On 04/06/2013 11:30, roy.stockdill@btinternet.com wrote: > Here's a thought that struck me only yesterday when I was doing some research > in the US censuses..... > > People often complain in this country that the census questions get more and > more intrusive every decade, though whether there will ever be another one > seems to be up in the air at the moment. > > However, I was doing some research in the US censuses in connection with the > latest subject for my Famous family trees blog at Findmypast (a UK celebrity > with an American connection) and looked at the censuses from 1840 to 1940 > online. > > Looking at the census for Brooklyn in 1870, I suddenly noticed that there were > two columns (8 and 9) headed "Value of Real Estate" and "Value of Personal > Estate". The person I was looking at said they had real estate worth 10,000 > dollars and personal estate of 3,000 dollars, which I imagine was quite a lot > in 1870. Whether the question about personal estate related to furniture, > household effects, etc, or actual cash was not clear. Checking further, I > discovered the same questions about real and personal estate values were asked > in 1860 also but in 1850 only the question about real estate value appeared. > > The questions about the value of real and personal estate appear to have > disappeared by the census of 1880 - perhaps too many people objected to being > asked such personal questions. I find it interesting that in America, the land > of liberty and dislike of government interference, such questions could ever > have appeared in a census at all. > > Someone may prove me wrong but I don't recall any UK census asking a question > about property values and certainly not how much money you had in the bank. I > can imagine the outcry if they did! The nearest, in the UK, is how many rooms a house had in the 1911. Earlier US censuses were specifically for heads of households, asking the specific question of how many slaves they owned.

Renia <renia@otenet.gr> wrote: : Earlier US censuses were specifically for heads of households, asking : the specific question of how many slaves they owned. That was not for property value, but apportionment in Congress where each slave counted as 3/5ths of a person. This led to the Southern, slaveholding states having a greater number of seats in the House of Representatives than would otherwise be apportioned by free population. The irony is that these 3/5th persons couldn't vote. -dja

On Tue, 04 Jun 2013 18:55:46 +0100, Renia <renia@otenet.gr> wrote: >On 04/06/2013 11:30, roy.stockdill@btinternet.com wrote: >> Here's a thought that struck me only yesterday when I was doing some research >> in the US censuses..... >> >> People often complain in this country that the census questions get more and >> more intrusive every decade, though whether there will ever be another one >> seems to be up in the air at the moment. >> >> However, I was doing some research in the US censuses in connection with the >> latest subject for my Famous family trees blog at Findmypast (a UK celebrity >> with an American connection) and looked at the censuses from 1840 to 1940 >> online. >> >> Looking at the census for Brooklyn in 1870, I suddenly noticed that there were >> two columns (8 and 9) headed "Value of Real Estate" and "Value of Personal >> Estate". The person I was looking at said they had real estate worth 10,000 >> dollars and personal estate of 3,000 dollars, which I imagine was quite a lot >> in 1870. Whether the question about personal estate related to furniture, >> household effects, etc, or actual cash was not clear. Checking further, I >> discovered the same questions about real and personal estate values were asked >> in 1860 also but in 1850 only the question about real estate value appeared. >> >> The questions about the value of real and personal estate appear to have >> disappeared by the census of 1880 - perhaps too many people objected to being >> asked such personal questions. I find it interesting that in America, the land >> of liberty and dislike of government interference, such questions could ever >> have appeared in a census at all. >> >> Someone may prove me wrong but I don't recall any UK census asking a question >> about property values and certainly not how much money you had in the bank. I >> can imagine the outcry if they did! > >The nearest, in the UK, is how many rooms a house had in the 1911. > >Earlier US censuses were specifically for heads of households, asking >the specific question of how many slaves they owned. And they remained that way until the 1850 census which for the first time listed members of the household, and also dropped the head count of slaves. The property question was reduced to the value of real estate owned . Personal questions covered literacy, school attendance within the census year, and marriages within the year. Earlier censuses were for head of household only; all other household members were grouped by age brackets, sex, and color. For white males the age related to availability for military duty, for all blacks the numbers related to both intrinsic value and taxation of the holder, in addition to the political implications of the 3/5 apportionment Dennis Ahern mentions. -- Don donsgenes@charter.net