* Dead people on a census

Got general Family History research questions - this is the place
Post Reply
User avatar
mezentia
Superstar
Posts: 304
Joined: 12 Jan 2007 21:14
Family Historian: V7
Location: Stourbridge

Dead people on a census

Post by mezentia »

I have an interesting situation where I think that a father on the 1911 census has listed all of his children, irrespective of whether they are alive or not. At least two children appear to have died before the census, there are GRO death index entries for them where the age and thus calculated birth dates match and the deaths are registered in the right district. The two children do not appear on the 1939 register. One child, born 1899 does not appear on the 1901 census. So, do I create a 1911 census entry for the two children believed dead, or merely note the fact that they appear against their death event entry? The 1911 census entry does say that the father has 8 children, 5 still living and three who have died, and 8 children are listed.
avatar
Peter Collier
Famous
Posts: 192
Joined: 04 Nov 2015 17:32
Family Historian: V7
Location: Worcestershire, UK

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by Peter Collier »

Your record of the 1911 census needs to report what that census actually says, not what you think it should say. The information recorded in it may indeed be wrong, but that is beside the point.

You can (should) add a note to your source to explain that you believe it to be inaccurate, and cite other sources that support that.

Given you have found earlier death records, I would guess someone at the time misunderstood what was meant to be filled in on the census. It is a red flag though, so you might want to double check the death records, to be sure you are right and the census isn't.
Peter Collier

Collier, Savory, Buckerfield, Edmonds, Low, Dungey, Lester, Chambers, Walshe, Moylan, Bradley, Connors, Udale, Wilson, Benfield, Downey
User avatar
Mark1834
Megastar
Posts: 2458
Joined: 27 Oct 2017 19:33
Family Historian: V7
Location: South Cheshire, UK

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by Mark1834 »

How interesting! I've not seen that before. If you are sure they were dead (and it sounds to be the case), I would not create a census event for the dead children, but record the transcript exactly as written and add a note to explain what you think has happened. It sounds like the householder has misread the instructions and listed all the children specifically, as this was the first census that asked that question.
Mark Draper
User avatar
mezentia
Superstar
Posts: 304
Joined: 12 Jan 2007 21:14
Family Historian: V7
Location: Stourbridge

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by mezentia »

I have GRO death index entries for the three children that have died. The age at death corresponds with their birth GRO index entries, and the registry office place is consistent with their births. I have the 1911 source record as exactly as it appears, with all eight children listed. I have checked the GRO death index for the names of the deceased children, and can find none that match the information I already have. I suspect that the father mis-interpreted the instructions, but this is the first instance of dead children being listsed that I have ever encountered.

I think I will just note the 1911 census entry on their death event.
User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 28341
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V7
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by tatewise »

Yes, there is a great of confusion in 1911 Census returns relating to that question often with various crossings-out.
You say that the father has recorded the children born, living & died, but that should be recorded against the wife!
The Census should only list the 5 living children.
So he has misunderstood and all subsequent enumerators & officials have not corrected it.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry
User avatar
AdrianBruce
Megastar
Posts: 2090
Joined: 09 Aug 2003 21:02
Family Historian: V7
Location: South Cheshire
Contact:

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by AdrianBruce »

Peter Collier wrote: 16 Dec 2020 14:44 Your record of the 1911 census needs to report what that census actually says, not what you think it should say. The information recorded in it may indeed be wrong, but that is beside the point. ...
I suspect that we may be confusing two separate things here. Or at least failing to draw the distinction.

1. If you record the text of the 1911 census in the Source-Record (possibly via AS), then, as Peter says, it should record exactly what is on the source - spelling errors and mistakes included. At some point in the proceedings, it would make sense to record the fact that three of the children are mentioned in error. Probably in the Notes for that Source-Record?

2. The other question is whether to create (1911) census events for the 3 deceased children. I would say that would be absurd. You've already covered the error in the transcript of the Source-Record - no need to compound that error. Remember please, the events, attributes and other facts recorded against someone are conclusions, not transcripts of sources. Otherwise some people would have several birth events depending on what the censuses say about them.
Adrian
User avatar
BillH
Megastar
Posts: 2245
Joined: 31 May 2010 03:40
Family Historian: V7
Location: Washington State, USA

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by BillH »

It is not always an error to appear in a census when you are dead. In some places I have run across the situation where the census instructions are to include all people who were in the household as of a certain date but the actual enumeration of the census is after that date. For example, the enumeration occurs on July 1, but the instructions were to include everyone in the household as of April 1. I have run into several dead people in censuses.

Bill
User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 28341
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V7
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by tatewise »

So people born between April 1 and July 1 should not be included either?

In that case, is the Census Date really April 1 and not July 1?

It is a bit like the UK Birth Certificate where registration can happen weeks after the child is born, but it is still usually cited against the Birth Event and not a separate Birth Registration Event.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry
User avatar
BillH
Megastar
Posts: 2245
Joined: 31 May 2010 03:40
Family Historian: V7
Location: Washington State, USA

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by BillH »

tatewise wrote: 16 Dec 2020 19:17 So people born between April 1 and July 1 should not be included either?
Correct.
In that case, is the Census Date really April 1 and not July 1?
The official census date in my example was April 1, but the household was actually enumerated on July 1.

This type of delay happens a lot in the US. Often (especially in the 18oo's) the official date was January 1 or April 1, but homes (especially in the west) were not enumerated until much later because of the vast distances and areas of sparse populations. I have one family in 1850 that appears in 3 places because they moved from Missouri to California and each place they moved to was enumerated later in the year. The last place wasn't enumerated until October.

Bill
User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 28341
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V7
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by tatewise »

That is my point.
If you record the Census in your Project on the official Census date, then dead people don't get a Census Event because they were alive at that date. It is just that the Census paper work gets filled in retrospectively.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry
User avatar
BillH
Megastar
Posts: 2245
Joined: 31 May 2010 03:40
Family Historian: V7
Location: Washington State, USA

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by BillH »

Mike,
tatewise wrote: 16 Dec 2020 19:29 That is my point.
If you record the Census in your Project on the official Census date, then dead people don't get a Census Event because they were alive at that date. It is just that the Census paper work gets filled in retrospectively.
Not sure I understand. Say person A was alive on April 1. Say they are dead on July 1. They do show on the census form because the instructions were to include people who were alive on April 1. I do enter the data into FH using the official census date. So person A does get a census event.

Can you elaborate on what you mean?

Bill
User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 28341
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V7
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by tatewise »

The thrust of this thread is that the OP found 3 children recorded on a Census when they had sadly died much earlier.
He asked whether those children should be assigned a Census Event at the Census Date and the answer is NO because their entry on the Census was a human error.
In the UK the Census should be filled in on the night of the Census so there is no delay. We are only a tiny country.

Your 'dead people' on a Census were not dead at the official date of the Census, as those unfortunate children were.
So it is a different scenario.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry
User avatar
BillH
Megastar
Posts: 2245
Joined: 31 May 2010 03:40
Family Historian: V7
Location: Washington State, USA

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by BillH »

OK... I see what you mean.

I agree that my scenario is different. The situation described by the original poster was in error. Those children should not have been included on the census form (assuming the census had no reference to including people alive at an earlier time and they were alive at that time). In that situation I would not create a census event for the children that were actually dead... I would include a note indicating they were included in error.

I was only suggesting that it isn't always an error for people to appear in a census if they were dead at the time the census was enumerated. I probably wasn't clear enough. Hopefully I didn't confuse the issue too much.

Bill
User avatar
NickWalker
Megastar
Posts: 2597
Joined: 02 Jan 2004 17:39
Family Historian: V7
Location: Lancashire, UK
Contact:

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by NickWalker »

BillH wrote: 16 Dec 2020 20:17 I was only suggesting that it isn't always an error for people to appear in a census if they were dead at the time the census was enumerated. I probably wasn't clear enough. Hopefully I didn't confuse the issue too much.
Not at all, I've found this thread very interesting and both scenarios are interesting ones to consider.

I totally agreed with Adrian's comments about how to record all this.
Nick Walker
Ancestral Sources Developer

https://fhug.org.uk/kb/kb-article/ancestral-sources/
User avatar
mezentia
Superstar
Posts: 304
Joined: 12 Jan 2007 21:14
Family Historian: V7
Location: Stourbridge

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by mezentia »

Goodness gracious me! I had no idea I would spark such a debate.

The 1911 census return was completed by the head of the household, in this case the father. I agree it is usual for the entries for number of years married, children born, still living and dead to be listed against the mother's entry, but in this case they are listed against the father's entry, and have not been crossed through, although there is a red line by these figures and a red 5 at the bottom of the page, possibly the enumerator may have made these to identify a mistake on the form. The actual form for anyone interested may be found here:

Merthyr Tydfil, Glamorganshire, Wales RG14 Piece 32473 Schedule 288

The head is John Frederick.

I have recorded a note against the death event for the three children who died before 1911 to say that they have a 1911 census entry recorded. The 1911 census entry was recorded using AS, and is an exact transcript copy of the original image.
User avatar
mezentia
Superstar
Posts: 304
Joined: 12 Jan 2007 21:14
Family Historian: V7
Location: Stourbridge

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by mezentia »

Funnily enough, I have just found yet another example ...
avatar
kimgroothuis
Gold
Posts: 19
Joined: 12 Dec 2020 12:47
Family Historian: V7

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by kimgroothuis »

This is my first posting, so apologies if I do anything wrong!

I have seen dead children enumerated in the 1911 England census several times, with the correct numbers shown for living and dead (such as 8 children, 5 alive, 3 dead, all 8 listed). In one case, the occupation of the children who had died was shown as 'dead', and in another their relationship to head was 'dead'. I agree with the suggestion the heads of household had misunderstood what they were supposed to do.
User avatar
LornaCraig
Megastar
Posts: 3190
Joined: 11 Jan 2005 17:36
Family Historian: V7
Location: Oxfordshire, UK

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by LornaCraig »

Yes, misunderstanding the instructions was very common. I've never actually found any dead people listed by name as if they were in the household, but I have seen a number of other curiosities. It was probably one of the earliest occasions when a form was designed to be filled in by members of the public themselves, and must have been a lesson in how not to set out the questions.

The most common mistake was filling in the number of children against the man's name rather than the woman's name. Another was that some people genuinely didn't understand the questions. I have seen one where a landlady of a lodging house obviously didn't know what 'Nationality' meant and reported the nationality of some of her residents as 'Prodisdent', some 'Cathlick', some 'Metherdist'. In other cases elderly people who were illiterate resorted to asking their grandchildren to fill in the form. I''ve seen one signed by a ten year old! And some people simply didn't know how to spell the names of their own children. One man reported that he had a son called 'Ubert' (Hubert). I imagine that when they wanted to attract his attention they said 'You, Bert'!
Lorna
User avatar
mezentia
Superstar
Posts: 304
Joined: 12 Jan 2007 21:14
Family Historian: V7
Location: Stourbridge

Re: Dead people on a census

Post by mezentia »

On the two that I have found, the children were all listed as Scholars! At Hogwarts, maybe? :lol: :lol:
Post Reply