Yes, This Was Indexed.

 Ancestry tells me that William Chinn, born about 1790 was enumerated on this page. Really. Were they using some sort of magic to index this page? Infrared light? Ultraviolet?  They 1870 census for William Chinn in Scott county is not much better. Maybe on a microfilm reader this might actually display, but this image is totally useless.

Looking at Family Search's index is worse. They don't even show this person indexed. Because they couldn't read the page either.

In an attempt to get the page number so I could try to get the image on Heritage Quest, I noticed that the record says he is Black. I don't know how they could read that either.

1850 Fayette County, Kentucky Census

Copyright 2011, ACK for Gene Notes

What Was the Census Taker Thinking?

I've been working on the Family Search Record Search Site or the New Family Search Beta site - same info different formats - and finding lots of good stuff. One was a marriage record for William W. Dunham in Montana, son of Job Dunham and Hannah Percival (Percivil on the record). Of course, I had no idea he had gone to Montana. With this information I went to Ancestry to look for William Dunham in Montana, and of course, he wasn't there! If you use a search engine as much as I do, you will know that sometimes less is more. So I tried again, removing Montana from the search and there was William and Almeda Dunham and their family in Fremont County, Idaho. I found them again in 1910 and by 1920 Almeda was a widow. I found her in Pocatello, Idaho as recently as the 1938-39 City directory. I searched and searched before I found a death record for Margaret Almeda Dunham. Yeesh, what you have to go through to find stuff.

In looking over the 1910 census for this family, I had to wonder about the census transcription. You see, she transcribed Clod for Claud. Poor kid!

Copyright 2010, ACK for Gene Notes

Wish I Had Been There

Some things you just can't blame on the indexer. Especially not the following example.

I've been trying to put together all the Percival lines that I can find that relate to me. One of those is a Percival line out of Maine. On the 1900 Census, I find George S. Percival, his wife Helen, son-in-law George S. Burrill and daughter Lottie and their two children Helen and Harry. Ok, great, as I didn't have a marriage or any children for Lottie. One can always use more info, right?

On to the 1910 Census. No George Percival, no Helen Percival. No George and Lottie Burrill. So, out of desperation, I search for Harry Burrill and find him, living with his grandmother, Helen. Only one teeny tiny little snag, though. His grandmother is listed as Helen Burrill and living with her are grandchildren Helen and Harry and daughter Lottie.

I don't even want to imagine the scenario in which the census taker writes down the wrong surname for the head of household. I just wish I had been there to whack Mr. Rollin C. Clark upside the head and say "Pay attention to what they are telling you."

And then to top off all this aggravation are the problems with getting the image to load. Or the index for that matter as our favorite genealogy site is experiencing problems, so I should "check back soon!"

Copyright 2010, ACK for Gene Notes

OCFRD* and the Census

 My pile of census covering 1850 to 1930 and including some New York State census from 1892 totaled about 169 before I started entering the information and sorting out the families. I've since added about 15 to that total and now stand at 47 to go. Every so often I come across a family with a simple name, like Reed for instance, that I have the 1900, 1910 and 1930 census for but they are totally MIA for 1920. Information from a county history indicates that the family had lived in that county all their lives. So where are they?

I've been running into this problem with various families and censuses.  I've done line-by-line searches for various families over the years and nothing. I've checked out the Family Search Pilot search for 1920 - they aren't there. I've searched Heritage Quest - I've searched Ancestry. Here are some of the reasons I think I can't find them:

1. They were out of town visiting relatives.
2. They used aliases.
3. They were picked up by a spaceship.
4. They moved in 1920 and managed to elude the census taker.

Or maybe even all four.

*Obsessive Compulsive Family Research Disorder
Copyright 2010, ACK for Gene Notes

Random Thoughts of a Genealogical Nature

I was working on a blog for Surname Saturday and came across a printout from St. Joseph Cemetery in East Tawas, Michigan, where most of my Zimmeths are buried. Lot 120 appears to have two different family names on it. One is Zimmeth. The other is Fournier, which is my youngest sister's married name. It creeped her out, not because of the names, the cemetery part.

Where do people go from one census to another. I have obituaries stating so and so was born in Annsville in Oneida County, New York prior to the 1850 census and was a lifelong resident. Yet they are nowhere to be found in 1850. Anywhere? Darn Percival line anyway.

Hubby and I finished watching the reincarnation of the 1970's Battlestar Galactica series of the same name. My question is, do all these DNA test results show that we are part Cylon?



Copyright 2010, ACK for Gene Notes

The 2010 Census

I can't believe ten years have passed since I filled out the 2000 census. And forgot to mail it back, so a census taker hunted us down!

Are you planning on filling out the 2010 census? I know you're supposed too, but, it is obvious that they really can't count every one.

Since the last census, hubby and I have moved from Michigan to Tennessee. On the 2000 census, I put my maiden name in for my middle name. I will do the same for the 2010 census because I want my descendants (if our progeny ever procreates) to find me. Will they be surprised to find us here?

It makes me wonder exactly who and what filled out my Zimmeth grandparents census. My grandfather could sign his name, but was a natural left-hander whose father forced him to write right-handed. My grandmother was ill with tuberculosis and died the following year. Even though she is listed as living with them, I wouldn't bet on it. Most of the time, my mother, aunt and uncle lived with relatives. Somehow they were written as Zimeth and grandma appears to be Louyetta instead of Luetta.

Will my descendants in 2082 find our last name has been butchered so much that we are impossible to find? I hope not!

This Isn't Misspelled - It's Just Wrong

I'm still working on the 1892 New York State Census and it appears that the collection is not yet complete over at Family Search Labs pilot site. For more information on what counties are included you can click here for a description of the database.

A couple days ago, I commented on misspellings in the census. Since I am presently working in New York's 1892 State Census, I will use this as an example.

Remember Michael Krushka* (should be Kruszka) in Buffalo in 1892? Well, here is a list of those enumerated with him.

1. Michael Krushka, age 37, born Germany, alien, occupation is laborer.
2. Josephine Krushka, age 37, born Germany, alien, no occupation is listed.
3. John Krushka, age 15, born Germany, alien, no occupation listed.
4. Michaeline Krushka, age 13, born Germany, alien, no occupation listed.
5. Joseph Krushka, age 10, born Germany, alien, no occupation.
6. Leonara Krushka, age 9, born Germany, alien, no occupation.
7. Valentine Krushka, age 4, born Germany, alien, no occupation.
8. Martin Krushka, age 1, born US, citizen, no occupation.

This is the first census in which this family appears. You might infer from this that Michael and Josephine are married and came to the US with 5 of their 6 children (at this point in time) from their home in Germany.

This first inference would be correct, Michael and Josephine are indeed married, but were married abt 1888. Therefore, the first four children are not Michael's, and are incorrectly listed as Krushka. Their real last name is Fryczynski (FUR-shinski). They were the children of Josephine's first marriage to Andrzej (Andrew) Fryczynski. Church records in Buffalo bear this out.

Finally, the family was from Poland, not Germany. Okay, they were from German Poland, but it was Poland, nevertheless. The fact that Poland was usurped by Germany is incidental to me. Also, the census taker was J. C. Knoll. I can just imagine him sounding out the last name of Kruszka and coming up with Krushka. Maybe the Kruszkas never got around to telling him the other children were named Fryczynski. Maybe they didn't want to get into the first marriage/second marriage stuff.

If I had been looking for Fryczynski - which I was - I wouldn't have found it by any means. Not with the name listed as Krushka. So in this case, be real creative to find that elusive ancestor.


*Husband's great grandfather.