Tuesday, December 17, 2013

Double enumeration in the census, part two

Some people have written to me, asking how you know to look for someone twice in the same census year.  The short answer is that you don't know, so don't stop with one census entry.  The longer answer is that you need to look for hints or situations that may have given rise to getting counted twice.  In my prior post on double enumerations, my hint was the Adelia Joyce's occupation was "out at service" in her listing at her father's home in 1880.  I looked for her again and found her also listed at the home of her employer.

In this post and in upcoming posts I will feature some more double enumerations in the census and explain the hints pointing to a double count and the ramifications to that family's history.

We'll look at the Bossert family of Newark, Essex County, New Jersey in the year 1900.  Newark was a major city then, as it is now, and its city directories survive. Years ago, I sat in the Newark Public Library to view the directories on microfilm, but you can view them (up to 1923) from home at Fold3.  The city directories provide a year-to-year snapshot of a family, where they moved, their occupations, when women were widowed, and much more.  I am quite fortunate that so many of my lines lived in major cities, appearing in city directories for almost two centuries.

Holbrook's Directory, Newark, Essex County, New Jersey
Year:  1900.  Page: 289.  Fold3.com

We have two men (or do we?) with the same name, Peter Bossert, living in the same neighborhood in the 1900 city directory.  No other information is available, such as their age or spouse.  In 1900, I know of two living men bearing this name:  Peter Bossert, born about 1845, and his son Peter, born about 1880.  An unmarried twenty year old would likely not have his own entry in the city directory.  So are these the same person?  Broome and Prince Streets run parallel to each other, one block apart.  The Broome Street residence is about three blocks south of the Prince street address.



Above is the census entry at 111 Broome Street for the entire family: Peter Bossert, father; Elisabeth [Beck], mother; and seven children.  Peter is 55 years old, working in "day labor."  Peter, the son, is 20, a mattress maker.  Son Freddy is 14 years old and "at school."




Above is the census entry for a few blocks away at 17 Prince Street.  Peter Bossett (not Bossert) is 51 years old, a "fireman stationary."  Only one person is listed with him:  a son, Frederick, age 14, "at school."

I would say that these are the same people, counted twice in the same census year, blocks apart.  I don't know why Peter was counted separate from his family and just with one son.  (The family did shift the spelling of their name from Bossert to Bosset and then Bossett.)  Both of these residences are rentals.  It is possible that the family was in the process of moving when the census was taken.  As a fireman, Peter may have slept apart from the family when on duty; perhaps son Frederick was training with him at this point in time.  In the few birth certificates that I have found for Peter's numerous children, Peter's occupation and address change often.  This double enumeration, in both the city directory and the census, could reflect Peter's multiple occupations and constant relocation.  Fortunately for research purposes, he stayed in the same neighborhood in Newark every time.


Sunday, December 15, 2013

Double enumeration in the census

Sometimes people can't be found at all in the census.  Others have two entries for the same census, called a double enumeration.

Adelia "Delia" Joyce was born about 1863 in Pawling, Dutchess County, New York.  Her mother, Margaret Campbell, died in 1870 after a train hit her.  Adelia is listed with her father, Patrick Joyce, and her step-mother, Bridget Cortney, in the 1880 census in Pawling, occupation "out at service."

1880 United States census
Pawling, Dutchess County, New York
Household of Patrick Joyce
Retrieved from Ancestry.com

I looked into this "out at service."  I figured it meant that Delia was working and living somewhere else, probably as a servant.  If she were living elsewhere, she could also be listed on the census at her place of employment.

Indeed I found her again in the 1880 census, still in Pawling, working as a domestic servant for the widow Margaret Craft, age 70.

1880 United States census
Pawling, Dutchess County, New York
Household of Margaret Craft
Retrieved from Ancestry.com
This finding sheds some more light on Delia's early life.  She was sent away from her home- was this a blessing or a curse- to live and work with a nearby family.  We don't know at what age she was sent to start working as a domestic, and if she was able to earn any money to keep for herself.  This also provides us with some more people to explore.  Was Margaret Craft related to the Joyce family?  What about the other worker, Francis Cullum?

To get to this point, I first had to figure out that the name was Craft.  In the 1880 index, Margaret is actually listed as "Carzt."

Index at Ancestry.com for household of Margaret Craft in the 1880 United States census,
Pawling, Dutchess County, New York.
I submitted an alternate spelling.


The name "Carzt" looked bizarre for this time and place so I had to find a more normal-looking spelling.  Neighbors tend to not move much when we're dealing with farmland, so I searched for all the women named Margaret or Mary in the 1870 census in Pawling.  And here she is, this time more clearly as "Craft."

1870 United States census
Pawling, Dutchess County, New York
Household of Margaret Craft
Retrieved from Ancestry.com

Margaret Craft and daughter Mary aged beautifully from 1870 to 1880.  But this is not the only way we know we have the same family.  Look at the neighbors.  You can see that the census taker in 1880 approached in the opposite direction from the route followed in 1870.


With a more reasonable spelling, we can explore the Craft family more easily.  Margaret Toffey Craft's grave was posted on FindAGrave (by a Fallen Graver) and there is so much more to explore.



Tuesday, December 3, 2013

Trouble for DNA Testing

Several people have written to me about the fiasco that 23andMe is facing.  The latest reports are that the company has stopped marketing its DNA kits under pressure from the FDA.

Today is the three year anniversary of my first purchase from 23andMe.  I tested myself and then other family members.

The squabble is over the medical or health testing services and not our genetic genealogy.  The genealogy component of DNA testing is wonderful and I don't think that the genealogy world has fully embraced its power yet.  It would be a shame for this situation to set back genetic genealogy when it is just picking up speed.

Through 23andMe I identified two close maternal cousins.  A close paternal cousin appeared in the results over a month ago.  He has not responded, which is a common problem among the matches at 23andMe.  Because I tested other family members, I know which branch he comes from.  I can tell him the name of one of his great grandfathers- the ancestor we have in common.  Unless there were additional children I am aware of, I can also tell him his grandfather's name.  That is how good and valuable this DNA testing is for genealogy purposes.

23andMe
The latest close cousin awaiting discovery.  This mystery cousins matches my paternal uncle 3.09%
I predict that the relation is second cousin.  Let's hope this man comes forward to confirm.