborers engaged in chopping down trees and splitting cord wood. On March 22, he and his force planted 100 acres of cotton. The following month, with the bayou rising, Frederick took twenty-five laborers and began building up the levee.
Life at Araby Plantation for Frederick, his family, and friends was characterized by cruelty, brutal living conditions, and relentless toil. Some years they received a few days of holiday time around Christmas; other years they had to wait until Nutt returned after Christmas was over. Running away provided members of the enslaved community with a brief respite. Most likely never believed that absenting themselves from the plantation would result in permanent freedom, but it did give them a sense of autonomy. Running away from the plantation was an act of defiance, one of the best tools of resistance available to the enslaved at Araby. Unfortunately the price paid for leaving was high. In March 1843, the overseer waxed poetic about a rare snowfall. He described it as “remarkable” and “beautifully clear.” Yet nothing at Araby Plantation existed without the constant reminder of the horrors of chattel slavery. The overseer declared it “a fine time to follow tracks in the wood.” When he spoke of tracks, he meant not that of deer or bear or rabbit but of the footprints of human beings. Animals were not the only things hunted in those woods. The overseer called out the hounds and tracked an enslaved man who had run away from Araby. He noted that he “found him by his tracks in the snow.”
Having some of the enslaved work force absent seemed the norm at Araby. In May 1843, five enslaved laborers were in the woods. Some even managed to leave for an extended period of time, though their access to food and clothing suffered in the interim. Patrick left the plantation in September and came home of his own accord in December “nearly naked.” Dick returned a few days after he ran away, “brought in last night by his wife.” Nutt chose not to whip him but chained him with Jerry, another runaway, as punishment. The following day, still in chains, Dick and Jerry escaped together. In 1846, Mr. Grubbs, the overseer, had to leave the plantation and travel to Port Gibson, Mississippi, to get Jack Simms out of jail, where he was being held as a runaway. In 1848, another overseer went to get Frank out of the Port Gibson jail. The advertisement that ran in the Port Gibson Herald to alert Frank’s enslaver about his apprehension as a runaway noted that he was around forty years old and had “the marks of having been considerably whipped.”
The cruelty inflicted upon members of the enslaved community at Araby and later at Winter Quarters and Evergreen was not just at the hands of overseers. Haller Nutt had a reputation amongst the enslaved for being a brutal master. Isaac Throgmorton, who had escaped slavery in 1853, was interviewed several years later by the American Freedmen’s Inquiry Commission. He said, “Mr. Haller Nutt, who lived in Louisiana, was very cruel indeed.” In the back of the Araby Plantation journal, Nutt admonished overseers, “Above all things avoid all intercourse with negro women.” He counseled them, “Instead of studying or thinking about women in bed or out of bed, a man should think about what he has tomorrow—or for a week ahead or for a month or year. How to take advantage of this piece of work, or that little Job.” Nutt instructed overseers that “intercourse is out of the question—it must not be tolerated.” Yet Nutt did not believe these rules applied to him; as the plantation owner he was exempt from the directives he issued to his overseers. When Nutt raped an enslaved woman on his plantation, the woman’s husband objected and was “saucy” toward Nutt. Nutt had the man “tied up by the thumbs, and whipped awful; the next morning, he was a dead man.” Enslaved women on the plantation were Nutt’s property. Frederick’s wife Maria and his daughters Dolly, Esther, and Lucinda were considered property and as such did not have the right to consent. Frederick would have lived every day knowing that despite his important role on the plantation there was very little he could do to protect his wife and daughters from being raped by Nutt or other white men.
Throgmorton also offered insight into working conditions on Nutt’s plantations. Nutt complained that the enslaved laborers did not pick cotton “clean enough.” This meant he believed they left too much plant matter in the lint. He told the overseer to “drive them”—work them harder—to force them to pick the cotton “cleaner.” Exhausted and demoralized, enslaved people on Nutt’s plantation began running away. When captured and returned to the plantation, Throgmorton said, “They were whipped so that they had to grease them—their clothes stuck to them so; and the women were whipped as bad as the men.” An enslaved woman, aware of the whereabouts of one of the escaped men, was held over a log heap to torture her to reveal the information. She burned to death. “I heard the boss and the overseer talking about it,” Throgmorton said in reference to those in charge of the plantation where he was enslaved. “They talked of having a council among the farmers about it, but it was said the master [Nutt] had dismissed his overseer for doing it, and as he was very popular, nothing was done about it.”
Nutt’s letters to his wife Julia from Araby Plantation provide corroborating evidence of Throgmorton’s assertion that he was cruel. On September 1, 1848, Nutt wrote to Julia that the enslaved workers had “acted badly—picked badly—been very impudent.” Two months later, in a letter to Julia, he informed her that he had “whiped [sic] Stephen Charles Josh & Phebe [sic].” Nutt elaborated upon the situation with Phoebe, stating, “I was so provoked with Phebe [sic] about letting chickens stay in the garden to eat up the celery, & about feeding the Dogs that I could not
hold in---I did give her a royal beating.” If Nutt’s response to ruined celery was to beat an enslaved woman, one can only imagine what might befall Frederick. He held the most important job of any enslaved person on the plantation, with great responsibilities and the weight of the success of the cotton crop upon his shoulders. If the levee did not hold, if the rows were plowed crookedly, if the planting was conducted poorly, it is likely that blame would fall upon Frederick and that consequences would be severe. At times Nutt seemed to take pleasure in the physical violence he inflicted upon the enslaved community. Upon his return to the plantation on November 21, 1848, Haller wrote to Julia, “I was up this morning by daylight and floged [sic] Eade & John Caston before sunrise for doing nothing while I was gone---and I feel much improved from my exercise—but terribly provoked every time I go in the garden. I suppose they [the enslaved laborers] think the birth of a son has not improved me much.”
Winter Quarters
Nutt recognized that Araby Plantation was a failing venture. He sold the place in 1850. He turned to his wife’s home for his next investment. On June 20, 1850, Ann M. Ogden, daughter of wellknown Tensas Parish plantation owner Job Routh and the aunt of Haller Nutt’s wife Julia, sold him Winter Quarters Plantation. Originally owned by Job Routh, the plantation was located on Lake St. Joseph in Tensas Parish, Louisiana, and consisted of 1,554 acres. It was bounded by Evergreen Plantation, the plantation owned by Julia Williams Nutt’s parents, Raritan Plantation, another holding of Ann M. Ogden, and the estate of Ms. Ann S Routh, all relatives of his wife’s. Nutt paid $44,656 for the land and brought his enslaved laborers from Araby Plantation to Winter Quarters. Winter Quarters would be the last plantation upon which Frederick and his family would be held in bondage. In 1857, Nutt further augmented his holdings by purchasing Evergreen Plantation from his mother-in-law. The sale included land and ninety-six enslaved people and cost him $121,000. It is important to address that much of what has been written about Haller Nutt is mere legend. Many portray him as owning Laurel Hill, Araby, Winter Quarters, and Evergreen simultaneously. This was not the case. From 1850 to 1857, he owned Winter Quarters; from 1857 to the late 1860s the Nutts owned Winter Quarters and Evergreen. He did not enslave 800 people. At the height of his wealth, his enslaved work force numbered approximately 261. This should not minimize the fact that he was one of the largest slaveholders in Louisiana and Mississippi and that he amassed vast wealth through the
Winter Quarters Plantation. Originally owned by Job Routh, the plantation was located on Lake St. Joseph in Tensas Parish, Louisiana, and consisted of 1,554 acres. It was bounded by Evergreen Plantation, Raritan Plantation, and the estate of Ms. Ann S Routh.
unpaid and extorted labor of hundreds. Yet even that did not satisfy Nutt. He wanted to be among the wealthiest and most elite of Natchez society, who relied upon their plantations across the river in Louisiana to fund their lavish lifestyles. He began the construction of a grand mansion in Natchez he called Longwood. Constructed in the Moorish style, the approximately 30,000 square foot edifice was topped by a domed cupola. Today it is the largest octagonal house in the United States.
Frederick’s life at Winter Quarters was similar to what he experienced at Araby Plantation, with the exception that Haller Nutt proved less of an absentee plantation owner for several years, at least until he began living at Longwood. Lake St. Joseph was the site of twenty large plantations, most owned by the Routh clan, Julia Nutt’s family. They lived grandly and were in close proximity to Rodney and Natchez, and thus were not as isolated as they had been at Araby, where Nutt frequently lamented being “lonesome.” 16,000 people were enslaved along the banks of Lake St. Joseph, forced to labor in the cotton fields. On the eve of the Civil War, the combined cotton crop of plantations along Lake St. Joseph was greater than the totals of thirty Louisiana parishes. During this time, Frederick’s wife Maria disappeared from written records. She was not included in any of the list of names of the enslaved at Winter Quarters made by Nutt or his overseer. The most likely explanation is that she died. Mortality rates were high in nineteenth century Louisiana, especially for enslaved people. Other possibilities include her being sold away or being taken to Longwood to work as an enslaved domestic. Similarly Frederick’s daughters’ names were also absent from records made at the start of and during the Civil War. However, Frederick’s son Clem was listed. In addition to Clem, Dolly, Lucinda, and Esther, Frederick and his wife had more children, sons named Reuben and Frederick Jr. and a daughter named Nancy. In a list of enslaved people at Winter Quarters written by the overseer, the names include “Federic,” Clem, “Ruben,” Nancy, and “Fed.”
In the fall of 1858, Haller Nutt was absent from Winter Quarters. His wife Julia wrote to him about the health and wellbeing of their children. Julia wrote of their three-year-old son Prentiss on September 5, 1858, “I never saw such an independent boy for his age. He says he don’t want Pheby [sic] to follow after him any more but wants a boy he says Fred will do.” Prentiss wished not to be looked after by an enslaved woman; instead, he wanted a boy assigned to watch over him. At the time, there were two men with this name on the plantation: Frederick, who would have been around fifty-six years old, and Fred, who was likely in his early teens. In this era, white people routinely referred to Black men as “boys” regardless of their age, which is reflected in numerous personal correspondence and bills of sale throughout the South as well as Nutt’s own letters and journal entries. Because of this, Prentiss and Julia could have been referring to either of the Freds living at Winter Quarters. The letter does indicate a familiarity with the family which an enslaved field hand would not have had, emphasizing the importance of Frederick’s role.
The Civil War
With the coming of the Civil War in 1861, Haller Nutt recognized a threat to the empire he had been intent upon building and maintaining. When Mississippi and Louisiana seceded from the union, his elaborate mansion in Natchez remained unfinished. The workmen and artisans charged with building the edifice were from the North and chose to return home. Nutt knew that a war would jeopardize his business interests. He viewed the conflict pragmatically and did not foresee victory for the South. Nutt has been referred to as a Union sympathizer, and his wife testified in lawsuits after the war in which she claimed that her husband openly supported the United States and even had altercations with other citizens of Natchez over his outspoken loyalty. At that point, it benefited Julia Nutt to make such statements. Documents suggest her husband’s sympathies lay elsewhere. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say Nutt was not overtly hostile to the Union army once it arrived and took steps to support it in an effort to preserve his fortune. On April 26, 1862, Haller Nutt, in Natchez, wrote to his overseer Hamilton Smith at Winter Quarters, “We have unpleasant news since I wrote you by Josh. Altho’ I expected to hear of the loss of N[ew] Orleans & the whole River to the Yankees, I did not expect it so soon. The place is surrendered & the enemy are now coming up to Baton Rouge.” Nutt’s language undermined any notion of his support of the federal government. He deemed the surrender of New Orleans by the Confederacy “unpleasant news,” referred to Union soldiers pejoratively as “Yankees,” and called the United States “the enemy.” Nutt ended his letter by instructing the overseer to send his family provisions from the plantation and instructed him, “Let John out of stocks when you think he is well punished.” Fearing Longwood might be destroyed, he would not travel to Winter Quarters.
Correspondence as late as December 27, 1862 confirms that Nutt looked upon federal troops unfavorably. Certainly fear of destruction of his property would have factored into his views. Yet Confederate troops also greatly damaged his property, and Nutt did not call them “the enemy.” By December, Nutt finally returned to Winter Quarters, and wrote to his wife, “About 90 gunboats & Transports are now above Vicksburg. . .and our troops have retreated back as far as New Carthage. A great consternation exists here on the Lake---one which is so repugnant to my feelings as to excite only disgust. Any old woman now with a broomstick on her shoulder could run every man out of the Parish---& they are so frightened they know not where to go.” Nutt regarded the impending arrival of the Union army as repugnant and the inability of Confederates to defend the area as disgusting. He made his position very clear when he referred to Confederates as “our troops.” He supported Confederate troops. The Natchez Democrat ran a notice on September 9, 1862, entitled “The Tensas Cavalry” expressly addressed “To Haller Nutt, Esq,” informing him from Holly Springs that they were safe and that John Ogden had been slightly hurt by a fall from his horse. The Confederate cavalry unit sent this message to the Natchez Democrat intending for Nutt to see it and listed the names of those killed and wounded. Julia also included updates on the wellbeing of individual Confederate soldiers in her letters, for her Routh and Ogden cousins were serving.
The experiences of Frederick and the enslaved community at Winter Quarters was fraught with turmoil and danger. Yet it also brought the promise of change, the possibility of freedom. The United States was determined to control the Mississippi River. Vicksburg proved the last Confederate stronghold. General Grant and his soldiers marched through Tensas Parish and encamped there while awaiting a chance to cross the Mississippi River. Ultimately the Union army crossed at Bruinsburg, not far from Laurel Hill Plantation, and surrounded Vicksburg, placing it under siege until Confederates finally surrendered on July 4, 1863. The time between the Union army’s arrival in Tensas Parish and the surrender of Vicksburg was characterized by great upheaval. During the war, Julia Nutt’s uncle John Routh, owner of Holly Wood Plantation located near Winter Quarters, remained at Lake St. Joseph and kept the Nutts apprised of all that went on in Tensas Parish. He was the one to first notify the Nutts of the arrival of the Union army and the departure of enslaved laborers from the plantations to follow the soldiers. While leaving plantations would certainly have provided enslaved people with feelings of autonomy and hope, it also meant they were at risk. “I think one half of them will soon come back,” John Routh wrote, “as some of them will die and then will run away, and they will suffer very much from exposure without shelter.” The army was not equipped to provide a large influx of people with food and shelter, and the enslaved people who sought refuge with the soldiers found that they suffered greatly and lived in conditions rougher even than those on the plantations from which they had fled.
Many enslaved people who had chosen to leave the plantations were caught and brought to jail. Hamilton Smith, overseer at Winter Quarters, informed Haller Nutt on June 12, 1862, “The jail is crowded with negroes. Taking out some & puting [sic] in others.” A week later, Smith went to the jail to bring home five men from Winter Quarters. On September 16, Smith reported to Nutt that Garrett, an enslaved man who had been running the steam engine at Evergreen Plantation, had run away. As was so often the case, Smith expressed surprise, noting, “If there was any cause for him to leave I don’t know it.” Yet in the statement that followed, Smith revealed exactly why someone at Winter Quarters would choose to leave: the brutal and dehumanizing reality of being enslaved. Smith sent for another man to assist him and brought in hounds to hunt down Garrett. “There was a light rain about dark, so next morning we tracked him to Holly Wood,” Smith wrote. “There had been so much traveling we could not trail him any farther. I suppose it was his calculations to get to [the] Yankee fleet above Vicksburg, but he will not be able to get there, for I learn that from New Carthage up there is Pataroles [pattyrollers] out & they keep a close watch to prevent negroes from running to Yankees.” Pattyrollers were patrols organized by parish governments to police the movements of enslaved people.
Three days after Routh’s letter arrived at Longwood, Julia Nutt sent her sister an update on the situation at Winter Quarters. “The Yankees have paid Lake St. Joseph a visit at the Upper end and taken of[f] 20 men from Aunt Ann[‘s] place and also 39 from Dr. B’s [Bowie’s] the same from
John Routh and the Gorden estate, Mrs Elliot and Douglass.” This was Julia Nutt’s assessment of the situation and that of her informant’s back on Lake St. Joseph. What was more likely happening, based on firsthand accounts and documentation in various areas of Louisiana up and down the river, was that Union troops were seeking enslaved men to perform manual labor. More than likely, the enslaved men offered their assistance and voluntarily left with the army, hoping to gain their freedom and escape the plantations. In this case, it was probably Union General Thomas Williams engaging enslaved men to work as ditchers in an effort to cut a new course for the river in order to enable the army to take Vicksburg. Julia Nutt herself confirmed this in that same letter, writing, “The Dorsey negroes heard the Yankeys [sic] were in the neighborhood so the[y] all both men, women, & children fled to the Yankeys [sic]. They only wanted able bodied men, so selected them out and drove all the balance back. They went home, and Sarah went out to talk to them and reason with them, they cursed her & Mr Dorsey, and then threatened them with taking their lives.” The Dorseys left their plantation, and “several of the gentlemen in the Parish”—essentially a mob—went to the Dorsey plantation and “collected” the enslaved people who supposedly threatened the Dorseys. “It is thought that several will be hung, which they deserve,” Julia stated. Acts of resistance like this one were occurring throughout Tensas Parish as well as the entire state. Frederick would certainly have been aware that they were taking place and may have even witnessed them or taken part.
In fact, in her letter, Julia informed her sister that, based on what was being reported, the Union army was likely at Winter Quarters. Julia believed that the enslaved community at Winter Quarters would refrain from joining Union soldiers, writing, “Our negroes have arranged to run to the swamps, so soon as they see them coming.” This was likely what the enslaved people at Winter Quarters had claimed to the overseer, for none would admit planning to run away. It was not ultimately what would transpire. Enslaved people at plantations all along Lake St. Joseph chose to leave, either to pursue the Union army or to stay at neighboring plantations away from their enslavers. Some encamped at Winter Quarters. A week after Julia Nutt’s letter, in which she claimed the enslaved people at Winter Quarters would all take to the swamp to hide from the Union soldiers, her uncle John Routh penned a letter from Holly Wood plantation to Hamilton Smith, the overseer at Winter Quarters. Ten enslaved people from Winter Quarters were on a steamboat at the federal encampment. Routh advised Smith to get word to Haller Nutt to either go himself or send someone on his behalf to get the enslaved people and force them to return to the plantation, as the steamboat might depart and take them out of range of easy apprehension.
Sarah Dorsey, one of the Dorseys mentioned in Julia Nutt’s letter to her sister, wrote of what she witnessed at her home on Lake St. Joseph during the Civil War. Much of her account is a romanticized rendering of the magnificent homes, lavish interiors, and gracious living of the planter class. The departure of enslaved men and women not only threatened the cotton crop, upon
which plantation owners relied for their wealth, but it also meant that enslavers faced having to clean their own homes, cook for themselves, and launder their own clothing. White women like Sarah Dorsey and Julia Nutt believed themselves entitled to the labor of enslaved women like Frederick’s daughters. Dorsey documented an incident she believed “deserve[ed] to be recorded to the glory of Southern women.” A white woman and her niece were left alone on one of their plantations. “Mrs.----- had been deserted by all her slaves as the Federals advanced,” Dorsey wrote. “She and her niece were obliged to do all their own work with their own hands.” To people like the Nutts, the thought of doing their own work instead of holding the threat of violence over people like Frederick in order to expropriate their labor was unimaginable.
An undated letter with an illegible signature sent to Haller Nutt provides insight into the danger and turbulence of life at Winter Quarters before the fall of Vicksburg. When the Confederate cavalry returned to the area, they broke up an encampment at Winter Quarters. They killed two men and one woman who had come from other plantations as well as four enslaved men from Evergreen Plantation. The Confederate soldiers informed a large number of the enslaved men that they were considered prisoners, but left no one to guard them, so they fled. Twenty of the men enslaved by the writer of the letter returned but then subsequently left. Ultimately many of these enslaved men were taken prisoner when found. Four enslaved men of those taken were hanged; three of those hanged had been enslaved at Winter Quarters. Only three of them could be identified: Kennedy, Dick, and Thom. The writer went on to state that John Thom, a man enslaved by Nutt, was “most active getting the Co. there organized.” Because of this detail, it is likely the letter was written in 1863 when Union regiments were recruiting enslaved men to enlist. John Thom was working with the Union army to form a company of soldiers; these enslaved men may have officially enlisted in the United States Colored Infantry or they may have been in the process of doing so when they were attacked by the Confederate cavalry. The writer then noted that “they were sent home on their parole to remain,” indicating that the Confederate cavalry considered them prisoners of war. Most of the enslaved men did not follow these orders and left when it was reasonably safe to do so. It is also known that enslaved people engaged in acts of resistance, acting as informers and revealing to the Union army the plans of Confederates. As post-war records of Winter Quarters do not contain any mention of Clem, Frederick’s son, and the 1870 census in the parish lacks any sign of him, it is reasonable to conclude that the tumult of war had an impact on Frederick’s family. Clem may have chosen to leave the area. Yet is also possible he was one of the many enslaved people who died by violence or due to food shortages and poor conditions.
Meanwhile Haller Nutt was at Longwood in Natchez making an effort to win over Union officers. He entertained them at Longwood and did everything he could to convince them of his loyalty and preserve his fortune. He formed alliances with them and used these to his advantage. In April 1863, federal troops marched to Hard Times landing to cross the river and begin the assault upon Vicksburg.
They met with resistance from Confederate troops in the area. In response, Union soldiers set fire to many of the homes along Lake St. Joseph, including Holly Wood, John Routh’s plantation, and destroyed property. The plantation home at Winter Quarters was spared, but Nutt suffered significant losses in crops and buildings. Nutt wrote Senator Reverdy Johnson of Maryland seeking compensation for his loss of property. “I did not as others did abandon my plantations & run my negroes & stock to Texas & elsewhere at the approach of the Federal Troops in their march to the rear of Vicksburg—but was unfortunately absent with my family in Natchez,” Nutt stated. Despite having his overseers obtain letters of protection from the advance officers of the Union army, Nutt wrote that “my entire property was left in a state of devastation & ruin. . .Every living thing on both places was either destroyed or carried away—gin houses were burnt— dwelling house ruined—cattle—hogs—sheep—mules & horses all carried away or killed—teams & wagons of all kinds taken—negroes excepting a few old women & children gone--& fencing burnt & crops abandoned.” Without enslaved laborers to work his fields, there would be no future cotton crops. Haller Nutt traveled to Vicksburg with an order from the Colonel and General Superintendent of Freedmen in January 1864 permitting him to “take from camps of Freedmen. . .his former servants, who may wish to return with him to his plantation. . .for the purpose of laboring with him.” Nutt would be required to pay these formerly enslaved workers, now known as freedmen. At last Frederick and his family would receive compensation for their work but not at Winter Quarters. They chose to no longer work for Haller Nutt and were not present on the Freedmen’s Bureau contract for Winter Quarters.
Reconstruction
Just a few months later, Nutt died, leaving a widow and eight children in massive debt. The destruction brought on by war certainly contributed significantly to the financial ruin in which the Nutt family found themselves. Yet other key factors emerge: Nutt’s lavish lifestyle, the construction of Longwood, and his dependency upon unpaid labor. Nutt often did not pay his creditors. The builders of Longwood remained uncompensated, never to be fully paid. Nutt had overextended himself. He lived beyond his means. By the late 1860s, his estate was insolvent, and his widow sold Winter Quarters and Evergreen. The family continued to live at Longwood, obsessed with the unfinished palatial home and determined never to sell it. Once again, the Nutts eschewed work; instead they decided to sue the federal government for reparations. The Southern Claims Commission was formed to hear cases of those loyal to the Union who had lost property during the war. If their claims proved valid, they would receive compensation from the federal government. Prentiss Nutt moved to Washington, D.C. to supervise and manage the family’s claim of one million dollars - the equivalent of more than 38 million today - against the federal government. Many officials at the national level proved skeptical of the validity of the claim, yet Prentiss strove to win them over. He attended lavish parties, dined with senators and the Washington elite, and was
received at the White House, all the while bemoaning what he perceived to be his family’s poverty. “What a hell of a way these contemptible northern people have of living!” Prentiss wrote to his mother in 1878. “I would a thousand times sooner spend my days in a cotton field than to live such a dog’s life.” One month later, he again revealed he had no understanding of what life was like for Frederick and his family, who actually spent their days in cotton fields, or the system of bondage under which they had been held by his family. Prentiss confided to his mother, “I am living under a system of slavery that I would give five years of my life to be free of. God knows I am trying hard to get your bill through speedily but for this life gets harder to bear every day.” Julia Nutt agreed with Prentiss’s assessment of the situation, writing to him from her unfinished mansion a few months later, “I see nothing else but servitude for my children.” Julia and Prentiss displayed that characteristic Nutt pragmatism, disdaining both Northerners and Southerners alike, concerned solely with the redemption of their lost fortune. “Great God how much good it would do me to make money to finish Longwood so you could give some of those damn Natchez people the devil for the way they have treated you,” Prentiss told his mother.
Back in Tensas Parish, Frederick and his family found work at plantations owned by the Rouths, the only members of the Nutt family remaining on Lake St. Joseph. Frederick and his son Reuben lived at Kenilworth, owned by the widow of Julia Nutt’s cousin Calvin Routh, and later at Holly Wood, John Routh’s estate. They took the surname Baker. In the 1870 census, Frederick Baker, around the age of seventy, listed his birthplace as Virginia and his occupation as that of farmer.
His household consisted of his daughter Nancy, his son Reuben, Reuben’s wife Caroline, and his grandchildren Frederick Jr., Millie, and Reuben Jr. Another grandson, Harry, would be born the following year. Frederick became the minister of Mount Zion, a congregation established in the quarters at John Routh’s Holly Wood Plantation. Between April 1869 and January 1872, he married sixty-nine couples. This is profoundly significant. Enslaved people had been forbidden from entering into legal marriages. As a result, they could be sold apart from their spouses and separated at any time. After Emancipation, formerly enslaved people were eager to make their unions official.
They recognized the importance of the freedom to be able to marry who they chose and for their unions to be protected and recognized under the law. Frederick was a crucial part in making that happen for formerly enslaved people on Lake St. Joseph. This also suggests that his Christian faith was instrumental in helping Frederick endure the horrors of slavery.
Perhaps most astonishing of all about these marriage certificates is that some were written in Frederick’s own hand, revealing that he was literate. Soldiers in the United States Colored Infantry learned to write beside campfires, taught by Northern officers. Freedmen’s Schools were established after the Civil War to educate formerly enslaved people. Yet for someone like Frederick, nearing seventy years old at the close of the war, these options would either not have been available or not have been something to which someone of his age would typically turn. Did he learn to write while still enslaved by Haller Nutt? He was the driver of the plantation, so he held a prominent position. Yet he could carry out his duties without being literate, and educating enslaved people was against the law. Some well-positioned enslaved people or those held in high esteem by their enslavers were
taught to read and write; some even managed to surreptitiously teach themselves. Or did Frederick make it a priority to become literate after the Civil War, when he was finally free? The question will likely go unanswered.
The last marriage Frederick Baker presided over took place on January 30, 1872. It is quite possible that he died shortly thereafter or at least became too old and infirm to continue his ministry. He had been a leader among the plantation workers and an esteemed elder in his community. He would have been buried by the congregation of Mount Zion Church on Holly Wood Plantation or the adjacent cemetery on Routhland Plantation, another Routh property. Mount Zion African Methodist Episcopal Church, which Frederick helped establish, continued through the late twentieth century.
The World’s Industrial and Cotton Centennial Exposition
Frederick Baker appears to have died some time in the 1870s, yet he left something behind in addition to his family’s cherished memories of his life. Frederick had been the subject of a painting by C. R. Parker. While Frederick’s body lay in a grave in Tensas Parish, his face stared out from the walls at Longwood mansion in Natchez. Likely painted in the 1830s or early 1840s at Laurel Hill, the portrait of Frederick was commissioned by the Nutts. C. R. Parker, prolific itinerant portrait painter, was a friend of the Nutt family. He arrived in New Orleans around 1825 and was commissioned by the Louisiana state legislature to paint portraits of George Washington and the Marquis de Lafayette. Parker and another friend of the Nutt family, John James Audubon, were close acquaintances. In fact, when original volumes of Audubon’s paintings surfaced in New York, Prentiss Nutt brought suit for them, claiming they had been stolen from Longwood by Union soldiers. Parker had a studio in New Orleans but spent a great deal of his time traveling, especially during the summer months when epidemics threatened New Orleans. The New Orleans Bee extolled Parker’s work, declaring, “The characteristics of Mr. Parker’s portraits are boldness and fidelity, accuracy of expression, warmth of coloring and exquisite distribution of light and shade.” Parker died in New Orleans in 1849.
Why did the Nutts commission C. R. Parker to paint a portrait of a person they considered property? And why of all of the enslaved people on the plantation did they choose Frederick? At the time he sat for the portrait, Frederick was the highest appraised enslaved person in the Nutts’ possession. He held the highest position an enslaved man on the plantation was capable of having. It is likely that these factors contributed to the Nutts’ decision to have a portrait painted of Frederick. Parker was an itinerant painter in need of work and a family friend, so it is possible that the Nutts considered themselves his patrons by engaging him. Additionally Julia Nutt’s mention of Prentiss asking for “Fred” supports that he not only held an important role out in the fields and in the
quarters but was recognized as significant by the family in the big house. It had been fashionable in Europe to have white sitters pose with Black servants or enslaved laborers, but these inclusions of Black people in portraiture were typically characterized by a kind of “type,” a servile caricature that emphasized the power and prestige of white sitters. However, the Nutt family did not pose with Frederick, and Parker’s rendering of Frederick was that of a complex individual. Much has been made by Longwood tour guides, curators, and scholars over Frederick’s attire, referring to it as “livery” the like of which was worn by enslaved domestics like carriage drivers and manservants. However, drivers were known to wear clothing in keeping with their elevated status, including on occasion high top leather boots, great coats, and top hats. Enslaved people, especially drivers like Frederick, would sometimes be given large garden plots and could sell the produce they made. Enslaved laborers also received a small amount of money for corn crops they harvested; it is documented that this occurred at Laurel Hill. It is well known that enslaved people spent some of this money on clothing and enjoyed dressing up when they could. Having possessions like decent clothing provided a sense of pride and autonomy.
Tiya Miles, author of All That She Carried: The Journey of Ashley’s Sack, A Black Family Keepsake , stressed that physical objects can be bearers of memory. “Attention to material things, especially ones elaborated by words or pictures, opens a route to accessing intangible feelings and desires that can evade the documentary record,” Miles wrote. “The physical traces left behind therefore allow us to glimpse what our forbears found worthy of making and keeping, and what, by implication, they hold dear.” At a time when photography was in its infancy and the vast majority of people, free or enslaved, did not possess images of their loved ones, sitting for a portrait was a comparatively rare act. Only the very wealthy were able to engage in such an activity. Thus the portrait of Frederick is extraordinary, and it acts as a means of bearing witness. Nutt may never have intended to elevate Frederick’s status or preserve his memory when he asked Parker to paint him, yet that is exactly the result of his actions. For Nutt, Frederick’s painting would have conveyed the image of a loyal and subservient subject; for the modern viewer, it provides a compelling reminder of the events of the past and destroys the anonymity and dehumanizing elements of slavery. Frederick stands before us in his portrait as a human being, reminding us that the brutal system of chattel slavery and the white supremacist caste system that has been upheld even after its dissolution impacted actual people. Although he was an enslaved man, he was also a husband, a father, a grandfather, and a skilled and intelligent survivor. While custom and finances dictated that portraiture should be dominated by the white and the wealthy, the humanizing element of a portrait remains another key factor in plantation owners typically refraining from having the images of the people they enslaved captured in paintings or later in photographs.
It is important to note that Frederick’s feelings about having his likeness captured will always be unknown. How voluntary were his actions? Was he coerced or did he willingly participate? Or, as is so often the case, was it likely somewhere in between those two possibilities? In Slave Portraiture in the Atlantic World, Angela Rosenthal and Agnes Lugo-Ortize discussed “the paradoxical presence and erasure of the enslaved subject in portraiture,” which was “a genre founded in Western modernity on the power to evoke and revoke subjectivity by producing the visual fiction of an individualized and autonomous self.” However, for an enslaved man like Frederick, the autonomy captured truly was an illusion; only plantation owners, wealthy merchants, and the landed gentry of Europe were the subject of large oil paintings. Van Horn pointed out that a portrait like Frederick’s conveys a “false agency” and “bestow[s] [upon Frederick] a freedom to refuse that [he] did not in reality possess.” Nutt and his family occupied the mansion in which Frederick’s portrait was displayed, while Frederick and his family labored in the fields. According to the laws of Louisiana and Mississippi, Frederick’s body was the possession of Haller Nutt. Now, through the possession of the painting, Nutt had another means of objectifying Frederick. As Van Horn so eloquently noted, “The ongoing contest over who could rightfully possess these symbolic representations, who could be considered a person and therefore worthy of portrayal and critical viewership, and who was acknowledged to possess aesthetic capabilities makes portraits more than representations of individual sitters or an index of racist beliefs. Rather, they were participants in a battle over personhood that occurred at levels of the individual and the nation.” Frederick Baker’s family never owned a painting or photograph that allowed them to remember their father and grandfather; even after they were free, the people who had owned Frederick while he was alive owned his likeness after his death.
In 1884, Prentiss Nutt was still in Washington lobbying on his family’s behalf. Plans were in the making for an exposition to be held in New Orleans. It would showcase the art, industry, manufacturing, and agriculture of every state in the nation. Akin to a world’s fair, the event was commonly referred to as The New Orleans Cotton Exposition or the 1884 Exposition and was designed in large part to commemorate a century of cotton being exported through New Orleans. Through the connections he had forged, Prentiss was appointed Commissioner of the state of Pennsylvania’s contribution to the exposition. It was in this capacity that he met with Bruce K. Blanche in Philadelphia. Prentiss had known Blanche for several years. Blanche was the first Black senator to serve a full term and had represented Mississippi. He was named Commissioner of the Colored People’s Department for the exposition and was visiting the state to encourage support of and contributions toward the exposition. Prentiss engaged in a discussion about Southern politics with Bruce while he was visiting Philadelphia. Afterward Prentiss met the editor in chief of the Evening Telegraph and repeated his conversation with Bruce. Reporters tried to interview Bruce, but he had already left the city. Prentiss wrote to his mother, “I carelessly remarked that I did not think Bruce would object to his views being
known.” The Evening Telegraph proceeded to publish Bruce’s views on current political events based on a conversation he allegedly had with Prentiss as reported to the newspaper by Prentiss. Other newspapers copied the story. Prentiss found himself under scrutiny for this unethical behavior. Bruce sent him a letter marked “personal,” and wrote, “The whole thing is false from beginning to end. I had no such interview.” Bruce had told reporters that the interview never took place and the story was false. Prentiss was determined to expose what he believed to be Bruce’s political views, yet he recognized that he had not conducted himself properly. In his letter to his mother on the subject, Prentiss stated, “When Mr. Cleveland [President Grover Cleveland] comes in the N____r for a good many years to come is politically dead. When will Bruce be?”
Prentiss took steps to ameliorate the situation with Bruce and to cement his family’s legacy. On November 23, 1884, he wrote home to his mother at Longwood that he was going to have a picture of Longwood framed along with drawings of the interior. He also intended to “send a well gotten up statement” about Rush Nutt’s cultivation of cotton and improvement of the cotton gin. He was going to send all of this to New Orleans for the exposition. Prentiss informed his mother that he had promised Major Jonas, the Mississippi state commissioner for the exposition, certain paintings, writing, “Therefore will you please get Mr Gunning to box the portraits of S. S. Prentiss, Uncle John Routh and Father, also Old Frederick and send them to Maj. Jonas, send along the frames too.” He enclosed a card that would allow the package to travel by railroad or steamboat for free. He urged her to carry out his instructions at once. “Old Frederick’s portrait I have promised to loan Ex Senator Bruce for the Colored Peoples Exhibit,” he noted, adding that he wanted the picture of Winter Quarters to also be sent. Two days later, he wrote to his mother, “I am fixing up a very creditable exhibit for the Nutt family at N.O. [New Orleans].” Much of the legend surrounding the family, including the exaggerated wealth of Haller Nutt, can be traced to Prentiss and his desire to restore the family’s status. It was also beneficial to their claim against the government to magnify Nutt’s wealth. Even as Prentiss was still hounding the government for money and bemoaning his supposed poverty, he had the Nutt family crest painted on the doors of the carriage kept at Longwood. Former senator Blanche K. Bruce mentioned Frederick in his December 5, 1884 letter to Prentiss, saying, “I hope you will send the picture of the old colored man referred to sometime since. I am very anxious to be in NO [New Orleans] at the opening, but I fear I shall not be able to do so without neglect of Exposition business.”
Excluded from the 1876 centennial exposition, the 1884 exposition included an exhibit dedicated to Black Americans. Designated the Colored People’s Exhibition, it consisted of 34,000 square feet containing 16,000 exhibits filled with contributions from Northern states like New York and Pennsylvania to states of the Deep South like Louisiana and Mississippi.
White Southern businessmen saw it as an opportunity to highlight the economic recovery of the South after the Civil War, promoting a New South economy while maintaining the white supremacy of the Old South. Black leaders like former senator Blanche K. Bruce believed it was a chance to showcase the achievements of Black Americans, stressing their intellectual and artistic capacity and the immense gains that had been made since Emancipation. “We think the colored people of the South owe it to themselves, and we think the white people owe it to the country to put in contrast the present condition of the colored race with what it was twenty years ago,” ran a column in the Natchez Democrat reporting on the upcoming exposition. “For this purpose we would be glad to see the colored people of the whole country united in an effort to show to the thousands in New Orleans of what they are now capable. A fair exhibit of their capabilities in the present day after they have had, it may be said, only twenty years of industrial and intellectual training, would show an advance that would be perfectly wonderful.” Yet the Democrat went on to refer to whites as “the more advanced race” and attributed the advances of Black people to their imitation of whites. The separation of Black citizens from their state exhibits anticipated the legalized segregation that would emerge in the 1890s with the passage of Jim Crow laws and the Supreme Court’s ruling in Plessy v. Ferguson . Frederick’s portrait was not included in the Louisiana or Mississippi exhibits, the states in which he had lived. Instead Prentiss Nutt and men like him ensured that the racial hierarchy of the nation was strictly enforced. Frederick Baker’s identity as a citizen was limited because of the color of his skin and his status as a formerly enslaved man, and the exhibiting of his portrait reflected that.
There is no mention of the portrait of Frederick in reports on the Colored People’s Exhibition, yet from the opening of the Cotton Centennial on December 16, 1884 until its closing on May 31, 1885, it was on display there along with a portrait of Haitian revolutionary Toussaint L’Ouverture. What surrounded the portrait? Mississippi focused on cotton. Virginia included 250 images taken by a Black photographer and “relics” of George Washington. Washington, D.C. showcased etchings, embroidery, drawings, and fine art. Arkansas sent a model locomotive and Massachusetts a model steamboat, representing the work of Black inventors. New England sent 220 paintings. The opening ceremonies included a procession with delegations from Southern University, Straight University, Leland University, and the Fisk School. Bruce K. Blanche was in attendance, riding on a flag-bedecked steamboat to the Exposition grounds. The former senator did, in fact, get a chance to see Frederick’s portrait. Upon the conclusion of the Cotton Centennial, the painting was packed up and returned to Longwood. It remained in Natchez until December 2024.
The Descendants
Between 1870 and 1880, Frederick Baker’s son Reuben died. His widow Caroline remarried, and she and her new husband brought Frederick’s grandchildren with them to Gregg County in east Texas, where they sought greater economic opportunities. Reuben Baker Jr. became a teacher and later moved to Muskogee County, Oklahoma. His grave is in Taft Cemetery beside his wife and four children. Frederick Baker III remained in Texas and owned a farm, married, and had several children. Harry Baker followed in his grandfather’s footsteps, becoming a minister. He also worked as a barber and owned his own land in Hunt County, Texas.
Frederick Baker Sr.’s other son, Frederick Jr., remained in Tensas Parish, as did his daughter Nancy. Frederick Jr. was living with his wife and two children on Franklin Plantation north of Winter Quarters in 1870. The Bowies were friends of the Nutts and had married into the Routh clan. By 1880, Frederick Jr. had been widowed. He and his son Isaac worked in the fields, while his daughter Betsy was a domestic servant. He remarried in 1883 and had at least three more children: John, William, and Milly. The Bakers witnessed great violence and significant racial tensions. Between 1877 and 1950, twenty-nine Black people were lynched in Tensas Parish, making it among the four parishes in Louisiana with the highest number of lynchings. Of all the parishes and counties in the nation, Tensas Parish ranked eighth for the most lynchings. When Frederick lived there in 1860, ninety-percent of the population of Tensas Parish was enslaved. The parish remains a majority Black one today, and due to limited economic opportunities, it is the least populated parish in the state.
The Nutts received some money from the federal government for damages they incurred during the Civil War, but they were not satisfied with the amount. They continued to petition the government until 1929, when they were awarded another sum of money, over which they immediately began fighting. They wrote each other angry letters, argued amongst themselves, and took each other to court. Some of Haller and Julia Nutt’s grandchildren inherited Longwood. In 1968, three of them sold the home to a couple from Texas. In 1970, the Pilgrimage Garden Club of Natchez acquired Longwood along with the portrait of Frederick.
There were the Nutts who benefited from the payout from the federal government and the sale of Longwood, but there is another, long overlooked branch of the family. It is easy to imagine the children and grandchildren of Haller Nutt Jr. interacting with Frederick Baker’s children and grandchildren. They all lived within a few miles of each other in rural settlements along the Mississippi River in Tensas and Concordia Parishes; one lived at Vicksburg, just across the river. Haller Nutt Jr. had children with three formerly enslaved women. They all took the surname Nutt and most were christened with family names, including Rush, Haller, and Calvin. Haller Nutt Jr. directed that money be left to Annie Coleman, the Black woman who was the mother of his last child, but Prentiss Nutt and his siblings forced her to sign away her rights to Haller Jr.’s share of the
lawsuit in exchange for $800. Many of these Nutts, deemed people of color under the law, chose to leave for Chicago and California during the Great Migration. Like the Bakers, they would have suffered economic hardship, limited opportunities in education, the denial of civil rights, and threats of physical violence.
Frederick Baker had been enslaved because of cotton. He and his family had spent their lives laboring in cotton fields. The most prominent public exhibition of his portrait occurred at an exposition organized to celebrate cotton. In a letter to the editor of the New York Globe, a writer who referred to himself as “Though Black, A Man” protested the segregation of Black people into a single department instead of including them in the exhibits put forth by their native states. It was not lost on him that the cotton industry had been dependent upon enslaved labor and continued to rely upon the exploitation of sharecroppers. He believed that the exposition’s approach was “like staging the play of ‘Hamlet’ with the character of Hamlet left out,” noting that “nearly three fourths of the creditable exhibits of the South will [already] be indebted to the efforts of the colored people.” The interpretation of Frederick’s portrait over the years has been like staging a play entitled “Frederick” but with the absence of any actual inclusion of the real man. With this sale, it is the hope that Frederick’s portrait will be displayed in a place where he will be treated with dignity and his story told, not as a footnote in the life of the white man who enslaved him, but in a manner that is historically accurate and appropriate to the dignity of the man that he was. A portrait can turn a person into an object, especially a person who was already regarded as a commodity when living. But long after that person is gone, it can also remind of us of his humanity. Frederick’s personhood was denied in life but lives on today because of his portrait, in which he was depicted as an individual, not adjacent to a white person or in a subservient manner. Due to the paucity of portraits of enslaved people, they are often seen as a collective, a monolithic group, not as individuals. Frederick’s portrait acts as a panacea for the dehumanization and othering of enslaved people. In his face, we see both his own story and the stories of so many others at Araby and Winter Quarters and plantations all across the South that remain untold, forgotten, ignored, or dismissed.
NOTE: Due to my inability to travel to California and the institution’s restrictions on the collection, I was only able to virtually view three boxes of the Nutt collection held at the Huntington Library. Further research within this collection would provide even greater insight.
Sources
The Existing Narrative
William L. Whitwell, The Heritage of Longwood (Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1975), 25.
Jennifer Van Horn, Portraits of Resistance: Activating Art During Slavery (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2022).
Thomas Norman DeWolf and Sharon Leslie Morgan, Gather at the Table: The Healing Journey of a Daughter of Slavery and a Son of the Slave Trade (Boston: Beacon Press, 2012), 155-61.
Laurel Hill
Richard Nutt Will, May 25, 1811, Northumberland, Virginia, Record Book Vol. 19.
Rush Nutt Succession, probated August 2, 1837, Jefferson County, Mississippi, Chancery Court Packets, Case C281-C296, 1830-1890.
Nutt Family Collection, Z 1519, Mississippi Department of Archives and History.
Walter Johnson, Soul By Soul: Life Inside The Antebellum Slave Market (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999).
John Hebron Moore, The Emergence of the Cotton Kingdom in the Old Southwest: Mississippi, 1770-1860 (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1988), 12.
Merle C. Nutt, The Nutt Family Through the Years, 1635-1978 (Phoenix: M.C. Nutt, 1978).
Araby
Journal of Araby Plantation, Records of ante-bellum southern plantations from the Revolution through the Civil War. Series F, Selections from the Manuscript Department, Duke University Library; pt.1, The Deep South, reels 1-2, Louisiana and Lower Mississippi Valley Collections, Hill Memorial Library, Louisiana State University.
Juliet E. K. Walker, “Slave Drivers,” in Dictionary of Afro American Slavery, ed. Randall M. Miller and John David Smith (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 1998), 196-198.
Rush and Haller Nutt Papers, mssNU, Boxes 5, 6, and 7, The Huntington Library, San Marino, California.
John W. Blassingame, ed., Slave Testimony: Two Centuries of Letters, Speeches, Interviews, and Autobiographies (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1977), 434.
Winter Quarters
Rush and Haller Nutt Papers, HL.
William Kauffman Scarborough, Masters of the Big House: Elite Slaveholders of the Mid-Nineteenth Century South (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2006), 7.
William L. Whitwell, The Heritage of Longwood
The Clarion Ledger, December 20, 2018
Jeffrey Alan Owens, “The Burning of Lake St. Joseph,” Louisiana History Vol. 32, No. 4 (1991): 393-415.
Pilgrimage Historical Association: Nutt Family Papers, Z 1817, Mississippi Department of Archives and History
Nutt Family Collection, MDAH
The Civil War
William L. Whitwell, The Heritage of Longwood
Katherine S. Minor Claim, December 1879, U.S. Southern Claims Commission Approved Claims, 1871-1880, Record Group 217, National Archives and Records Administration.
Stephanie Chotard Claim, December 1875, U.S. Southern Claims Commission Approved Claims, 1871-1880, Record Group 217, National Archives and Records Administration.
Nutt Family Collection, MDAH
Rush and Haller Nutt Papers, HL
The Natchez Democrat, September 9, 1862
Owens, “The Burning of Lake St. Joseph”
Sarah A. Dorsey, Recollections of Henry Watkins Allen (New York: M. Doolady, 1866), 167.
Agreement with Freedmen for Winter Quarters Plantation, Reel 50, Agreements with Freedmen, Tensas Parish, Record Group 1905, Records of the Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands, National Archives, Washington, D.C.
Note: I also located and searched agreements for adjacent Routh properties.
Reconstruction
Haller Nutt Succession, Adams County, Mississippi, Chancery Packet 1436.
Julia Nutt, Renunciation of title to Winter Quarters, Conveyance Book F page 532, Tensas Parish Courthouse.
Pilgrimage Historical Association, MDAH
Nutt Family Collection, MDAH
Year: 1870; Census Place: Ward 2, Tensas, Louisiana; Roll: M593_532; Page: 226B
Tensas Parish Marriage Records, Books B and C, 1869-1872, Tensas Parish Courthouse.
The World’s Industrial and Cotton Centennial Exposition
The New Orleans Bee, December 2, 1847
The New York Sun, February 28, 1896
Nutt Family Collection, MDAH
Death record for C. R. Parker, February 1, 1849, Orleans Parish Deaths, vol. 11, p. 1286, Louisiana State Archives.
Juliet E. K. Walker, “Slave Drivers,” 196-198.
Tiya Miles, All That She Carried: The Journey of Ashley’s Sack, a Black Family Keepsake (New York: Random House, 2021), 19. “Envisioning Slave Portraiture,” in Slave Portraiture in the Atlantic World, ed. Agnes Lugo-Ortiz and Angela Rosenthal (Cambridge University Press, 2013), 2-4.
Van Horn, Portraits of Resistance, 9-10, 155. Pilgrimage Historical Association, MDAH
The Weekly Democrat, July 30, 1884
The Philadelphia Times, November 12, 1884
The Philadelphia Times, November 26, 1884
National Republican, February 28, 1885
Miki Pfeffer, “’Mr. Chairman and FELLOW AMERICAN CITIZENS’: African American Agency at the World’s Industrial and Cotton Centennial Exposition in New Orleans, 1884-1885,” Louisiana History Vol. 51, No. 4 (2010): 442-462.
The Descendants
Year: 1880; Census Place: Precinct 2, Gregg, Texas; Roll: 1307; Page: 448b; Enumeration District: 036
Year: 1900; Census Place: Justice Precinct 2, Gregg, Texas; Roll: 1641; Page: 10; Enumeration District: 0033
Rubin Baker, Taft Cemetery, Muskogee County, Oklahoma, Find a Grave®. http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi
Year: 1900; Census Place: Justice Precinct 2, Delta, Texas; Roll: 1627; Page: 8; Enumeration District: 0035
F. R. Baker, Friendship Cemetery, Delta County, Texas, Find a Grave®. http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi
Year: 1900; Census Place: Justice Precinct 1, Hunt, Texas; Roll: 1647; Page: 21; Enumeration District: 0120
Harry Baker, Ancestry.com. Texas, U.S., Death Certificates, 19031982 [database online]. Lehi, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2013.
Year: 1870; Census Place: Ward 2, Tensas, Louisiana; Roll: M593_532; Page: 227B
Year: 1880; Census Place: 2nd Ward, Tensas, Louisiana; Roll: 472; Page: 183a; Enumeration District: 082
Year: 1900; Census Place: Police Jury Ward 2, Tensas, Louisiana; Roll: 583; Page: 10; Enumeration District: 0105
Lynching in America: Confronting the Legacy of Racial Terror, Third Edition, (Alabama: Equal Justice Initiative, 2017), 41-42. Profile of Tensas Parish, United States Census Bureau
Tensas Parish, 1860 United States Census Bureau Report
Haller Nutt Succession, probated January 28, 1929, January 20, 1930, Chancery Packet Case No. 1726, Adams County, Mississippi. Haller Nutt Jr. Will, December 9, 1899, Warren County, Mississippi, Will Books Vol A-B. Haller Nutt Jr. Succession, probated February 25, 1903, Chancery Packet Case No. 4401, Warren County, Mississippi.
Year: 1880; Census Place: 5th Ward, Concordia, Louisiana; Roll: 452; Page: 73b; Enumeration District: 021
Year: 1910; Census Place: Beat 2, Warren, Mississippi; Roll: T624_761; Page: 9a; Enumeration District: 0063; FHL microfilm: 1374774
Year: 1940; Census Place: St Louis, St Louis City, Missouri; Roll: m-t0627-02204; Page: 67A; Enumeration District: 96-566
Year: 1880; Census Place: 4th Ward, Tensas, Louisiana; Roll: 472; Page: 162a; Enumeration District: 081
Year: 1920; Census Place: Chicago Ward 3, Cook (Chicago), Illinois; Roll: T625_312; Page: 11A; Enumeration District: 123 Miki Pfeffer, “’Mr. Chairman and FELLOW AMERICAN CITIZENS,’” 451-452.
Katy Morlas Shannon
Katy Morlas Shannon, a tenth generation Louisiana native, received her master’s degree in history from Louisiana State University in 2005. She was instrumental in the early stages of research for Whitney Plantation, created a searchable online database of over 400 enslaved individuals at Evergreen Plantation, and co-curated an exhibit about the enslaved community at Laura Plantation. Her book Antoine of Oak Alley: The Unlikely Origin of Pecans and the Enslaved Gardener Who Cultivated Them received the Phillis Wheatley Award for the best biography of 2022 from the Sons and Daughters of the Middle Passage. She was featured in The New York Times mini-documentary that was released in August of 2023, “His Name Was Bélizaire,” which has had almost five million views on YouTube. The story also appeared on the front page of The New York Times on August 14, 2023. Her column “Within These Walls,” profiling historic homes and the people who lived in them, is featured in the Preservation Resource Center’s magazine Preservation in Print. Her book, Invisible Blackness: A Louisiana Family in the Age of Racial Passing, was released by LSU Press this spring and was named a “Top New Release” in Women in History according to Amazon rankings. Morlas Shannon will be attending Tulane University this fall to pursue her doctorate in history.
Additional Images
“Portrait of Frederick” Photos Password availble upon request approval.
Images property of Neal Auction Company © 2025
These files are provided as a courtesy to select clients for April 4, 2025 Auction bidding review only.
Downloading is tracked.
Copying, sharing, printing, creating any print or photo reproduction of these images are strictly prohibited.
Please contact Michelle Leckert with any questions or concerns. michelle@nealauction.com or 504-910-8869.
Condition Report
A condition assessment report by Grenier Fine Art Conservation LLC is available upon request.
Private viewing appointments can be arranged.
Please contact Marney Robinson at paintings@nealauction.com or 504-910-8867.
Bidding Information
Auction will take place on Friday, April 4, 2025 beginning at 11:00 a.m. (CST).
For bidding registration, please contact Michelle Leckert at michelle@nealauction.com or 504-910-8869.
~ PREMIER ESTATE COLLECTIONS ~
ART & INTERIORS
April 4, 2025
EVENING LECTURE:
Thursday, April 3, 2025 6:00 p.m.
“Portrait of Frederick”
Please join us for a special lecture presented by historian Katy Morlas Shannon on her ground-breaking research into the “Portrait of Frederick.” This event is free and open to the public. Seating is limited. The lecture also will be livestreamed on Neal Auction’s Instagram and Facebook pages.
EXHIBITION
Monday, March 24 through Thursday April 3, 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
SATURDAY PREVIEW
Saturday, March 29, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.
EVENING PREVIEW
Tuesday, April 1, 5-7 p.m.
LIVE & ONLINE AUCTION
April 4, beginning at 11 a.m.
