Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Name: Edward Keyes
Estimated Birth Year: 1830
Gender: Male
Age in 1870: 40y
Color (white, black, mulatto, chinese, Indian): White
Birthplace: Canada
Home in 1870: Montana, United States
Household Gender Age
Edward Keyes M 40y
Louis Duncan M 25y
Wm Prickston M 38y
Stephen Dewell M 26y
Ezekiel Wilkinson M 53y
Maria Wilkinson F 46y
Henry C Wilkinson M 28y
Allen Wilkinson M 22y
Raleigh Wilkinson M 17y
Dora Wilkinson F 14y
Woman China F 18y
Woman China F 28y
Wonen China F 34y
Woman China F 31y
Woman China F 22y
Woman Chince F 17y
James Jewell M 27y
Geo Rogers M 28y
Jas T Woods M 36y
Bohn Neace M 37y
Moses Pearce M 36y
R D Barnes M 42y
Joseph Lambert M 32y
E Lavassey M 48y
John Lavassey M 15y
Camille Locteau M 52y
Amelia Courtway F 11y
I'm guessing this is a boarding house? This looks to be in Beaverhead, Montana. My ancestor was Henry Wilkinson. I'm not sure if this is the same one or not. I'm also not sure if the record was transcribed or not. You click to look at the record and the record itself is divided between two different census pages.
Anyway, I thought it was strange. I wouldn't want to be known just as "woman." "Woman China" also sounds really strange. There are quite a few on this census from Canada, a few from China, apparently two from England, and a few from the U.S. (mostly Missouri).
It's just strange all around.
Here's an alternate census from the same time with the Wilkinsons in it, for some reason.
Name: Dora M Wilkinson
Estimated Birth Year: 1856
Gender: Female
Age in 1870: 14y
Color (white, black, mulatto, chinese, Indian): White
Birthplace: Missouri
Home in 1870: Montana, United States
Household Gender Age
Ezekiel B Wilkinson M 52y
Maria Wilkinson F 48y
Henry C Wilkinson M 25y
John W Wilkinson M 23y
Allen M Wilkinson M 21y
Raleigh Wilkinson M 17y
Dora M Wilkinson F 14y
A E Hanford M 28y
A J Edsall M 29y
Jno B Carruthers M 26y
Why would these siblings be living with all these other people while at the same time living at home with their parents? Maybe they lived at each part of the time?
I'm glad that I'm not known as "Woman Missouri" as well. That would seem kind of degrading. Of course, I'm sure this census taker was probably just so flabbergasted by the end of the day that he didn't care. Or it could be transcribed wrong.
I would guess boarding house and the Chinese women were servants. I would think when asked their names the census taker couldn't even think to spell what he heard.
The didn't understand the names of the women. And Asians were seen as so different, they didnt' try hard enough to find out.
It's not uncommon for people in the 1800s and early 1900s to live with parents into adulthood. In fact that's been the practice longer than not. The mid 1900s post WWII prosperity that briefly made it possible for almost anyone to own a home was a rare time. And it's over. At least for now.
I would guess boarding house and the Chinese women were servants. I would think when asked their names the census taker couldn't even think to spell what he heard.
Why would these siblings be living with all these other people while at the same time living at home with their parents? Maybe they lived at each part of the time?
I'm glad that I'm not known as "Woman Missouri" as well. That would seem kind of degrading. Of course, I'm sure this census taker was probably just so flabbergasted by the end of the day that he didn't care. Or it could be transcribed wrong.
What do you think?
Well, first off, did you look at the actual census page, or are you relying on the abstract at the FamilySearch site?
I looked at the images at Ancestry (they load faster for me), and the Wilkinson household is enumerated twice. But each time, it's a complete household, holding only the Wilkinson family. The long listing of people you have above, is more likely just a lazy abstracter, who missed the individual households. That's why you ALWAYS need to look at the original record.
That each household doesn't match is not uncommon. I have encountered that many times. As with any census, what information is on it depends on who was asked. And whether they understood what they were being asked. I've seen families who named all the children as living in the household, though most were married and living elsewhere.
These two census entries, one was taken on July 12 and the other on August 29. That's a month and a half different - perhaps they moved in the interim, so got counted twice. Or maybe an enumerated just got the boundaries of their district wrong. It happens.
And unfortunately, the Chinese were often badly enumerated. I've seen pages and pages of "Chinaman" listed in the western censuses.
Well, first off, did you look at the actual census page, or are you relying on the abstract at the FamilySearch site?
I looked at the images at Ancestry (they load faster for me), and the Wilkinson household is enumerated twice. But each time, it's a complete household, holding only the Wilkinson family. The long listing of people you have above, is more likely just a lazy abstracter, who missed the individual households. That's why you ALWAYS need to look at the original record.
That each household doesn't match is not uncommon. I have encountered that many times. As with any census, what information is on it depends on who was asked. And whether they understood what they were being asked. I've seen families who named all the children as living in the household, though most were married and living elsewhere.
These two census entries, one was taken on July 12 and the other on August 29. That's a month and a half different - perhaps they moved in the interim, so got counted twice. Or maybe an enumerated just got the boundaries of their district wrong. It happens.
And unfortunately, the Chinese were often badly enumerated. I've seen pages and pages of "Chinaman" listed in the western censuses.
Good points.
I've seen ancestors enumerated once in town and again on their farm. Same family, same year. Really emphasizes how the human element varies the records because they're never the same.
Also sometimes the census taker talked to a neighbor who didn't always know all the information accurately.
I've seen ancestors enumerated once in town and again on their farm. Same family, same year. Really emphasizes how the human element varies the records because they're never the same.
Also sometimes the census taker talked to a neighbor who didn't always know all the information accurately.
I will have to deal with other family members for ever with the 1930 census listing my mother's name as Emma. As she was the only daughter in the house, they all called her Sister. My grandfather notoriously couldn't remember her name. Heard some great stories about that growing up...
So when the census taker asked her name, by Grandfather used HIS mother's name. So all the cousins that we never see think her name is Emma......
I would guess boarding house and the Chinese women were servants. I would think when asked their names the census taker couldn't even think to spell what he heard.
Most likely mail order brides or some other variation of human trafficking. People didn't have to go to China for servants back then.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
