From: "Peter B Park" <pbp@archive-research.freeserve.co.uk> To: <SOG-UK-L@rootsweb.com> > From: "John Brown" <john.dhb@btopenworld.com> > >> So the enumerator was very slightly hard of hearing, and the subject had >> a >> bit of an accent - sounds very reasonable ! > > Why does this myth persist. The enumerator delivered schedules to each > household the during the week before census night. The schedules were > filled > in by the householder and collected after a check by the enumerator that > all > the correct parts had been filled in on the doorstep. There is no way an > enumerator could have written out the details of 2,000 households in the > houses - it took them days to copy the schedules into the books we see > today. Hardness of hearing and accents very rarely came into the > equation - > relatively few households had no one that could read and write in them or > living next door. I have a copy of an original schedule from Darlaston in > 1861 signed by the 13 year old son. So please, lets give the enumerators a > break and not blame them for all the evils of the world - well all the > mistakes in the census. The original post referred to "Foulness" being recorded as "Fournass", which looks and sounds like a straightforward case of verbal misunderstanding, surely ? I don't dispute the process you describe, but I'd question the extent of illiteracy in the general population and how this would have affected the recording of information. I wasn't 'blaming' the enumerators for anything, by the way, and I do have an enumerator somewhere in my tree - a beautiful job he did too, despite being the local publican ! John B Leic., Eng