Extra Notations and Detailed Answers in 1950 US Census

 Excerpt from 1950
US Census
Enumerators'
Manual

This is my fourth post about understanding the 1950 US Census, to be released in April, 2022. (You can see other posts on my summary page here.)

Whether enumerators for the 1950 US Census actually followed the rules set forth in the instructions, I don't yet know. But if they did, we genealogists will be glad for their extra notations and detailed answers.

Some examples:

• If the enumerator can't get a specific, accurate age from a household respondent, he or she was instructed to "enter an estimate as the last resort, and footnote it as an estimate." Wonder whether my Great-grandma Tillie Jacobs Mahler told the truth about her age? She tended to fudge a year or two in either direction.

• If the enumerator thinks an answer is not truthful, he or she should footnote it and indicate what the truthful answer might be. Wouldn't that be interesting to see on a page with my ancestors? Looking at Great-grandma Tillie, would the enumerator believe she was, say, 98? I can't wait to find out.

• Asking about the respondent's occupation, enumerators are not to accept a general term like "agent" or "clerk" or "engineer" but must ask questions to obtain more specifics, such as "purchasing agent" or "aeronautical engineer." This would help me learn a bit more about ancestors whose work lives I know little about.

• Enumerators were to be specific about the county in which the respondent lived a year before. This will be really valuable to me, because instructions say not to accept merely "New York City" but ask about the specific borough of the city. If my ancestors moved from, say, Brooklyn to the Bronx in 1949-50, this question may reveal the move. I'm talking about you, Great-aunt Nellie Block! 

What Future Genealogists Will Learn from the 2020 US Census

Page 1 of the 2020 Census questionnaire

Attending a presentation by local representatives of the 2020 US Census, I learned that in the year 2092, when the records are publicly released, future genealogists will be able to see some very valuable pieces of information. (You can browse the entire 2020 questionnaire here.)

Page 2 of 2020 Census

One key piece of info is the month, day, and year of birth for each person in the household, to be entered on page 2 of the Census questionnaire.

Future genealogists will be able to look for a birth cert, compare with age shown on other documents, match someone to a marriage license or other vital record, and so on--with more confidence because they will have the complete birth date, not just "age" or birth month and year.

I was surprised but interested to learn that another question (on page 1) is about whether a person in the household (1) owns the residence clear and free of a mortgage, (2) has a mortgage, or (3) is not paying rent. Clues to seeking deeds, taxes, and other records!

2020 Census questions about usual residence
and relationship to head of household

Happily for future genealogists, the 2020 Census asks specific questions about whether each person usually lives in this residence AND about exactly how each person in the household is related to the head of household (Person 1).

Look at the many answer alternatives shown in the excerpt above! 

These two questions will elicit incredibly valuable information for future genealogists. Question #2 will point toward where the person's usual residence is (such as with another relative or in the military). Question #3 will tell, with great precision, how each person is related to the head of the household--clues to filling in gaps in the family tree!

Future genealogists, there may not be many questions on the 2020 Census form, but there will be several top-quality clues to be followed up. Yes, I'm going to answer the Census as fully and completely as possible. You'll be able to find me and my family in 72 years, I promise.

1950 US Census: "Think Like an Enumerator"

1950 US Census manual

Although the release of the 1950 US Census is more than two years away, I'm getting ready now.

My prep for this Census release includes understanding what the enumerators were instructed to do (and not do).

I'm browsing through the Urban & Rural Enumerator's Reference Manual so I can . . . "Think Like an Enumerator." (You can read the manual here.)

Enumerators were told, for example, that if no one was home at time of their visit and that household was expected to be away for some time, talk with a neighbor and record as much detail as possible. Then add the notation: "Information given by a neighbor."

Now, 72 years later, we should take such information with a grain of salt because it was not first-hand. How many neighbors can recite the proper age or birth year for anyone or everyone in my household? None. Same holds true for 1950, even though neighbors might have been living near each other for many years. But I'm happy that the Census will contain such notations to alert us to be cautious in accepting the information as factual.

Enumerator instructions on p. 10 of 1950 Census manual

Also I will be checking the pages before and after my ancestor's enumeration for members of the FAN club!

Be aware that 1950 Census enumerators were instructed to visit residences in a particular order and to ask neighbors where houses were located, so they wouldn't miss any. Read more on the U.S. National Archives blog here.

P.S.: I'm putting all of my 1950 Census blog posts into one summary page, with header found at top of my blog. The direct link is here. Thank you for reading!

Two Bracelets, Two Family Heirlooms

Daisy and Dorothy Schwartz, mid-1920s

Shown here in one of my favorite photos is Mom (Daisy Schwartz Burk, 1919-1981) and her twin sister (Dorothy Schwartz, 1919-2001), with matching Buster Brown haircuts and lacy dropped-waist dresses.

Look very carefully at the arm of the smiling twin on the right, and you can see a dainty pearl bracelet dangling from her wrist. No doubt both girls had identical bracelets, but only Mom's survives.

It's a tiny heirloom (see the ruler to see how tiny) that will be shared with Mom's descendants, along with the treasured studio photo of the twins.

Worn by Daisy Schwartz Burk

The second bracelet heirloom is this one from the late 1950s, a piece of Mom's costume jewelry with photos on both sides--photos of her twin daughters (Sis and me).

As with the pearl bracelet, this charm bracelet will be shared with Mom's descendants, along with memories of her and her twin sister, my Auntie Dorothy.

One of my 2020 goals is to finish a booklet about Daisy and Dorothy, with lots of photos to bring them alive for future generations who never had the opportunity to know them.

"Favorite photo" is this week's #52Ancestors prompt.

Who We Are and How We're Related

List of Larimer ancestors written by Brice Larimer McClure

"I am Brice McClure, a son of Margaret Larimer McClure and Wm. McClure," begins the scrap of family history above. It was written by my husband's maternal grandfather (Brice Larimer McClure, 1878-1970) in the first half of the twentieth century.

The family treasures this scrap of paper in Brice's handwriting, listing what he was told about his Larimer family's history. It also demonstrates Brice's pride in his family's background and his hope that these ancestors would be remembered for generations to come.

Brice set a wonderful example: He told descendants (1) exactly who he was and (2) exactly how he was related to his ancestors.

I've been putting my name and the date on every family history booklet I write. Now I realize that's not enough information about me.

When I wrote my most recent booklet about my late father-in-law's musical life, I added a longer note to the title page:

"Written by Marian Burk Wood, daughter-in-law of Edgar James Wood, in December, 2019."

In a decade or two, when some descendant pulls this dusty booklet off the shelf, he or she will see both my name and my relationship to this ancestor.

Although I could add even more info to explain how I fit into the family, I want to keep things simple and leave the spotlight on the featured ancestor in my booklet.

Now future generations will at least know my name, my relationship to the ancestor I'm writing about, and when I prepared the booklet.

Fresh Start: New York's Cafe Monopol

The entrepreneurial Roth family, cousins to my Hungarian-born great-grandpa Moritz Farkas, sought a fresh start after leaving Hungary for opportunities in New York City at the turn of the 20th century.

Cafe Monopol on Second Avenue in NYC

Peter Roth (1872-1956) and his brother-in-law Peter Stern, with two other partners, owned and operated the Viennese-style restaurant Cafe Monopol at 145 Second Avenue in Manhattan.
They paid $5 to organize as a corporation in 1913 (shown at left).

Peter and his wife had put in $10,000 in funding during the previous year, according to incorporation documents. The incorporation process probably formalized family shares in the restaurant corporation.

Peter had headed the Cafe Monopol since at least 1910. That's the year he told the US Census he was the "keeper" of this restaurant, which was also listed in the 1910 New York city directory. He learned the business from the ground up, listing "waiter" as his occupation in the 1900 Census (when he lived only a few blocks from his future business).

I just found an ad for Cafe Monopol on November 21, 1908, saying "Hungarian music, Vienna Restaurant" at the 2d Avenue address. And other early ads in New York Evening Telegram for the Cafe Monopol said it featured "a concert every evening." The place must have been hopping at dinnertime!

A Cafe Monopol in Berlin and Another in New York

Reading the 2018 book, A Rich Brew: How Cafes Created Modern Jewish Culture by Shachar M. Pinsker, I was pleased to find the Roths' Cafe Monopol in New York briefly mentioned (p. 228). Much more space was devoted to the far better-known Cafe Monopol in Berlin, then a gathering place for Zionists (see pages 167+ of the book). Surely my Roth ancestors from Hungary would have been aware of the Berlin cafe's fame when naming their New York cafe.

In New York City, the entire Second Avenue neighborhood around Cafe Monopol was home to a rich brew of Jewish culture, including the Yiddish Art Theatre and the National Theatre. In the 1940s, a cousin of my Roth and Farkas ancestors acted in New York's Yiddish theater for a time!

A Star's Fresh Start at the Cafe Monopol

I just found out that a really big star got her fresh start at the Cafe Monopol more than a century ago.

Sonya Kalish, the star's original name, was a baby when her family settled in Hartford, CT after leaving Tulchin, Ukraine. She married Louis Tuck and was known as Sophie Tuck.

But Sophie was eager to sing, and so she took herself off to New York City to break into show business. Her money was running out when she approached the proprietor of Cafe Monopol and offered to (literally) sing for her supper.

When he asked her name, she made up a variation of her married name on the spot: Sophie Tucker. 

That's how Sonya Kalish became Sophie Tucker ("The last of the red-hot mamas"), and got a fresh start at the Cafe Monopol on Second Avenue in New York City!

(My sources: Sophie's biography, "Some of These Days," and the Museum of the City of New York.)

--

Many thanks to Amy Johnson Crow for this first #52Ancestors prompt of 2020.

Happy Family History New Year 2020

This pretty postal card was sent to my husband's uncle more than a century ago.

Let me wish you and your loved ones a very happy and healthy new year! It's a perfect time of year to share your own memories of holiday traditions as part of family history. (Actually, it's always the right time to share family history.)

I've reached a new blogging milestone: Never have I posted more entries than in 2019. Looking forward to more blogging in 2020, including Amy Johnson Crow's new #52Ancestors prompts.