Finally, an Enumerator Who Enumerated His Own Household

A distant, distant relative of my husband was an enumerator for the 1950 US Census! He's the first enumerator I've ever found in either my tree or hubby's family tree, for any Census. I had no idea he worked for the Census when I began researching his family.

Eric Townsend Brigham (1918-1965) was the grandnephew of the husband of my husband's 2nd cousin 3x removed. (See, I told you he was distant.) Eric was the grandson of a doctor, great-grandson of a lawyer who served as a Congressional Representative of Maine from 1877 to 1883, great-great grandson of a Union officer in the US Civil War. 

Anyway, at the time of the 1950 US Census, Eric had previously worked as a telephone equipment repair tech, and had also had his own car parking business for a time. Yet in the 1950 US Census, there he was, enumerating himself at his residence, saying he worked 28 hours last week as "enumerator, census." His wife (Thelma Claire Jarisch Brigham, 1917-2010) worked 9 hours the previous week as a sewing teacher in elementary and junior high schools. Both were listed with a "G" for employer, meaning they worked for a government agency, as shown in excerpt above. 

Anyone else find a Census enumerator in their tree? An enumerator who enumerated his or her own household? 

This is my "free space" blog post for Amy Johnson Crow's #52Ancestors genealogy prompt for the week. 

Still Seeking Ancestors Missing from the 1950 US Census

Did you locate all the US ancestors you were hoping to find in the 1950 Census?

Immediately after the release of records last year, many of us rushed to find people who were enumerated on April 1, 1950. Still, I have yet to find a couple of dozen ancestors, so I'm going to redo my Census searches again on multiple sites, focusing on this one point in time.

At top, I'll use the Ancestry hints to see what that site has already found for ancestors in my family trees. To be thorough, I won't just rely on hints--I'll also specifically search the database "1950 United States Federal Census" with creative surname spelling.

On MyHeritage, I'll search for missing ancestors in the database titled "1950 United States Federal Census." Why? Because MyHeritage and Ancestry indexed this Census differently, I have a better chance of finding "missing" ancestors if I try both sites. 

Of course, Family Search is always free to search, with the 1950 US Census available here. 

I've also been using other sources, including phone directories, newspaper mentions, and vital records, to locate these ancestors and their families in the mid-20th century. But I would like to have the Census records so I can compare with previous Census answers about age, citizenship, occupation, and so on.

With a focused search, I expect to cut the number of ancestors "missing" from this Census to only a handful! 

Looking Back at 2022 Genealogy Milestones

 

Now that 2022 is nearly over, it's time to look back at milestones in this 24th year of my genealogy journey.

• Fun with the 1950 US Census release. On April 1st, this mid-century US Census was made public, and the race was on to find ancestors! Between navigating the US National Archives Census site (with its rudimentary index) and checking FamilySearch.org, MyHeritage.com, and Ancestry.com, I found just about everyone I wanted to locate in 1950. I blogged frequently leading up to the release and afterward as well with tips, techniques, and resources. Only a few stragglers remain to be found...like my paternal 1c2r Frank Morris Jacobs, a WWI veteran who in WWII was working in advertising. 
• Presented 25 genealogy programs. A new one-year record for me! I presented a dozen how-to talks about finding ancestors in the 1950 US Census, including one in-person program. Among my other popular talks were "Planning a Future for Your Family's Past" and "Bite-Sized Family History Projects." It was an honor to present at the WikiTree Symposium, and record talks for The Genealogy Show and Virtual Genealogy Association anniversary. In addition, I was interviewed for two podcasts about preserving family history for future generations. 
• Active in genealogy blogging and social media. This year, I've written 140 blog posts. Some were related to Amy Johnson Crow's #52Ancestors in 52 Weeks genealogy prompts, some were for Elizabeth Swanay O’Neal's Genealogy Blog Party. I've been active in many Facebook genealogy groups, also active in Twitter chats such as #AncestryHour and #GenChat, with occasional #ArchivesHashtagParty posts. Given Twitter's problems, I hedged my bets by joining a genealogy-oriented Mastodon server (where I post as @MarianBWood@genealysis.social). I appreciate the growing genealogy community there! 
• LOCKSS and NaGenWriMo. During 2022, I was increasingly focused on sharing what I know about ancestors, because LOCKSS (lots of copies keep stuff safe). I participated in National Genealogy Writing Month and wrote 70 bite-sized bios of ancestors during November alone. My most popular blog post of 2022 was "Go Ahead and Save My Stuff to Your Tree," part of my plan for LOCKSS. 
• Cousin connections and elusive ancestors. I 💗 my cousins! It's been a joy to get to know so many during the course of my 24-year genealogy journey, even connecting with a few fairly distant cousins this year. We've shared a couple of photos and confirmed basic dates for mutual ancestors. I hope we can pool our knowledge to make even more progress in fleshing out the lives of elusive ancestors, particularly those who stayed behind in Eastern Europe. 

With the coronavirus pandemic still keeping me close to home for most of 2022, I watched dozens and dozens of informative (often inspiring) genealogy webinars, including at the all-virtual RootsTech (which will be hybrid in 2023), plus the Virtual Genealogy Association and WikiTree, among others. As a member of multiple genealogy societies, I learned a lot from speakers and from discussions with members at virtual meetings throughout the year.  

In all, 2022 was jam-packed and I won't be slowing down in 2023. I have lots of genealogy plans in the works...more about that soon! 

It's October: Have You Found Your 1950 Ancestors?

It's October, Family History Month! And it's been six months since the US National Archives released the mid-century Census taken on April 1, 1950.

If you haven't yet found your ancestors in that Census, this is a good time to try again, because indexing is nearly complete! 

Plus access to the 1950 US Census is free on all the major genealogy sites. 

Below are some links to check out, including search, browsing, and extra info for background.

Tip: If you can't find your ancestor using one site, try a different one. A couple of my ancestors didn't shown up in a search on one site but were indexed and discoverable by a search on another site. 

FamilySearch.org 

• www.familysearch.org/1950census/ (current index review status, background on this US Census)

• www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/United_States_Census_1950 (release details, links to forms, lots more)

• www.familysearch.org/search/collection/4464515 (search or browse the 1950 Census)

Ancestry.com

• www.ancestry.com/c/1950-census  (search this US Census, and background on this Census) 

• https://support.ancestry.com/s/article/1950-U-S-Federal-Census (includes link to search this Census)

• https://support.ancestry.com/s/article/Census-District-Finder?language=en_US (how and why to use district finder feature, useful for browsing in an Enumeration District for FAN club members)

MyHeritage.com 

• www.myheritage.com/census/us  (tips and search link for 1950 US Census)

• www.myheritage.com/research/collection-11006/1950-united-states-federal-census (index reviewed by people)

• www.myheritage.com/research/collection-11011/1950-united-states-federal-census-ai-index (indexed by computer)

• www.myheritage.com/research/collection-11009/1950-united-states-federal-census-images (browse 1950 images by state, county, Enumeration District)

This is my entry for the Genealogy Blog Party for October, 2022.

1950 US Census Update at 115 Day Mark

The 1950 US Census was released 115 days ago, on April 1, 2022. You can browse or search for free on several sites. Indexing has been in the works since the first moment the Census was made available to the public. Here's an update on where things stand.

Family Search and Ancestry

Family Search and Ancestry teamed up to work on the index for this Census. Family Search's thousands of volunteers are making tremendous progress on reviewing and improving the index. You can browse any state while indexing continues.

Above, the map showing completed states and states still being reviewed. There's still time to participate and get this project over the finish line more quickly! Soon full search functionality should be ready at Family Search, for free.

Meanwhile, Ancestry's automated indexing system worked well enough that you may be able to find ancestors using the early draft index. Give it a try on Ancestry, for free. I've had excellent luck locating ancestors in 1950 using the Ancestry early index.

MyHeritage

MyHeritage also has the 1950 US Census searchable for free, using this access page. Not every state has been indexed, but work continues and soon all states will be indexed and searchable. Again, I've had good luck with indexed states, so do give it a try for free.

NARA

The original US National Archives (NARA) website remains available for researching in the 1950 US Census, ideally by enumeration district and surname or full name of head of household. It's entirely free, forever.

The NARA index has been slightly improved since April 1st, thanks to corrections submitted by members of the public, but it remains a "work in progress." 

I was able to find a cousin and her husband by searching for him (head of household) in ED 1-1025 in Washington, D.C, as shown here. The NARA site returned the exact page as the top result. Without entering the enumeration district, however, there were too many results to explore.

Top Tip

If you've looked for some ancestors who should have been in this Census, but haven't yet found them, try this: Join the Facebook group called 1950 US Census for Genealogy. The wonderful members have a lot of experience with Census searches! First browse the latest posts (usually queries followed by suggestions and answers). Then post if you have a specific question about how to search or what might be missing. Check back regularly to see what's happening!

1950 US Census: 9V Income Code

Did you have an ancestor or friend/associate/neighbor (FAN club) of an ancestor who was chosen to answer the sample questions on the 1950 US Census? I've been paying attention to the income questions, in particular, as I put my ancestors into context.

Above $10k? 

According to the 1950 US Census Enumerator's Training Manual, if someone reported income above $10,000, the answer would be listed as $10,000+ on the population schedule--regardless of how much higher their actual income might have been.

Income answers from the 1950 US Census were coded for data entry and analysis, as were a few other questions (such as birthplaces and occupations).

Decoding the code

As you can see from the code circled in image at top, the income listed was $10,000+. and the code was 9V.

Huh? Turns out, 9V is the code for more than $10,000, as I read on the History Hub page about decoding 1950 US Census answers for Column 31.

In this case, I'm willing to bet that the actual income was far above $10k. Why? Because this is the 1950 US Census entry for Jack Cohn, VP of the film giant Columbia Pictures. One of Jack's nieces married a first cousin of my father. Of course I'm looking at the answers given by these and other in-laws in the 1950 US Census 😉

1950 US Census Offers Sad Clue to John's Life

My late father-in-law, Edgar James Wood (1903-1986) was the oldest of four boys born to James Edgar Wood (1871-1939) and Mary Slatter Wood (1869-1925). After Ed came Wally, John, and Ted. I have family stories and research about Wally and Ted, but not much about John Arthur Wood (1908-1980).

Who remembers Uncle John?

My husband remembers his Uncle Wally and Uncle Ted coming to holiday dinners, but not Uncle John. Yet there was definitely contact over the years, because John and his wife Marguerite were mentioned several times in my father-in-law's diaries (written 1958-1986). 

Still, I had little to go on when trying to research this man. Then last year, my sister-in-law mentioned John might have been married twice. Her memory led me to confirming that he did have a first wife. 

John was just 20 in 1928 when he married Elsie Harder, who was 23. According to the news account of their wedding, John was working for Grasselli Chemical Company, which was soon merged into the chemical giant E.I. du Pont. (John remained with du Pont for his entire professional life.)

Through WWII draft card info and city directories, I can trace John Wood and his first wife, Elsie, up to 1945, when they're living together in Hammond, Indiana. 

New info from 1950

Now the 1950 US Census has given me a new clue about John and Elsie's married life. As shown in the image at top, Elsie was enumerated as a patient in Longcliff Logansport State Mental Hospital in Logansport, Indiana. This was unexpected and sad.

Of course medical records are sealed, so I don't know exactly why Elsie was in the hospital. When she passed away in 1960, her death cert said she was divorced and died of a cerebral hemorrhage, having had cerebral arteriosclerosis for some years. I wonder whether her health problems were part of the reason she and John divorced?

In April of 1951, John married Marguerite Goodin (1918-1988). She's in the 1950 US Census, enumerated as divorced, and working as a telephone operator in East Chicago, Indiana. When John had heart problems and died in 1980, Marguerite was the one who kept my father-in-law informed, according to the diaries. 

Where was John Wood in 1950?

One possibility is in Cleveland, Ohio, the city of his birth, living in a two-family home. It's not easy to tell one "John Wood" from another when the Census enumerator only notes that this John Wood is separated (probably correct), born in Ohio (correct), and is 43 years old (close enough). No occupation, no industry. Not a strong possibility, but maybe.

A better possibility is in East Chicago, Indiana (the same city where his soon-to-be second wife was living). This man was enumerated as "John Woods," a roomer, married (correct), 44 years old (about right), born in Ohio (correct), with occupation "engineer, planning and schedule, chemical lab" (close).  

I've put both of these Census records on John's family-tree profile until I can sort them out. 

1950 US Census: Indexed by Computers, Reviewed by People

Released on April 1, the 1950 US Census is available to browse and search for free on Ancestry and Family Search (among other sites, including the US National Archives). For more about this mid-century American Census, see the informative Family Search page here. Also take a peek at the Family Search YouTube Channel playlist of 1950 Census videos.

Indexed by computers, reviewed by people

Family Search describes the 1950 Census as "indexed by computers, reviewed by people." 

Ancestry used artificial intelligence to create an "early index," already available on that site. Still, computers invariably make mistakes, which is where the "reviewed by people" part comes in. 

Ancestry turned the index over to Family Search, which has recruited thousands of volunteers to review the names, checking that the digital index actually reflects what the handwritten name says on the Census page.

Volunteers are also reviewing households to see whether all people in that household have been grouped properly by the AI indexing system, and be sure the main details are correct.  

Progress! See the webinar on June 10

By the end of June, every name in the 1950 US Census index on Family Search will have been reviewed by human eyes! That's a real plus for finding our ancestors through a name search, rather than the browsing method of looking at one page at a time.

For the latest from Family Search, you can watch a webinar update on Friday, June 10, at 4 pm Mountain Time. 

Here's the link--and you don't need to be a Facebook member to watch! 

1950 US Census Hints: Filter by Name

 

In the weeks since Ancestry.com began delivering 1950 US Census hints to my family trees, I've been enjoying the convenience of reviewing and adding this information to ancestor profiles.

By now, there are LOTS of hints. The default hint arrangement is by most recent hint added to my list.

But at this point, I'm being choosier about who I want to see first.

As shown above, Blackford is a recent addition to my hint list, but a low priority because the relationship is quite distant. Maternal grandfather of husband of sister-in-law! Not a high priority.

To see more of the people I care more about, I'm going to filter my 1950 US Census hints by name (see star at top). Then I can specify the closer ancestors I want to see first (see image below).

Filter by first name or last name or both

Later, I'll go back and review the remaining hints for distant ancestors.

Hope you're having fun finding ancestors and the FAN club (friends, associates, neighbors) in the 1950 Census. 

Did the 1950 US Census Enhance My Family Tree?

The 1950 US Census release has brought new excitement and fresh energy to my genealogy research! It's been fun looking for ancestors, sometimes by browsing one page at a time, and feeling the thrill of discovery.

But has this new resource actually enhanced my family tree? 

Happy surprises

I was pleased that at least some of the adult ancestors in my tree and my hubby's tree were chosen to answer sample questions. One reported an astonishing $30,000 as annual income in 1949--the equivalent of more than $300,000 today, and quite a fortune for the time.

Some birthplace answers simultaneously made me happy and confirmed my research. In 1950, Lithuania was in the clutches of what was then the USSR. Yet many of my paternal ancestors (Burk, Birk, Berk) answered "Lithuania" when asked about their birthplace (which I know was Gargzdai, Lithuania). 

I noticed a number of interesting occupations in our trees. One of my Dad's first cousins was the manager of a "5 & 10 cent store." Those don't exist any more. Two of the big chains of the time were Woolworth and Kresge (which later evolved into Kmart), but I don't know whether this cousin worked for either of them.

Another surprise was seeing my aunt Dorothy, who was a WAC in WWII, at age 30 still living at home with her parents. I know from family sources that she found her own apartment in 1950, and now I know it was after April 1st. Interestingly, she was chosen to answer sample questions but was not asked about her military service, because of her gender. Only males were asked that question!

Intriguing mysteries

The Census also turned up the heat on a few mysteries. For example, in the 1940 US Census, my great uncle David Mahler (1882-1964) was shown as married, but no wife in the household. In the 1950 US Census, he's shown as widowed. When he died, his death cert said he was widowed (sister was the informant). 

I've chased multiple people named David Mahler through multiple research sources and not yet found where or when my great uncle was married. He was quite the wanderer when younger, and could have married in nearly any state at any time. More research is in my future.

Checking hints, documenting details

My pace of research accelerated further when Ancestry's 1950 US Census hints began popping up this week. 

It's quick and easy to attach the 1950 Census to each person in my tree, and I'm transcribing key details onto each ancestor profile--allowing relatives to see, at a glance, where our family was and what they were doing at that point in time.

I'm also updating my virtual cemeteries on Find a Grave as I look at these ancestors and link family members. And I'm suggesting edits to ancestor memorial pages based on the latest research. Over time, I'll be improving my family trees on other sites, little by little.

Grain of salt

Because 1950 isn't that long ago, my relatives and I can almost always figure out whether the Census information makes sense. Too often, it's incomplete or flat-out inaccurate.

One great uncle and aunt were listed only by name with clearly approximate ages, no occupation or birthplace or anything else. The enumerator wrote: "all information available - given by superintendent after 4 calls." So in the 1950 US Census "fact" block on these ancestors' profiles, I inserted a warning: Info other than address was provided by building superintendent, not reliable. 

In other cases, enumerators indicated that neighbors or others had given the information. One in-law was listed as "Enid" even though her name was actually "Lena." Not even close! 

No wonder I consider Census data to be clues, not facts, and carefully double-check and correlate with other sources.

Bottom line: The 1950 US Census has been a plus for my genealogy, reenergizing my voyage of ancestor discovery and reinforcing the need to confirm new info in the context of what I've already proven.

1950 US Census: Decoding Birthplaces, Relationships

Although I can usually read the handwritten answers in the 1950 US Census, I wanted to see how the Census Bureau coded some answers for tabulation and analysis. Also, if handwriting is unclear or illegible, deciphering the codes will help me figure out what was written down.

With sincere gratitude to Steve Morse and Joel Weintraub, I used their special page to decode birthplace if born in the United States, birthplace if born in another country (and citizenship), and how related to head of household. 

At top, some random examples I plugged into the special Steve Morse page. This shows how the drop-down menus work. I experimented to see all the coding possibilities and then looked at codes on some actual Census pages where my ancestors were mentioned.

By the way, remember that the coding only puts into numbers what the enumerator wrote. And the enumerator wrote what the resident said (or a neighbor said). Not necessarily the truth, but what the enumerator was told.

State & country codes - naturalization too!

At right, coding for birth in Maryland = 052, coding for birth in  Pennsylvania = 023. 

Since this Census page was from New York state, only non-New York codes were entered on the pages. 

 

The last entry in this excerpt shows Russia as country of birth for someone who answered "Yes" about being a naturalized citizen.

This entry was coded as 155 = born in Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, US citizen. Note that the initial 1 in the code stands for naturalized.

If this country code had said 255, it would mean born in Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, but not a US citizen. 

If this country code had said 355, it would mean born in Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and parents are US citizens.

Relationship to head of household

At left, coding for three people in multiple households on a Census page. 

The step-daughter in this example is coded as 3, which stands for son, daughter, or step-child. NOT included in this code are sons-in-law and daughters-in-law, coded separately as as 4. 

The sister of head is coded as 7. This code covers brothers, sisters, brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law, nephews, nieces, uncles, aunts, grandparents, cousins, and so on. 

The lodger in a household is coded as 9, meaning non-relative of head of household.

Decoding the codes is a fun extra as I wring every bit of info from what enumerators recorded about my ancestors during the 1950 US Census. 

BIG NEWS! Ancestry has uploaded an "early version" of the index for the entire 1950 US Census. For more, see Crista Cowan on YouTube here.

Decoding Ancestor Occupations in 1950 US Census

When the 1950 US Census was released last month, I located dozens of ancestors, noted the basic details for each, and downloaded the Census pages for further study.

Now I'm comparing what was written as an ancestor's occupation/industry to what the codes say, at the far right of each line. These codes were added much later in the process as the government tabulated and analyzed 1950 Census data.

Travel agent = 300 (agent)

My entrepreneurial father (Harold Burk) and his brother (Sidney Burk), who lived a few doors away from each other in the Bronx, were travel agents in my Dad's travel business. At top is an excerpt from their Census page. 

Both were coded as O (working in own business), occupation 300 (agents), industry 808 (miscellaneous business services), and 3 (class code for "own business"). 

Steve Morse & Joel Weintraub decipher the codes 

The reason I was able to decipher these codes easily, as shown above, was by looking them up on a very convenient page provided by Steve Morse and Joel Weintraub, found here. 

Codes are particularly important when the enumerator's handwriting is unclear or the occupation or industry aren't legible. Just plug in the codes and see, at least in a general way, what our ancestors said they did for work.

More specific coding?

The 1950 Census training manual stressed that enumerators were to be as clear and specific as possible when recording occupation/industry. In fact, what the enumerator listed as occupation/industry for my Dad and uncle was quite specific. 

Yet the coding of this information was anything but specific, IMHO. 

So I looked up the occupation "travel agent" in the official Alphabetical Listing of Occupations and Industries from 1950 (link here leads to a pdf), where all the numerical codes are shown. 

The snippet from "travel agent" shown above says:

• "300" correctly corresponds to the general category of agents.
• "Ind" indicates that the next set of numbers will be "industry." 
• "568" is an industry code for services incidental to transportation.

Surely 568 would have been a better classification for my father's travel agent business than, say, 808 = miscellaneous business services?

For more about the 1950 US Census, please see my summary page here.

1950 US Census: Formats For Citing Your Source

Now that I'm downloading 1950 US Census records from the US National Archives to attach to ancestors on my family trees, I'm thinking about how to document my source for these key records. In general, there are several acceptable citation formats, as summarized by the U.S. Census Bureau. 

Here are two possibilities updated for the 1950 Census in particular.

Citation example following suggestion of Elizabeth Shown Mills

Genealogy expert Elizabeth Shown Mills has citation suggestions on the Facebook page for her best-selling book, Evidence Explained, and on her own Facebook page, both original posts dated April 1. 

Following her recommendation, here's to cite the three-person family of Louis Woolf, which begins on line 5 and ends on line 7 of the Census excerpt shown above. 

1950 U.S. Census, Westchester County, NY, New Rochelle, ED 67-43, sheet 9, household 105, lines 7-9 (Louis Woolf family); U.S. National Archives, 1950 Census (https://1950Census.archives.gov/search). 

Note that the street address isn't needed, nor are the names of other people in the family, because all of that is covered by the household number and line numbers.

Citation example following suggestion of Claire Kluskens

Claire Kluskens, Genealogical Projects Archivist for the U.S. National Archives, suggests a slightly different format for citing this Census as a genealogical source. You can see her suggestion on the History Hub here.

Following her recommendation, here's how to cite the same three-person family of Louis Woolf.

Louis Woolf family, Lines 7-9, Sheet 9, Enumeration District 67-43, New Rochelle, Westchester County, New York; Seventeenth Census of the United States, 1950; Record Group 29, Records of the Bureau of the Census; National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC, downloaded from https://1950census.archives.gov/ on April 23, 2022.

Citation example following Ancestry's format

Above, how Ancestry cited the 1950 US Census as the source of a different record I just attached to my family tree. Note that the citation includes year, record group, residence date, and the town, county, state. I can edit this citation on my Ancestry tree to add more specifics (family name, ED, sheet number, HH number, line numbers, etc.). As it stands, I would need those extra details to retrace my research path.

IMHO: Short, sweet, and practical 

My personal plan is to adapt the formal citation formats. Short, sweet, and to the point will work best for my personal purposes.

As long as I provide specifics, I believe others will be able to retrace my steps and see what I saw about an ancestor in the 1950 Census, at any time in the future. 

Here's my concise but detailed version of the citation, neither formal nor official by any means.

1950 U.S. Census, New Rochelle, Westchester County, NY, ED 67-43, sheet 9, household 105, lines 7-9 (Louis Woolf family).

This is my preference, for personal use, and it may not work for everyone. 

IMHO, the key elements of documenting a source are shown in my abbreviated version, for my personal use: I cited the 1950 US Census, providing the town, county, state, ED, sheet number, household number, and line numbers, plus head of household and family name. 

"Document" is this week's #52Ancestors prompt from Amy Johnson Crow.

1950 US Census: Seeking Big-City Ancestors on NARA site?

 

Having located nearly all of the closer ancestors I wanted to find in the 1950 US Census, I'm branching out to more distant ancestors.

At left, my search on the US National Archives site for someone living on East 141st Street in Cleveland, which is ED 92-945. 

Searching quickly only for Cuyahoga County, Ohio, ED 92-945, I was surprised to see "No Records Found" as shown here on the results page. 

Simply choosing the state/county and entering a specific ED is not enough to find ancestors living in big cities! 

Look for big city in NARA drop-down menu

NARA's drop-down menu for county does have a city/state choice of Cleveland, Cuyahoga. I didn't choose that option initially, but I quickly figured out how to improve my search.

Once I redid my search, and chose the city along with the county and the ED, the correct population schedules showed up in the results.

I checked with several experienced researchers and they confirm that if the city is one of the choices on the drop-down menu for county, be sure to select the city. 

Elusive Ancestors Hiding in the 1950 US Census

The positives: I've had very good success finding many ancestors in the recently released 1950 US Census. 

The negatives: Some folks remain stubbornly elusive. 

No 1950ish address

The top reason I haven't found a particular ancestor is because I have no 1950ish address. Even if I have a 1940s address, some of these people moved frequently.  Remember, it was a time of great mobility in America and there was also an acute housing shortage in many regions.

Where's wounded WWI vet Frank Maurice Jacobs (1896-1974), my 1c2r? I'd hoped he was still living in the residential Hotel Tudor in New York City, which was his 1942 address while working in the advertising industry. Nope, he didn't show up when I browsed the many dozens of pages for that Enumeration District. With no 1950 address, he could be anywhere in Manhattan (or possibly an outer borough, although I doubt it). When full indexing is complete for New York, I'll do a deep search for him by given name, middle initial, and birthplace, with possibly other search twists.

No longer living on own

Another reason I haven't found an older ancestor is because he or she moved into a retirement home or was living with an adult child whose address I don't yet know.

This might very well be the case with hubby's great aunt Nellie (Rachel Ellen) Wood Kirby (1864-1954), who has been elusive, as I wrote a few days ago. In the 1940 Census, Nellie was in a Chicago apartment. When she died in 1954, she was in a nursing home. I've browsed the Census for both Enumeration Districts and she turned up in neither place. She's on the back burner until full indexing for Illinois is ready and I can search by name and birthplace and/or other search parameters.

Wood, Smith: common names

Let's face it: Wood, my husband's surname, isn't exactly unique. His uncle John A. Wood (1908-1980) is a tough case, since I don't yet have a clue which state, let alone which county, he might have been in. I know his 1951 address when he got married--but he wasn't there in 1950 when I looked! He's on the back burner until full indexing for Indiana and nearby states has been completed. Then I can search for him with his middle initial and birthplace and/or other search parameters.

Similarly, my great aunt Sarah Mahler married a man named Sam Smith and they moved to California during the 1940s. Sam never used a middle initial. When full indexing is ready, I'll search for a household with Sam, Sarah, and one of their children, or use some other creative strategy--they can run but they can't hide. 

Searching by name, initial, birthplace, and/or other fields (like age) might turn my negatives into more positive results!

PS: Try searching state, county, surname on NARA IF not a big city

Before the Census is fully indexed for all states by those big genealogy sites, try searching state, county, and surname on the US National Archives 1950 Census page. That's only if your target ancestor was NOT in a big city.

I wanted to find my hubby's grandfather Brice L. McClure, who wasn't where the family remembered him living in 1950. After a variety of searches that went nowhere, I tried looking where he and his late wife had lived when she died in 1948--in a town in Wyandot county, Ohio. 

Success! He was living in that very same house, about to sell it and move out of the county. But not yet. So even before the big genealogy sites finish indexing bit states, try the NARA site because its indexing is fair enough to find someone, even with creative spelling.

"Negatives" - Amy Johnson Crow's #52Ancestors theme for week 16.

Penny Postcards from Easter of 1914

 

In April of 1914, my hubby's uncle Wallis W. Wood (1905-1957) received two colorful Easter postcards. 

He lived in Cleveland, Ohio and received penny postal greetings for every conceivable holiday, sent by his Wood and Slatter relatives.

Shown at left is the postcard from his aunt, "Nellie" Wood Kirby (1864-1954) and her husband, Arthur Kirby (1860-1939). 

Nellie was an older sister of Wallis's father, James Edgar Wood (1871-1939).

 

Although I've tried to find Nellie in the 1950 US Census, I haven't yet succeeded. I checked the 1949 Chicago directory (online for free at the Library of Congress) and didn't see her name listed under Kirby. 

Nellie was living in a nursing home when she died, and I haven't found her there in the 1950 Census, nor at the address where she lived in 1945, according to the city directory. I'll keep looking!

Here's a pretty postcard sent to Wallis by his aunt Ada Mary Ann Slatter Baker (1868-1947), who lived in Toledo, Ohio when she mailed this card.

By 1920, Ada and her husband, James Sills Baker (1866-1937) were living in Cleveland and most likely visited with Wallis and his family quite often.

Ada was the older sister of Wallis's mother, Mary Slatter Wood (1869-1925). 

Now 108 years later, these postcards live on in the Wood family's collection!

Add a Transcription to Improve NARA's 1950 Census Index

Waiting for the big genealogy sites to index the entire 1950 US Census, I've been using the US National Archives site to locate my ancestors in that Census. Thankfully, NARA released a preliminary name index along with the images of the Census sheets, allowing for both name search and browsing. 

I've been most successful in locating ancestors when I try my search by inputting the state, county, Enumeration District, and surname of head of household.

Searching for Carrie

Above, results of my search for hubby's great aunt in ED 88-26 of Wyandot County, Ohio. Her name was Carrie E. Traxler. My search was for Traxler Carrie because the automated systems transcribed what they "read" on each line, and head of household was listed Surname Given. 

NARA's system can match on creative spelling, and the first result was the ancestor I wanted--even though the transcription wasn't perfect. Her name was NOT Traller Carriee, as the system read the enumerator's handwriting. But it's close!

Adding a transcription

NARA welcomes the public's assistance in adding correct transcriptions. It will accept both transcriptions that correct what the automated system says AND transcriptions that correct what the enumerator wrote. Note that this will not alter the actual Census in any way. It will improve the search system so others can find ancestors on the NARA 1950 Census site.

After I made a note of the line number where my husband's great aunt appears, here's how I added a transcription to correct her name as transcribed by the automated system.

First, I clicked the button to "Help Us Transcribe Names" and entered my email. NARA sent me a six-digit verification code, which I entered so I could begin my transcription. 

Next, I used the NARA drop-down menu to indicate line number...which took me to a blank of the screen shown above. I typed "Traxler" for last name, "Carrie" for first name, and "E" for middle name--all of which are shown in cursive handwriting on the Census form, but not accurately read by the automated system.

Other family members with same surname in same HH?

After submitting a transcription, NARA said thank you and invited me to "Add a transcription to the next line."

If Carrie Traxler's household included a husband or child or anyone with same surname directly below her name, I would click to add their surname.

This is a key step for families that share a surname and were enumerated in the same household. I didn't do it for Carrie, but I did do it for many other ancestors who had folks with same surname in that HH. 

Otherwise, the search system can't find these people by their full names. Remember, they would have been enumerated with a dash for surname, followed by a given name. My transcription replaces the dash with the actual surname.

"How do you spell that?" is the #52Ancestors prompt by Amy Johnson Crow for week #15.

1950 US Census: Check Out Family Members in NARA's Index

 

Oh, I'm doing the genealogy happy dance! I've been finding lots of ancestors in the 1950 US Census on the US National Archives site. 

The index isn't perfect, but it works surprisingly well. Do check it out!

At a minimum, search by city and state, then enter the head of household's name in this order: Surname Given. 

Ideally, first input city, state, and Enumeration District, let the ED load, and then enter the HH head's name.

In 90% of my searches, the NARA results show me the exact page where my ancestor has been enumerated. 

If not, I then look carefully at the index summary for the top result before moving on. 

Shown above are the extracted names for a Census page in Jackson, Michigan. My search was for Farkas Fred (Surname, Given).

Two names are in bold in this search result. The first is FREDE (not my guy). The second is FARKAS. But wait, who's this Arthur Farkas? Um...

Before I rejected this result, I checked out the names of other people in that household and hooray! This is the correct family. It was recorded on a call-back sheet (meaning the family wasn't home when enumerator originally visited) and all the other names in the household are correct, as is the occupation of the head of household. 

My guess: neighbors supplied as much information as they could remember. They just didn't remember this ancestor's first name correctly. Everything else matches. Did I learn anything new? Well, the address was different from what I expected. And my search technique turned up the ancestors I wanted to locate. All I had to do was check it out thoroughly before moving to the next result.

"Check it out" is this week's #52Ancestors prompt from Amy Johnson Crow.

1950 US Census: Read the Notes!

 

Enumerators sometimes wrote notes on the 1950 US Census. The notes section may be near top, middle, or bottom of the page, depending on which version of the questionnaire was being used.

In most cases, the notes mentioned where a missing resident might be enumerated elsewhere in that ED (sheet number, line number). At least two of my ancestors, living in big city apartments, weren't home on the first call--and were never actually interviewed. The notes said something like "Superintendent provided information after 4 calls." 

Enumerators occasionally noted that they had left income forms for residents to fill out and return confidentially. Others noted the presence of more than one apartment at a dwelling or the fact that an address was a vacant dwelling.

You just never know what little details you'll learn if you read the notes! Some interesting notes I've found so far:

• "Line 26--Person just arrived from Canada. Sister-in-law supplied information and couldn't tell former occupation."
• "Lines 6-8 - Respondent vague on answers--couldn't remember ages."
• "Line __, serial no. 80. Rent of $40.00 is out of reason, about $15.00 should be right."
• "I left [Census] line for a locked gate and then I got information from neighbors."
• "Person is in reserve Navy."
  
• "Information given by daughter staying there while parents are away."
• "Line 1 is a female even though name is William T."
  
• "On vacation, don't know when she will be home."

I'm delighted to participate in this month's Genealogy Blog Party by going back to the 1950s!

1950 US Census: What Works?

Trying to find my ancestors in the 1950 US Census, I settled on a number of techniques that work well.

• For best results, locate the ancestor's Enumeration District. Don't know the ED but have an address? Use Ancestry's 1950 Census District Finder tool (link is on the home page). It's the fastest way to transform a street address into an ED. It also takes you to the ED maps in case you want to look for landmarks. Read Ancestry's explanation here.
• Using NARA's search interface, enter the location (state/county). Then add the ED. Read the description of the ED. In example above, I'm showing ED 60-36 for Maury County, TN. The ED description matches where I wanted to search.
• Add head of house as surname given name. In example above, this would be Hanes Bernard (his name is Bernard Hanes, but listing in Census is by surname first).
  
• This should narrow your search to a single ED and the correct page, as shown at top. Even though the automated indexing didn't correctly transcribe the given name, it did make the find for me.

What if this doesn't work? Remove the name and only search for the ED. Then browse the ED, page by page, to find your ancestor. I had to do this in more than one instance, but having the correct ED meant I browsed perhaps a dozen pages in.

Why isn't my ancestor shown in the right place?

Lots of people weren't home when the enumerator visited. April 1st was a Saturday in 1950 and some folks were out! 

If the person wasn't home, the enumerator would usually note on that address line, sending you to "sheet 71, line 3" or something similar to find the person who would ordinarily be at that address. Always check pages at the end of the ED. 

Starting with sheet 71, enumerators listed people who they interviewed on a subsequent visit. I've seen as many as 10 additional pages for callbacks in a single large ED.  Check the end of every ED if you don't find your ancestor where expected.

Download the page

Download the Census page showing your ancestor so you can study it further and even upload to your family tree. To do this, look at top right corner of the image of that page in the ED (see above example). Click on the three vertical dots and then click on the word download. 

Once the page downloads, rename that page so you know what it is. In this case, I named the file Hanes_Bernard_1950Census.jpg. Then I put it into a dedicated 1950 US Census folder on my desktop. Later, I'll copy it into my "Hanes" genealogy folder and upload it to my various family trees.

Happy hunting! I'm still looking for more ancestors and then will widen my search for FAN club members. 

PS: Here's what blogger Amanda Pape suggests: "If the ED that Ancestry's 1950 Census District Finder tool turns out to be the wrong ED (and that has happened to me a lot, particularly in large cities like Houston and Chicago), then use the Steve Morse tools (that you've blogged about before). I've also had some luck, when the Ancestry ED is wrong, just searching by state, county (or city/county), and just the surname (if unique enough) or the HOH surname & first name combo. I'll usually try that first before moving on to Steve Morse."