> I have a situation where I have found a gg grandfather and family in > the 1880 census but then he and his wife have disappeared by the > time of the 1900 census. Since he was born in the 1830's, I am > assuming he and his wife died during that 20 year period. Should I > try to narrow the dates down further or should I write to the county > asking for a death record based on a 20 year window? > > "Frank Cullison" <fcullison@yahoo.com> Frank, the estate records in most counties are fully indexed, so "after 1880 and before 1900" should be sufficient for them to locate a possible estate record. Also inquire to see if they have one for the wife. Richard "Richard A. Pence" <richardpence@pipeline.com>

> > I understand some site, not SSA!, has some SS-5 images up. Anyone > > familiar with the URL? > > > > Cheryl Singhals <singhals@erols.com> > > Here is a site that has some, quite a few actually: > > http://www.idreamof.com/ss5/surnames_a-l.html > > k727h@aol.com (Kimber) Now that is truly neat! I am inspired now to send for my great grandmother's form now. How long does it take? Roxanne Koelpin

> I have a situation where I have found a gg grandfather and family in > the 1880 census but then he and his wife have disappeared by the > time of the 1900 census. Since he was born in the 1830's, I am > assuming he and his wife died during that 20 year period. Should I > try to narrow the dates down further or should I write to the county > asking for a death record based on a 20 year window? > > "Frank Cullison" <fcullison@yahoo.com> Hello Frank, You didn't mention which county, but you may find that there is an online death index available. See... Online Searchable Death Indexes for the USA http://home.att.net/~wee-monster/deathrecords.html Good luck with your search. Regards, Joe joe@genesearch.com

"Richard A. Pence" <richardpence@pipeline.com> wrote: > > > one word missing is FOLIO > > > > a FOLIO in archive speak is a single sheet of paper. > > > > the recto or front is page one > > > > the back or (re) verso is page 2 > > > > <snip> > > > > "Hugh Watkins" <hugh_watkins@net.dialog.dk> > > Hugh, thanks for the addition of the word "folio," which is the > "front and back" I was talking about. It is a printing term, rather > than "archives-speak." > > I assume there is a point to the rest of your message, but since you > have declared that I am both stupid and undoubtedly suffer from > Alzheimer's, that must be the reason I fail to see what connection > it has to census page numbering. Perhaps you can send me an email > explanations it. Hi Richard the UK census was issued as books to be filled in sometimes it takes several books to one piece I know nothing about USA or CA only DK and Britain for word definitions see the online dictionaries http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=folio&r=67 and http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=folio more than ten meanings according to context get there by clikcing on the undelined word http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=folio in the blue bar Hugh W "Hugh Watkins" <hugh_watkins@net.dialog.dk>

"Mick Gurling" <No.Spam.mickg@toto.com> wrote in message news:<b8b9jl$bvh$1@askin-17.linkpendium.com>... > > All that will tell you is that there is (or once was) a person > > sharing Your surname who bore arms. Suppose your name were "Jones"; > > it wouldn't be very significant to learn that there was once an > > English armiger named "Jones". > > Wouldn't he have been more likely of Welsh origin? > > ;) Whatever origin, the coat of arms will make a great conversation piece. Go for it! lscacchi@aol.com (Lawrence Scacchi)

> You mention that you've "thought about sending for marriage records > but those won't tell me anything more than I already know...." As > Dr. Phil now says on tv all the time, "How's that workin' for ya?" > Have you considered that, in light of the fact that you can't find > the documentation to prove what you think you "already know," maybe > what you "already know" is not entirely correct? Amen to Diane. This is so true. You have to question everything that you've been told. Don't believe a thing - even a document - until you've followed up on the information provided in the document. Just starting out in my research my father told me, "Ah, yes, the Gordon's were Scots." I checked the 1900 census. The parent's and 11 children were all born in Ireland. I called my father and told him. He said, "Oh! My father often told us we were Scots-Irish." Huge difference. Don't hesitate to secure every document that you can. Each one will give you another clue. I sat there with the information that my family was from Ireland. Not a big help. In Ireland you need a specific townland/parish. I ordered two of of my G-Uncles SSDI. Those documents showed that my G-Grands were born in Newtownards, Co. Down, N. Ireland. Bingo. Leave no stone unturned..... Sandra SGordon817@aol.com

Hi Bud, Thank you for the information on the Confederate ship. It was interesting. Judy lewisjgrandma@webtv.net (Judith Lewis)

> My mother was born an American (Iowa) and moved to Canada when she > married my father in 1927.. She was told that as long as she did > not vote in Canada that she could maintain her American Citizenship. > She never voted and she travelled all of her life on a US passport, > which I have. She applied for and received her last passport just > before she died at age 91+. It's interesting to note that the prohibition that the US had on US citizens voting in foreign elections was taken to the US Supreme Court in 1967 and was overturned. Since then, voting in a foreign election would not cause loss of US citizenship AND a person who had lost his citizenship by voting in an foreign election prior to that date was (and still is) able to request that it be restored. > She always told people that she maintained her citizenship in case > my father ever wanted to move to the US as it would then have been > comparatively easy for them to do so. > > When I was b. in 1928 I was considered a Canadian by the US > government. > > When my brother was born in 1931 he was considered to be partly > American and would have to decide before a certain age. I think he > had to live 5 years between the ages of 16-21 years. My brother > attended US colleges (Antioch and MIT) but did not become an US > citizen at that time. > > Recently he applied to be a dual citizen. Now he and all of his 4 > children and 10 grandchildren hold this distinction. This was > possible because Mother was an American. > > When my sister was born in 1942 she was considered an American but > would have to live in the US for a certain amount of time before she > was a certain age.. She became a full US citizen after attending > college in the US. She travelled with Mother when she was little, > and her picture with mother was on Mother's passport. FYI. The requirement that a person born outside the US, and who received his US citizenship through a US citizen parent, to return to the US to live if he wishes to keep his US citizenship no longer exists. Nowadays, a person who is born with both US and another citizenship may keep both citizenships for life, as far as the US is concerned. The nationality laws of both Canada and the US have changed many times over the years, with some changes being retrospective and others not. In a lot of cases two people with the same relationship to a country may find that one is a citizen while the other is not. Stephen Gallagher sgallagher@rogers.com (Stephen Gallagher)

> As you say, might be the year in question, but I've never heard of > losing your U.S. citizenship when marrying a citizen of another > country. But I could be wrong. It was Canadian Law, at least in > the 1930s that stated that when a Canadian married a citizen of > another country, they lost their Canadian citizenship and were > considered a citizen of the spouse's country. Actually, it would have been British law. Canadian citizenship did not exist until 1947. Prior to then, Canadians were simply British Subjects the same as people from Australia, New Zealand, the UK, and other British possessions. It wasn't until the late 1940s and beyond that the countries in the British Empire established their own citizenships. In general, a person would have become a citizen of their respective country if, on the date that citizenship was enacted, they were still a British Subject. Stephen Gallagher sgallagher@rogers.com (Stephen Gallagher)

:> I have a situation where I have found a gg grandfather and family in :> the 1880 census but then he and his wife have disappeared by the :> time of the 1900 census. Since he was born in the 1830's, I am :> assuming he and his wife died during that 20 year period. Should I :> try to narrow the dates down further or should I write to the county :> asking for a death record based on a 20 year window? :> :> "Frank Cullison" <fcullison@yahoo.com> That might depend on the State. Here in Alabama, statewide reporting of births and deaths wasn't required until 1908, if memory serves, with full compliance taking some years. For the most part, counties don't have records of deaths at all prior to that time, though there may be some exceptions. So you should probably check to find out the situation in the area of interest. = Steve = -- Steve W. Jackson Montgomery, Alabama "Steve W. Jackson" <stevewjackson@charter.net>

"Richard A. Pence" wrote: > I know nothing of the Canadian and British censuses as any ancestors > I had in either place pre-date the census records. However, if you > believe that the LDS 1880 U.S. Census *Index* (and a fine one it is) > is a "transcription," you might want to look at one of the images > and compare it with the LDS index extraction. It doesn't contain > "the same information as the 1880 Census CDs" (I assume you mean the > image CDs taken from the microfilms); it contains only a fraction of > it. Richard, yes I am referring to the 1880 FamilySearch Census. It is much more than an index. Yes it does not contain all the information in the 1880 Census enemeration but it does contain most of the information that is useful in genelaogical research. > The 1880 U.S. Census contains 26 specific items; of these, only 8 > are in the LDS index. The two lists are below my signature. > > Richard > > 1. Dwelling houses numbered in order of visitation.> > 2. Families numbered in order of visitation. No, but what is the real importance of this information except in rather unususal circumstances. If you want to know the failies in order of visitation, just search on neighbord. > 3. The name of every person whose place of abode on the 1st day > of June, 1880, was in this family. > Personal description: > 4. Color: White, W; black, B; Mulatto, Mu; Chinese, C; Indian, I > 5. Sex: Males (M), females (F) > 6. Age at last birthday prior to June 1, 1880. If under 1 year, > give months in fractions, thus, 3/12. > 7. If born within the census year, give the month. > 8. Relationship of each person to the head of this family whether > wife, son, daughter, servant, boarder, or other. Civil condition: > 9. Single. > 10. Married. > 11. Widowed; divorced. > 12. Married during census year. > Occupation: > 13. Profession, occupation, or trade of each male, male or > female. This information is given. > 14. Number of months this person has been unemployed during the > census year. > Health: > 15. Is the person (on the day of the enumerator's visit) sick or > temporarily disabled, so as to be unable to attend to ordinary > business or duties? Is so, what is the sickness or disability? No but ususally not important > 16. Blind. > 17. Deaf and dumb. > 18. Idiotic. > 19. Insane. > 20. Maimed, crippled, bedridden, or otherwise disabled. > Education: > 21. Attended school within the census year. > 22. Can not read. > 23. Can not write. 17 thru 23, no, but ususally not pertinanat. > Nativity: > 24. Place of birth of this person, naming State or Territory of > United States, or the country, if of foreign birth. > 25. Place of birth of the father of this person, naming State or > Territory of United States, or the country, if of foreign birth > 26. Place of birth of the mother of this person, naming State or > Territory of United States, or the country, if of foreign birth > > Of these 26 pieces of information, the LDS 1880 index includes > only these eight: > > 3. Name > 4. Color > 5. Sex > 6. Age > 8. Relationship to HOH (Partial; those not members of the family > are in a catch-all "other" category) > 24. Place of birth > 25. Place of birth of father > 26. Place of birth of mother If any of the omitted information is pertinant for a researcher, he can go to the micofilm and get all the data. There are 48? CDs in the 1880 Census. To show all the information would have probably made the set 20% larger and for how much use? bob gillis bob gillis <rpgillis@bellatlantic.net>

Hi Listers, I went to the LDS familysearch site to find who widow Mary A Firth was living with in 1880 (New York). Fortunately I knew her birth year. Here is the LDS "transcription": Household: Name Relation Marital Status Gender Race Age Birthplace = Occupation Father's Birthplace Mother's Birthplace Mary A FIRTH Self W Female W 72 PA At Home = PA PA Thomas W DAWSON FatherL D Male W 56 ENG Truckman ENG ENG =20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= Source Information: Census Place Brooklyn, Kings (Brooklyn), New York City-Greater, New York Family History Library Film 1254845 NA Film Number T9-0845 Page Number 315A Later I made a request for a lookup on the NY-CENSUS-LOOKUP-L@rootsweb.com a kind member sent me the actual image(s) privately. The Census images (bottom of pg 314D and top of 315A) revealed that there was a large Firth family in household #115 headed by one of Mary's sons and Mary A. FIRTH was listed as Mother (not Self, as the LDS site said). I am enjoying being member of this list. Linda McDowell in California "Linda McDowell" <limcd@cox.net>

> > From: fsuedu@hotmail.com (fsuedu) > > > > i ran across information in an obituary for an individual which > > stated that the person's father was deceased. the father's full > > name was printed in the obituary, so i check the ss death > > index.....every way i tried, no matter what combination, the > > individual's father didn't pop up on the index. > > It is my understanding that many/most individuals who died before a > certain date (can't remember the date, but think it was early 1960s) > are not shown on the automated index. For instance, my grandfather > who died in 1958 is not listed although he was receiving SS payments > when he died. > > I believe you can have SS Administration look up the individual for > a fee. When they do the search and find the records, you get more > data than what is shown on the automated index. > > ron48@aol.common (Ron Recer) Additionally, an individual not receiving payments gets put in the records only if the SS office is notified.

The subject says it all. I am a true neophyte to genealogy and have done some searching out on the net. However, I feel my searches would be more fruitful if I had guidance or tips on how to search for the best sites/groups. Do any of you have a short list of (a) books or (b) net sites that would cover the basics of internet genealogy searches? I am loathe to pay Ancestry.com $30 for an intro genealogical research on the internet course. Thanks. lwitz1967@hotmail.com (L. Witzig)

Listmembers, I have a Craven Co., NC deed written 1771 that lists as occupation/trade "turner" [quotations mine]. In the deed Turner is written with caps if that matters and the word does follow the grantee's name. The deed reads like this: This indenture made the twelfth day of April in the year of our Lord Christ one thousand seven hundred seventy and one between William WEST of Craven County and province aforsd. Cooper of the one part and John WATERS of the county and province aforsd. Turner of the other part---, etc. What is a turner? Google provided me with definition of turner as one who uses a lathe. For what types of work would one use a lathe? Carpentry? Thanks for any information/sources. Fran powell@closecall.com

Hi! Some days ago I came across an Internet company that researches/ sells Coats of Arms via the 'no cure, no pay' principle. Since my last name, Meulie, is very rare (only 4 living people in the whole world) I thought it was worth the 'risk'. Great was my surprise when I received an email, with attached to it the coat of arms of the Meulie family, or so they say... Is there any way I can verify that the coat of arms I received is actually that of the Meulie family, and not something that has been made by some random coat of arms generator program? ;) For who is interested, the image received is visible at: http://www.meulie.net/CoA/ Anyone who can give me any info on this matter: yes, please! :) Regards, Evert Meulie evert@meulie.net (Evert Meulie esq.)

> I have a situation where I have found a gg grandfather and family in > the 1880 census but then he and his wife have disappeared by the > time of the 1900 census. Since he was born in the 1830's, I am > assuming he and his wife died during that 20 year period. Should I > try to narrow the dates down further or should I write to the county > asking for a death record based on a 20 year window? > > "Frank Cullison" <fcullison@yahoo.com> Try narrowing the dates first. Directories and local newspaper items may help with this. If successful, you may then have a window much smaller than 20 years to give to the county clerk. If you are really lucky, there will be obituaries and you can give the clerk exact dates after all, if official death records are what you want. Austin W. Spencer "Austin W. Spencer" <AustinWSpencer@sdc.cox.net>

Richard A. Pence wrote: >>> <snip> >>> >>>I am not quite sure, either, how you are using the FamilySearch 1880 >>>listings. The LDS 1880 census material is an index and is not a >>>"source document." >>> >>>"Richard A. Pence" <richardpence@pipeline.com> >> >>Oh, it's more than an index! >> >> <snip> >> >>"Austin W. Spencer" <AustinWSpencer@sdc.cox.net> > > Dear Austin: > > The LDS 1880 database is an excellent information source. And it > will do more than just help you find someone on the microfilms. But > my point was that you shouldn't rely on it as the source of your > information for you genealogy or cite it as the source unless the > original is quite unavailable to you. Even the LDS "finding aid" has > errors. And, as I noted in my message to Bob Gillis, it is hardly a > complete transcription of the census records. Surely if you are > using the census for information for your ancestors, you will want > to at least be aware of all of the other things in the census record > that are not in the INDEX. I think it is more properly termed an abstract. It retains essential elements, recoverable in original order, but by no means does it transcribe the full record. For those who want this, it offers an adequate source citation. By contrast, if it were truly an every-name index, it would be organized more along the lines of the indices offered by Ancestry.com and Genealogy.com. Personal names would be presented with little, outside of placement indicators, to correlate persons of the same surname. > The ability to see who the neighbors are quickly is a helpful > feature, but neither new nor unique. The first census indexes on CD > were Head of Household indexes. Using the old Genealogy Research > System DOS software you could easily see who the neighbors are. The > Indiana Historical Society indexed the entire 1860 census of that > state and you can view it in several different ways, including > household order. This project included not only every name, but > every item included about each person in the census. The Society > does NOT call this a transcription, but an INDEX. Although I haven't seen these myself, your points are in the main well taken. The fact remains, though, that the Indiana Historical Society's effort *does* better fulfill the definition of "transcript" than the LDS database. In fact, if it is as you describe (and we have little reason to doubt you), it fulfills that definition as well as any electronic publication could. That the Society chose not to describe its transcript as such does not alter that document's general character. Of course, part of that general character is that any serious researcher with immediate access to the original census schedules of Indiana will use the Society's publication primarily as an index, and anyone without that access will use it primarily as a transcript. No actual or conceiveable publication is better adapted to the latter use. Certainly the LDS database isn't. > Here's a tip with regard to your following comment: > >>If your ancestor lived in a large urban >>area in 1880, transferring from LDS to one of these requires >>entering the LDS film number to see which EDs are on that film, then >>checking each ED for the appropriate page, > > Since each page number will appear only once on each microfilm, you > can usually quickly find the page by either estimating its location > or calculating it. The other night I was looking for someone in NYC > who was on page 264 of a given roll which contained EDs 69 - 88. I > guessed that page 264 was in ED 83, but was one too high - it was in > ED 82. Once the images for ED 82 were loaded (at Ancestry.com), it > was easy to do the calculation to reach page 264 on the first or > second try. (I outlined for someone the entire process for finding > someone at Ancestry.com from the info at Ancestry.com and if anyone > would like a copy of that message, drop me an email. > > "Richard A. Pence" <richardpence@pipeline.com> My point was that before you can delve into the films (under any catalog except FHLC) or the images, you need the ED range. For that, FHLC remains an indispensable companion to the census database. Luckily, the latter's output includes film numbers linked to FHLC's description of that film's contents. Besides, any time you resort to guessing, your first guess has only a random chance of being more accurate than the result of a diligent search. You got lucky with ED 83. Austin W. Spencer "Austin W. Spencer" <AustinWSpencer@sdc.cox.net>

Singhals <singhals@erols.com> wrote: >It is tempting, oh-so tempting!, to list as a source for >great-grand's marriage something like > http://members.NASA.edu/web/web_page/this.html >and skip the wearisome step of VERIFYING the info in the real >records. > >The problem will arise (that's WILL, as in guaranteed) when, two, >six, eight months or a year from now when you try to go back to > http://members.NASA.edu/web/web_page/this.html >and get a 404- file not found, or a No DNS. > [snip] A partial solution is the "Wayback Machine", the Internet Archive at http://www.archive.org/ They have 10 billion pages that were once on-line. If you're lucky, the page you're looking for might be in the archive. More about me: http://thelabwiz.home.mindspring.com/ VB3 source code: http://thelabwiz.home.mindspring.com/vbsource.html VB6 source code: http://thelabwiz.home.mindspring.com/vb6source.html VB6 - MySQL how to: http://thelabwiz.home.mindspring.com/mysql.html Fix the obvious to reply by email. johnecarterXxX@mindXxXspring.com.xx

asprentz@hotmail.com wrote: > I appreciate the people who are nice about their reply's, I really > do. I also understand that it is hard for people to know what work > I have done without listing every single piece of documentation. > Because of limited time and space, I only list what I think is > important info, but evidentally, I need to learn how to make a > proper post, or rude people need to stop making assumptions that I'm > just doing my family genealogy on "family tales'. It's difficult for a disinterested observer to fault the assumption that you're using only family tales -- family tales were, after all, the ONLY source you cited, outside of one census which you brushed off because it didn't match your family story. Cheryl singhals@erols.com