> Q. Any other clues to finding an Indian before 1880? > > I, too, had rumors of Indian blood in my family. I think this > was a romantic notion, among those with ancestors who arrived > before 1750, attesting to mountain men and other adventurers in > the distance past. My brother asked me, not long ago, whether I > had found the Indian in our mother's history. "She had those high > cheekbones and black hair," I told him I hadn't found any > Indians, and since I had found most of her ancestors back to the > immigrants, I didn't think there was an Indian ancestor. But he > was not about to take that for an answer, going over more of her > physical characteristics. "Well," I said, "she did have one > ancestor named Mary Crow, who was married to a Gilmore ancestor, > but I am pretty sure she was Scot-Irish." "That must be it," he > said, not listening to the rest of the sentence. I am sure he > tells his children about the Crow Indian who was grandma's > ancestor. And so, what may have started out as a family joke, > becomes family history. > > "Joan Best" <joanbest1@earthlink.net> Great story, Joan. The "high cheek bones and black hair" are an integral part of the American Indian heritage tradition in many cases. I had a distant cousin and fellow genealogist, a professor at an Ohio University, who was convinced we had an American Indian ancestor. Each summer she would come and visit her brother who lived nearby and she spent many an hour trying to convince me she was right. The high cheekbones and black hair were part of the "convincing." One summer I don't think she even stopped at her brother's house - she came directly to show me her discovery. Of the 19 children of our common fourth great grandparents, only three had lived into the age of photography - and she had found a photo of one of the two youngest boys! "There," she said, poking the picture in my face. There, by golly, was the spitting image of Sitting Bull! It was a photo of my 3rd great grandfather's younger brother Benjamin, taken in his late years after the Civil War. The story is longer, but after my cousin died I went on to document a great many things about our fourth great grandparents, including solid evidence that both were born in Germany, where there weren't too many Native Americans. For that matter, there were no Indians living anywhere near them when brother Benjamin was born about 1790. Two more genealogical truths: You can't determine relationships by how a name is spelled. And you can't determine ethnicity by the relative position of cheekbones or the color of hair! <g> Regards, Richard "Richard A. Pence" <richardpence@pipeline.com>

> I've asked the person that told me, in June/July 1970, about the > 1970 census when I visited her (from the UK), whether she > remembers the conversation, and the book. > > She replied "I don't remember the particulars about being > polka-dotted or striped, but I do remember that if you said you > were Indian in some locations you were to be listed as negro and > in some locations as Mexican. The instructions you saw at the > > http://www.ipums.umn.edu/~pipums/voliii/inst1970.html > > website are for the respondents filling out the form. The > instructions I talked about were those given to the census-taker > who did home visits on a sample of the population." > I now wonder if the "book" was not so much for the questionnaire, > but > http://www.ssc.upenn.edu/ssc/ssdc/codebooks/cb0018.html > that households w for the analysis - I notice from ere divided > into negro and non-negro, a division that "fits" my friend's > memory better than does the questionnaire itself, though I can > see (knowing the ethnic background of her children) that the > conversation might have started with question 13b. > > In which case my comment was irrelevant to a genealogical > newsgroup - I apologise. > > "cecilia" <myths@ic24.net> Cecilla: I think I will let the researcher in 2042 figure this one out! You are correct in saying the quotation I posted was from the instructions to the respondent and not the enumerator. I clicked on a link that CLEARLY said "1970 instructions to the Enumerator" and then started searching for "the race question" without reading the heading - which explained what the document was. I guess most of the "enumerators" were the people who filled out the forms! <g> I confess to not spending much time with the other document you provide a link for, except to note it appears to be a document on data sampling analysis rather than collection. And, yes, 13b could have been the trigger, but who knows. It remains puzzling to me, why a "book" would tell people to count someone in one category in one area and one with the same make up as something else in another area. Perhaps something to do with some sort of federal aid based on ethnicity. In any case, in 2042, the returns will have to speak for themselves - just like they do now, which is not much of a comfort! The Census Bureau people undoubtedly have their reasons for what they do (as murky as these may be). Three years ago many of us puzzled over this one: You were supposed to list the household as it existed on a specific date (March 1?), but they badgered you to get the form in advance of the date. On a statistical level, this won't make much of a difference, but a genealogist of the future may have a problem if there was a birth in the family after the form was mailed in but before the official census date! And I noticed what will be another problem for future generations in looking over the instructions again just now. One of the questions asked where the child was born - and the instructions tell you that if the child was born in a hospital to enter the state of residence of the mother. We lived in Virginia in 1968 when our oldest child was born in a hospital in the District of Columbia. If we filled out the form correctly, it will say he was born in Virginia. A researcher looking in Virginia for a birth record for the child won't have much luck - it's in D.C.! Thanks for an interesting - and probably revealing - exchange. Richard > I've asked the person that told me, in June/July 1970, about the > 1970 census when I visited her (from the UK), whether she > remembers the conversation, and the book. > > She replied "I don't remember the particulars about being > polka-dotted or striped, but I do remember that if you said you > were Indian in some locations you were to be listed as negro and > in some locations as Mexican. The instructions you saw at the > > http://www.ipums.umn.edu/~pipums/voliii/inst1970.html > > website are for the respondents filling out the form. The > instructions I talked about were those given to the census-taker > who did home visits on a sample of the population." > I now wonder if the "book" was not so much for the questionnaire, > but > http://www.ssc.upenn.edu/ssc/ssdc/codebooks/cb0018.html > that households w for the analysis - I notice from ere divided > into negro and non-negro, a division that "fits" my friend's > memory better than does the questionnaire itself, though I can > see (knowing the ethnic background of her children) that the > conversation might have started with question 13b. > > In which case my comment was irrelevant to a genealogical > newsgroup - I apologise. > > "cecilia" <myths@ic24.net>

> >Lisa: > > > >You must be thinking of the annual school censuses that some > >city/county school districts conduct. These are a relatively > recent > >creation and as such would likely NOT be public information as to > >personal information - only the statistical results. Further, I > >don't think it is necessary to fill them out unless you have > >school-age children. (If no kids in the house, just check the box > >that says "Not applicable" or ""no children" and send it back.) > > "Richard A. Pence" <richardpence@pipeline.com> > > Thank you, but since I started this, I guess I need to re-post what > I wrote on Feb. 18: > > "I lived in Somerville [Mass.] for a while in the 1980s and 1990s. > A city census was taken every year with a few questions: name, age, > occupation, etc. The local history room of the Somerville Public > Library had a lot of these in bound form but I don't remember how > far back they went. You can get information on many Massachusetts > libraries (and search their catalogs) at > http://www.mln.lib.ma.us/index.htm > I did a search but could not find these census books, but "About > Member Libraries" will give you contact info for the library." > > Everyone had to fill in the census forms, whether we had kids or > not. They are public information, at least if you can go to the > library. > > I was asking if other cities and towns do such censuses, and if > there is a list of such cities and towns anywhere. From someone's > answer, at least there are other municipalities in Mass. that take > censuses. > > Carol Botteron <botteron@alum.mit.edu> Carol and Richard- The three towns I'm referring to are Boston, Milford, and Mendon, MA. While I'm sure that the data was used for school planning, they also asked your occupation, and how many pets you had, among other things that I don't remember now. When I have a little more time next week, I'll call around and see what I can find out about these town's census' and if they are available in the libraries here. Thanks, Lisa llepore@juno.com

> You must be thinking of the annual school censuses that some > city/county school districts conduct. These are a relatively recent > creation and as such would likely NOT be public information as to > personal information Despite all our talk about different types of censuses, I had forgotten about the school census. There ARE some very useful old ones, although I have absolutely no idea how widespread they were or how many have survived. One of my families homesteaded in Harlan County, Nebraska, in the 1870s. By writing to the county clerk, we found two school censuses taken in that decade that listed the names and ages of the school kids in our family. That was mildly interesting, but the REALLY useful, Methods-y benefit, was that the name of the school appeared on the form. These were all small "Little House on the Prairie" type schools in tiny communities that no longer appear on the map. We wrote to the county clerk a second time asking for help in locating the school on a modern map. The clerk handed our letter to a genealogically-minded woman who said that while the community no longer existed, there was an old cemetery by that name. She and her husband took it on themselves to drive out to the prairie cemetery, dig down to half-buried stones and turn over the fallen ones until they found the grave marker of a child in our family. That marker and the listing on the school census are our only documentation for that child. Anecdotes aside, please know that there ARE school censuses and perhaps other specialized local records that are worth checking. It's worth visiting or writing local organizations -- I live near Salt Lake and work in the great library there several days a week, and I have to remind myself constantly that there are so many records that are not in the library. And there are wonderful people out there who occasionally go the third and fourth mile to help complete strangers. Ardis Parshall AEParshall@aol.com

>From: "Richard A. Pence" <richardpence@pipeline.com> >Lisa: > >You must be thinking of the annual school censuses that some >city/county school districts conduct. These are a relatively recent >creation and as such would likely NOT be public information as to >personal information - only the statistical results. Further, I >don't think it is necessary to fill them out unless you have >school-age children. (If no kids in the house, just check the box >that says "Not applicable" or ""no children" and send it back.) Thank you, but since I started this, I guess I need to re-post what I wrote on Feb. 18: "I lived in Somerville [Mass.] for a while in the 1980s and 1990s. A city census was taken every year with a few questions: name, age, occupation, etc. The local history room of the Somerville Public Library had a lot of these in bound form but I don't remember how far back they went. You can get information on many Massachusetts libraries (and search their catalogs) at http://www.mln.lib.ma.us/index.htm I did a search but could not find these census books, but "About Member Libraries" will give you contact info for the library." Everyone had to fill in the census forms, whether we had kids or not. They are public information, at least if you can go to the library. I was asking if other cities and towns do such censuses, and if there is a list of such cities and towns anywhere. From someone's answer, at least there are other municipalities in Mass. that take censuses. Carol Botteron (that's French Swiss) <botteron@alum.mit.edu> Maintainer, Civil War Units File

Richard A. Pence wrote: >it seems quite appropriate >that your email handle is "myths." <g> >My view would be if a book >such as you describe was used in the 1970 census, it sure wouldn't >be any secret at this point! (I chose "myths" deliberately <grin>. Most "facts" turn out to be theories.) I've asked the person that told me, in June/July 1970, about the 1970 census when I visited her (from the UK), whether she remembers the conversation, and the book. She replied "I don't remember the particulars about being polka-dotted or striped, but I do remember that if you said you were Indian in some locations you were to be listed as negro and in some locations as Mexican. The instructions you saw at the http://www.ipums.umn.edu/~pipums/voliii/inst1970.html website are for the respondents filling out the form. The instructions I talked about were those given to the census-taker who did home visits on a sample of the population." I now wonder if the "book" was not so much for the questionnaire, but for the analysis - I notice from http://www.ssc.upenn.edu/ssc/ssdc/codebooks/cb0018.html that households were divided into negro and non-negro, a division that "fits" my friend's memory better than does the questionnaire itself, though I can see (knowing the ethnic background of her children) that the conversation might have started with question 13b. In which case my comment was irrelevant to a genealogical newsgroup - I apologise. myths@ic24.net

> > > Edith, in that time frame (1860-1870) the parents would likely > > > not be in the record unless she was still a minor and needed > > > their consent. That is still certainly worth the try. > > > > > > "Richard Pence" <richardpence@pipeline.com> > > > > In Virginia the marriage registers often listed both sets of > > parents in that time frame. I don't know about other states. > > > > "Edith" <ECFensom@aol.com> > > I double-checked my Virginia marriages and those I have for the > period 1860 - 1870 DO have the parents listed in most cases. Thanks > for setting me straight on that one! > > I was thinking this practice started some years later (even in > Virginia), as in some of the other states I am familiar with. > > "Richard Pence" <richardpence@pipeline.com> Richard, With each locality doing things differently, it's hard to keep them straight. Edith ECFensom@aol.com

Q. Any other clues to finding an Indian before 1880? I, too, had rumors of Indian blood in my family. I think this was a romantic notion, among those with ancestors who arrived before 1750, attesting to mountain men and other adventurers in the distance past. My brother asked me, not long ago, whether I had found the Indian in our mother's history. "She had those high cheekbones and black hair," I told him I hadn't found any Indians, and since I had found most of her ancestors back to the immigrants, I didn't think there was an Indian ancestor. But he was not about to take that for an answer, going over more of her physical characteristics. "Well," I said, "she did have one ancestor named Mary Crow, who was married to a Gilmore ancestor, but I am pretty sure she was Scot-Irish." "That must be it," he said, not listening to the rest of the sentence. I am sure he tells his children about the Crow Indian who was grandma's ancestor. And so, what may have started out as a family joke, becomes family history. Joan B ------- End of Forwarded Message "Joan Best" <joanbest1@earthlink.net>

All, I'm interested in locating specific information about the date changeover from Julian to the Gregorian calendar. I've found a lot of info on the web already, but I curious mostly about the Wurttemberg area of present day Germany and whether both the Catholic and Protestant's changed at the same time. Most of the area seems to be Protestant that I'm searching. I would also be interested in how people refer to Julian versus Gregorian as it relates to their documentation. Thank you for your time, Kevin L. Sholder Don't wait to make your Son a great man. Make him a great boy. --Unknown <http://www.siscom.net/~rdrunner/ <http://www.siscom.net/~rdrunner/> <http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~rdrunner/ kevin.sholder@ncr.com

All, Does anyone know if the GenKit application from 1995 has been updated? If so where can it be obtained? Thank you for your time, Kevin L. Sholder Don't wait to make your Son a great man. Make him a great boy. --Unknown <http://www.siscom.net/~rdrunner/ <http://www.siscom.net/~rdrunner/> <http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~rdrunner/ kevin.sholder@ncr.com=20

> I have an ancestor who was a merchant seaman on the Great Lakes. In > 1880 he is not enumerated with his wife & children in Milwaukee, and > I have not found him via familysearch.org. > > Was there any special enumeration of men at sea on census dates? > Also, how were American citizens enumerated who were traveling by > ship on a census date (i.e., traveling to or from Europe)? > > Kathleen Craine <KACraine@aol.com> Someone else you won't find on the 1880 census (the originals, the Soundex, or the LDS' CDs) is John S. Mosby, US Consul in Hong Kong. I found that odd, so I contacted the Census Bureau. US Citizens who were not physically in what is now "the lower 48" were not enumerated (even if they were the US Consul). There was a footnote or twelve to that; mostly concerning the US military. Additionally, there's that tidbit concerning what the enumerator was supposed to ask; in some years, they asked for "usually domiciled", in others, it was "slept the night". I don't remember what it was in 1880, but if it was either asked or interpreted as "who was in the house on (date)" results can become, er, fascinating. Cheryl singhals@erols.com

I had to similarly disillusion a woman in the midwest who assured me her great grandfather was an Indian chief. In the course of my research I found out he was an officer in a lodge with a name something like "Order of Red Men," and had that feathered headdress in the attic as part of his lodge regalia. She was pretty miffed about that, and of course blamed the messenger. Jan Hall Halltall@aol.com

"Carl Sachs" <csachs@dejazzd.com> wrote: > Kdberr1@aol.com wrote: > > > Does anyone have methods of packaging their genealogy that have > > captured the interest of the younger family members? > > . . . lots and LOTS of photographs . . . even those you may not be > able to identify. Someone just might be able to ID them! And old-fashioned drop-down trees with their names and dates on. My nephews loved tracing themselves back. For older folk, a tree with a small error on it can generate LOTS of info - they seem to enjoy the triumphant "you've got this bit wrong!". Make sure you then destroy the copy with the error so that is doesn't cause later confusion. Llesley Robertson Lesley Robertson <l.a.robertson@tnw.tudelft.nl>

> Could someone please explain the difference in State and Federal > Census to me. Was the State census taken in every state and how > often. I seem to only find Fedral Census when I go to the Library. > > iriscrall@att.net If you do a search on Google 'state census' click on the first listing and you will get a list from The Source for all the states with years taken. Remember though, not all counties had a census taken in all years. (New York State for example) You can try searching '(name of state)state census'.

<ECFensom@aol.com> wrote: > richardpence@pipeline.com writes: > > > Edith, in that time frame (1860-1870) the parents would likely > > not be in the record unless she was still a minor and needed > > their consent. That is still certainly worth the try. > > Richard, > > In Virginia the marriage registers often listed both sets of > parents in that time frame. I don't know about other states. Dear Edith: I double-checked my Virginia marriages and those I have for the period 1860 - 1870 DO have the parents listed in most cases. Thanks for setting me straight on that one! I was thinking this practice started some years later (even in Virginia), as in some of the other states I am familiar with. Regards, Richard @aol.com

"Dennis Lee Bieber" <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > Hmm, the page shows a link to the Calendrical Calculations > book... "Calendrical Calculation: The Millenium Edition" at US$110 > !!!! Ah.. a paperback version is only $40. > > The "Astronomical Almanac" itself is published annually (it > only covers the year). The 2003 edition lists for $55. (You can get > it and the Supplement combined for $131 <G>) Thanks, but no thanks. I have decided I already know more about this than I really need to know. <g> Regards, Richard "Richard A. Pence" <richardpence@pipeline.com>

> Richard A. Pence wrote: > >... The instructions are online and say > >this: <Quotes snipped> > > Yes. After I posted I went and looked. Sorry - my tale appears to > be ill-founded. > > What my friend told me (a few months after the 1970 census) was that > when she had asked the enumerator about the race of her children, > the enumerator had produced a book as large as a bible, half of > which appeared to be about race. Even allowing for her exaggeration > and my faulty interpretation at the time, and my memory since, I > feel that the "book" has not been reproduced on-line. > > Which makes me curious as to what it was. > > I will come across the answer one of these days. ( I have found > that answers generally come without too much effort on my part. I > call it the Piccadilly Circus effect.) > > "cecilia" <myths@ic24.net> Well, I guess my only comment is that it seems quite appropriate that your email handle is "myths." <g> My view would be if a book such as you describe was used in the 1970 census, it sure wouldn't be any secret at this point! Regards, Richard "Richard A. Pence" <richardpence@pipeline.com>

"Dena" <dena@dbnetmall.com> wrote: > Any help on determining a half or full Indian on census or was that > unheard of? Any other clues to finding an Indian before 1880? > Would have to be possibly in 1850s 1860s generations. gggrp. > dena > (I KNOW there was one there somewhere in our family, but can't find > them ANYWHERE!!!!) Dena: If you can't find "them" ANYWHERE, how do you KNOW "there was one there somewhere"? Aside from "the three brothers" and "the name was changed at Ellis Island," the most commonly believed (and rarely true) family tradition in American genealogy is the one about Indian (aka "Native American") ancestry. Like most other genealogical puzzles, the solution likely lies in carefully tracing each generation back. If you then encounter a person whose background might lead you to believe the person could be an Indian, then this is the time and the place to try to determine the details. Starting out by looking for (to put the quest as it is most commonly expressed terms) the "Cherokee princess" is almost certain to leave your genealogical vehicle spinning its wheels. If you are asking if there are census records which state that persons were "Indian," the answer is yes. If you asking if all of them who were full or part Indian are so recorded, the answer is no. Even if the answer were yes, this wouldn't provide you with any shortcuts - you still will want to check the census records for each family in your tree. In the final analysis, that is probably the only way you will be able to answer your question. Somewhere in the archives of this newsgroup I believe there are a number of discussions about Native American family traditions as well as some of the other commonly believed - but seldom true - ones. The essence of these discussions is that it is usually a losing strategy in genealogy to set out trying to prove your are related to some specific person - be he or she rich, famous, an Indian or a horse thief. There are simply too many blind alleys in this approach. Having preached that sermon, I have no doubt you will disregard most of it because you KNOW what you know. Worse, if your belief turns out not to be true, it will be my fault! That's what happened to me a couple of years ago when I proved with a stack of documents that a certain lady's "full-blooded Osage Indian" great grandmother was a nice German girl born in Indiana far in both distance and time from any Osage Indians. Her response was, "Why are you trying to destroy my heritage?" Beats me. What I thought I was doing was supplying the facts. <g> Regards, Richard Pence Fairfax, Virginia "Richard A. Pence" <richardpence@pipeline.com>

I have an ancestor who was a merchant seaman on the Great Lakes. In 1880 he is not enumerated with his wife & children in Milwaukee, and I have not found him via familysearch.org. Was there any special enumeration of men at sea on census dates? Also, how were American citizens enumerated who were traveling by ship on a census date (i.e., traveling to or from Europe)? Kathleen Craine Chicago KACraine@aol.com

Lisa <llepore@juno.com> wrote: > I think Carol is asking about the yearly (in some places) census > that are taken by cities and towns, and were the results available > to the public. > I always wondered about this myself, but since I don't have any > ancestors in the cities and towns that conducted a census, I never > looked into it. I have filled out census questionaires in 3 > different Massachusetts communities, including Boston. I have never > seen them mentioned as genealogical resource material. Lisa: You must be thinking of the annual school censuses that some city/county school districts conduct. These are a relatively recent creation and as such would likely NOT be public information as to personal information - only the statistical results. Further, I don't think it is necessary to fill them out unless you have school-age children. (If no kids in the house, just check the box that says "Not applicable" or ""no children" and send it back.) Aside from the privately published city/county directories (which Ardis correctly suggested are a good substitute or can augment Federal census records), the other city/county "census" would be the annual tax rolls. As you likely know, these vary in the amount of information in them from place to place and over time. And retention of these records can be hit or miss. One good way to find out what population finding aids are available in a particular place is to check the County GenWeb site, go to the board for that locale or subscribe to the mailing list covering it. Regards, Richard "Richard A. Pence" <richardpence@pipeline.com>