APG-L Archives

From:
Subject: Re: [APG] 1820 Census
Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 00:54:14 EDT

In a message dated 05/05/02 2:23:19 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
writes:


> Subj:[APG] 1820 Census
> Date:05/05/02 2:23:19 AM Mountain Daylight Time
> From:<A HREF="mailto:"></A>
> To:<A HREF="mailto:"></A>
> Sent from the Internet
>
>
>
> Not to beat a dead horse, but. . .
>
> Instructions to the census takers also confused them (re: the 16-18
> category). Some interpreted it "accurately" and repeated the number of
> youngsters in the 16-26 category. But some didn't. To find out which way
> the
> particular county enumerator interpreted his instructions, read several of
> his census pages. If there are instances of a "1" (or "2") in the 16-18
> bracket and *none* in the 16-26 bracket, then you know the enumerator
> interpreted the "16-26" as "18-26." [If you habitually work in the same
> counties, you can keep track of your findings on a list or in a computer
> file so you won't have to re-do this each time you search the 1820 census.
> You might also find out if your state has a separate 1820 manufactures
> schedule. It's useful sometimes if you're struggling with multiple men of
> the same name, or a man who only appears intermittently on tax lists--he
> may
> be in business with a partner, who is paying the taxes in alternate years.]

That is a very good point!

Past experience suggests that this very good habit of "looking for patterns"
in record keeping, and basing the analysis of those patterns on whomever was
doing the record keeping at the time, is always a good practice. This is a
great tool for figuring out puzzling abbreviations in records, too.

Natalie Cottrill
<A HREF="http://www.progenealogists.com">http://www.progenealogists.com</A>;

This thread:

• [APG] 1820 Census by "Helen Leary" <>

  • Re: [APG] 1820 Census by