Tobacco plants, when 'ripe' at mid-season, were 'topped' to remove their seed-producing 'flowers.' This caused soil nutrients used by the plants for seed production to be redirected toward growth of larger and fuller leaves. A side-effect of 'topping' was the new growth of 'suckers' from the stalk and axels (joints) of the original leaf stems, these sucker-shoots attempting to replace the seed-producing flowers lost from the topping action. Growth of from seven to ten suckers per plant was common, often requiring a second 'pass' through a field about 7-10 days after the first pass of sucker removal. Finding and removing these suckers was time consuming work. None of my books or on-line history sources speak of Virginian laws which prohibited the growing of suckers; it seems that removal of as many suckers as practicable was a good business practice. However, such a law may have been intended to upgrade practices of some planters who tended to minimize their costs at the loss of quality, thereby being detrimental to the reputation of Virginian tobacco -- a highly competitive product within the colonies, especially between Virginia and Maryland. Such a law may have originally been part of a series of colonial laws passed after over-production of tobacco glutted English markets about 1660 and dropped prices so low that colonists barely survived, and when many colonists attempted to counter low prices by exporting 'trash' tobacco or by manipulating the size of tobacco shipping containers called 'hogsheads.' These colonial laws, passed over a period of 50 years or more, included attempts to reduce and control tobacco production, to standardize the size of the hogshead, to prohibit shipments of bulk tobacco and to prevent the exportation of trash tobacco. However, enforcement of such laws was impractical and it was not until 1730 when Virginia passed its Inspection Acts, and other colonies followed, that tobacco trade laws indeed were generally accepted and enforced. "The Inspection Acts established public warehouses with official inspectors and required planters to transport every hogshead of tobacco in the colony to a warehouse for inspection. The inspectors were empowered to break open each hogshead, remove and burn any trash, and issue tobacco notes to the owner specifying the weight and kind of tobacco." Re: http://www.tobacco.org/History/colonialtobacco.html and other sites from Google searches. So...was a 'sucker-hunter' the field worker who looked for and removed suckers, a county appointee who counted the number of tobacco plants grown by individual planters or a colonial government appointee who inspected intended shipments of tobacco at a government warehouse, looking for suckers, 'trash' material, and other measures of overall quality? Barbara Little's knowledgeable posting indicates the middle option is correct for the specific purpose of Jim Watkinson, to which I agree since the record in question is from Orange **County**, VA. However, the term 'sucker hunter' seems to be a misnomer for 'plant-counter' in this case, unless the county appointee also looked for an excessive number of suckers and recorded such (this could only be done after a field had ripened and been topped and suckered the final time) -- but suckers were also hunted at the Inspection Warehouses after 1730. This leads me to suspect the name sucker-hunter was a general term, loosely applied to all of the above and other possibilities as well including a humorous one or two. Btw, tobacco was nearly half of the total exported commodities from the colonies in 1750, amounting to about 60 million pounds (weight) to England. With highest regards for Barbara Little and all, I'm simply a retired engineer and wannabe historian/genealogist. Neil McDonald [log in to unmask] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barbara Vines Little" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 4:45 PM Subject: Re: "sucker hunting" > Eric is correct, the law limited both the number of tobacco plants that > could be grown "per worker in the ground," i.e., tithable---whether white or > slave and denied the growing of suckers or sideshoots because they produced > an inferior grade of tobacco. Constables were appointed by the county to go > to each farm/plantation and count the number of tobacco plants; they were > paid a flat rate per tithable and you will find these listed in the > (usually ) October court list of items paid. Some of these lists survive > among the county loose papers and are usually erroneously labeled "tithable > lists" and filed as such. Tithables were created in the spring; tobacco > lists were created in the summer. I have seen a few that actually list the > total number of tobacco plants. > > One of the lists for Orange County by a Hancock is acctually labeled > "Hancock, his sucker hunting list." > > Barbara > > Barbara Vines Little, CG > PO Box 1273 > Orange, VA 22960 > phone/fax 540-832-3473 (evenings) > [log in to unmask] > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jim Watkinson [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 10:12 AM > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: "sucker hunting" > > > > > > Just ran across the following from Orange Co, VA, 1751: "The Pet[ition] > > of William Donaught Humbly Begs that your Worships will allow me my > > Tobacco for Sucker Hunting Last year according to the list I sent your > > worships . . ." "Sucker hunting"??? > > > > > > > > Any clues from the learned listers? > > > > > > > > Please pardon the cross-post. > > > > > > > > Cheers. > > > > > > > > Jim Watkinson > > > > > > > > James D. Watkinson, Ph.D. > > > > Archives > > > > Library of Virginia > > > > [log in to unmask] > > > > 804.692.3804 To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html