Tag Archive for California

I Never Knew . . . .

As a kid growing up, I knew very few of my cousins.  In fact, I can recall meeting just three of them, all on my mother’s side, before I turned eighteen years old.  This was a consequence of the fact that our military family lived in places far away from where my parents grew up.  I used to wonder sometimes if I could be passing by some cousin walking down the street and not even know it.

Since I began genealogical research about eight years ago, I’ve met many cousins online and in person, near and far removed (yes, that does have a double meaning).  And that has only increased my belief that some relative is always nearby, whether one knows it or not.

On Monday, 27 December 2010, I learned that my cousin Candy Gines had lived for several years just a few miles from me. I had met her just once, years ago back in our ancestral homeland of Kansas City. I would have eagerly welcomed the chance to get to know her.

Althea “Candy” Gines passed away on Monday, 27 December 2010 in Sacramento, California. She was in her fifties.   She leaves two adult children, Brian and Christina, and is also survived here by a nephew, Christopher.

Grand Genealogy Journey: Aboard the California Zephyr

California Zephyr

The California Zephyr arrives at Galesburg, Illinois

Amtrak’s California Zephyr runs between Emeryville, California (near Oakland), and Chicago, Illinois. The present Zephyr is the latest incarnation of a venerable train that began service in 1949, as the Golden Age of Trains was about to begin its decline.

The route of the Zephyr is one of the longest operated by Amtrak. The original Zephyr operated on the tracks and stock of three different companies, the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy, the Denver & Rio Grande Western, and the Western Pacific. The present day route varies a bit from the original, but it still remains one of the most scenic passenger rail routes in America.

Our virtual journey will take us from Sacramento to Salt Lake City aboard the Zephyr. The train leaves from Emeryville, 75 miles southwest of Sacramento, each morning at 9:50 am and arrives at the historic Sacramento Valley Station two hours later. It will have made stops in Martinez and Davis. Also boarding the train with us in Sacramento are several volunteer docents from the California State Railroad Museum will narrate and comment on the portion of the trip between Sacramento and Reno. This five hour trek over the Sierra Nevada is one of the most scenic parts of the Zephyr’s route.

We’re basically following the route that Theodore Judah had laid out for the Central Pacific railroad. It winds through the northern portion of California’s Gold Country in Placer and Nevada counties. A little over an hour from Sacramento, the train stops at Colfax. a picturesque town of about 1,500, settled originally in the Gold Rush days.  The Railroad Museum docents point out that during the construction of the Transcontinental Railroad, President Grant dispatched Vice President Schulyer Colfax to view the progress of the construction.  The people of the small mining community that had once been known as Alder Grove were so impressed that the Vice President of the United States had come to their town, they named the town after him!  And indeed, next to the Amtrak station, which contains a number of interesting shops, is a statue of Schulyer Colfax.    He was popular in California, having been in Congress (from Indiana) when California was admitted to the Union.  Colfax was a strong abolitionist, which also contributed to his popularity in free California.

After Colfax, the train continues up through the mountains toward the 7,000-ft.+ summit near Mount Judah (yes, Theodore again!). Then, the train begins to descend on the eastern slope through the Stanford Curve,  a back-switch with a terrific view of the Truckee river basin.

Schuyler Colfax, Vice President of the United States, 1869-1873

The next stop after Colfax is Truckee, California.  Truckee is also a picturesque Sierra village, though about ten times the size of Colfax.  Truckee is along side the Truckee river, which is Lake Tahoe’s sole outlet. Surrounding the area is the Truckee unit of the Tahoe National Forest.  West of Truckee, and visible from the Zephyr is Donner Lake, a beautiful freshwater  fishery and recreational area.  But the beauty is mitigated in some degree by the knowledge that the pass through the mountains here was the final resting place of many of  the “Donner Party” who met their demise in the winter of 1846-47. The Donner camp area is now both a National Historic Landmark and a California state park.

Donner Lake on eastern Sierra slope

At this point, it’s all  downhill for the Zephyr.   As we cross into Nevada, the docents point out the site of the first American train robbery. It occurred in 1870 at Verdi, Nevada. Today, Verdi is known for its largest hotel, Boomtown, where travelers still may be “robbed.”

The train makes three stops in Nevada: Reno, Winnemucca, and Elko–towns whose histories are intertwined with that of the Transcontinental Railroad.  It is said that railroad magnate Charles Crocker actually chose the names of Reno and Elko.

Elko County Courthouse

Winnemucca was named for Chief Winnemuca and his daughter, Sarah Winnemucca Hopkins, Paiute Indian leaders in Oregon and Nevada.  Theirs is an interesting and complex story that cannot be done justice here. However, for an introduction to their story, see the profile at AccessGenealogy.com.

Chief Winnemucca

Once we pass through Elko, it’s just a hop and a skip to Utah!

Gold Rush and Nevada Genealogical Resources

Next, as the Grand Genealogy Jouurney continues: Utah and the completion of the Transcontinental Railroad.

Photo Credits:

1. California Zephyr: Courtesy of  Trainweb.com (www.trainweb.com); photo at http://www.trainweb.org/amtrakpix/itrainpix/5/

2. Schuyler Colfax: Library of Congress

3. Donner Lake: California Department of Parks and Recreation (photo here)

4. Elko County Courthouse: U.S. Dept of Agriculture (photo at http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/population/photos/ShowCH.asp?FIPS=32007)

5. Chief Winnemucca: Courtesy Burns Paiute Tribal Council (photo here)

GeneaBlogie Grand Genealogy Journey – Day 1: Sacramento

Downtown Sacramento near the river

Sacramento has often been overlooked by visitors to Northern California; the same visitors are frequently mesmerized by the city some 90 miles away called San Francisco. Dissing Sacramento used to be a favorite pastime of the cognoscenti.   “It’s too hot!”  “It’s too dry!”  “It’s too flat!”  “It’s got no culture!” Even the California Supreme Court refuses to have its main office in Sacramento, which is after all, the capital of California.  The Court long ago chose San Francisco as its seat.

In fact, there would be little of anything that one likes about San Francisco had it not been for Sacramento.

On the site of present -day Sacramento, a settlement called Sutter’s Fort was founded in 1840 by Johann Augustus Sutter,  a former Swiss army officer with something of a history of bad business judgment.   In addition to the fort on the eastern bank of the Sacramento river, Sutter established a sawmill in the eastern foothills.  In January of 1848, one of Sutter’s business associates, John Marshall, found gold at the mill located in Coloma, California.  Despite Marshall’s and Sutter’s efforts let word out, news of the gold discovery spread rapidly.    Soon, several hundred thousand people were on their way to California.  Sacramento became the commercial outpost for the Gold Rush.

Originally known as New Helvetia, the city was planned and named by Sutter’s son.

John Sutter

Johann Augustus Sutter (1803-1880) called himself "John" after he came to America.

With the influx of immigrants from around the world, Sacramento was a booming center of commerce in the 1850s.  The Legislature decided in 1854 to make Sacramento the capital. [The Legislature had sat in Monterey, San Jose, and Benicia.  The apocryphal story is told that Sacramento civic boosters planned a party aboard a river boat for legislators in Benicia.  The boat was stocked with fine liquor and many prostitutes.  As the lawmakers got drunker, the boat moved upriver through the night to Sacramento.  When daylight came, the disgraced legislators were too embarrassed to return to Benicia and decided to stay in Sacramento!]

Sacramento played an important role in  changing the history of America.  A Connecticut engineer named Theodore Judah had come to California and built the Sacramento Valley railroad.  This  was the first railroad west of the Mississippi.  It ran from Sacramento’s Embarcadero to Folsom, a mining town on the western edge of the gold fields.  But Judah had bigger plans: he wanted to build a trans-continental railroad.  To finance his big plan, Judah sought venture capital in and around San Francisco.   There were no takers.  Judah then returned to Sacramento and found four local men, Leland Stanford, Charles Crocker, Collis Huntington, and Mark Hopkins, who were willing to take a risk on Judah’s plans.  The “Big Four” as they were known formed the Central Pacific Railroad Company to build Judah’s railroad over the Sierra–a plan thought foolhardy by more than just a few.

Theodore Judah

Theodore Judah (1826-1863) died before the Transcontinental railroad was completed.

The grand plan was that the Central Pacific Railroad would be built from the west and link to the Union Pacific Railroad being built from Omaha.  Two Acts of Congress and generous grants of government land helped the project along.  And as every schoolchild knows (or at least used to know), six years of work, much of it through the Civil War, culminated in March 1869 with the driving of the last spike to unite the lines at Promontory Summit, Utah.

The greatest technological feat of the nineteenth century wouldn’t have happened as it did but for the four Sacramento businessmen who believed in the project. The railroad changed American commerce forever.

Before the railroad was completed, Sacramento was the western terminus of the Pony Express.

5Mark Hopkins, Jr. Collis Huntington
Leland Stanford Charles Crocker

The “Big Four”: Mark Hopkins, Collis Huntington, Leland Stanford, Charles Crocker.  Stanford went on to serve as Governor and United States Senator from California, and founded Leland Stanford, Jr., University. Crocker later founded a bank which became Crocker Bank (later acquired by Wells Fargo).  It was a Crocker Bank branch in the Sacramento suburb of Carmichael (home of the GeneaBlogie  Bloggcast Center) in 1975 raided by Patty Hearst and the Symbionese Liberation Army, resulting in the killing of customer Myrna Opsahl.

Sacramento today is at the heart of a metropolitan area of about 2 million people.  Agriculture remains important in this region, but a slew of high-tech and service industry business has moved in to supplement state government employment.   Situated at the confluence of the American and Sacramento rivers, Sacramento is nicknamed “River City,” and is sometimes called The City of Trees because of its lush foliage.

So today we’re at the California State Railroad Museum in Old Sacramento where it all began. The Museum occupies the space on the Embarcadero where the Sacramento Valley line had begun.  It’s regarded as the most popular rail museum in North America.  Stay awhile; have a look around.

California Railroad Museum

California State Railroad Museum

Sacramento is not a town to forget its origins. Today, not far from the railroad museum, you can visit the renowned Crocker Art Museum, endowed by Judge Edwin B. Crocker and his wife Margaret.   Edwin Crocker was the older brother of Charles Crocker and was legal counsel to the Central Pacific Railroad.  “The Crocker” currently is undergoing a multi-million dollar arenovation that will triple the size of its exhibit space. The expanded museum is expected to open in October 2010.  The Crocker is at 216 O Street.

A few blocks from The Crocker is the Stanford Mansion, 800 N Street, a National Historic Landmark known officially as  Leland Stanford State Historic  Park.  Gov. Leland and Jane Stanford resided here.  Take a look around this place!Stanford Mansion

Although Gov. Stanford and two other  succeeding Governors lived here in the late 1800s, California now has no official Governor’s Mansion.  The Stanford house is California’s official reception center for visiting dignitaries.

When you’re finished there, you can go across the street to the California State Library, located at 900 N Street. The Library’s California History Room has many genealogical and family history research resources,

California State Library

including the 1852 California State census, a statewide index to the 1890, great register of voters (a very useful substitute for the 1890 census), city and county directories, going back as far as 1850, historical newspapers, and telephone directories dating from 1899.

A block away from the state library is California’s State Capitol.  Just inside the entrance of the capital, is the state Capitol Museum. This museum has replicas of the offices in the capitol building at the time it was completed in 1874 (after 14 years of construction and 2000% overbudget!).   The museum also has an extensive art collection and an architectural history collection.  And, of course, it has collections relevant to the legislative process in California.

California State Capitol Museum

The California State Archives, a division of the office of the secretary of state of California, is located a short walk away from the Capitol grounds at 1020 O Street.  The archives houses, among other things, County records from 1850 to 1987, including probate court files, wills, naturalizations, deeds, homesteads and vital records for 28 counties. You’ll also find here prison records from 1850-1979, military records from 1850-1942, and state mental hospital records from 1856-1934.

California State Archives

California State Archives at 1020 O Street

The California Secretary of State also operates the California Museum for History, Women and Arts, at the same location as the archives.  This museum known simply as The California Museum, has taken on a more diverse set of exhibits under the patronage of First Lady Maria Shriver.

Here at the California Museum, we’re about 10 blocks away from the Embarcadero.  We’ll head back north on 10th Street to I Street, and turn north.  At 8th and I Streets, is the Central Library, the largest location of the 27-branch  Sacramento Public Library. On the second floor of the library is the Sacramento Room, often described as the “Jewel in the Crown” of the Library. The Sacramento Room houses more than 21,000 artifacts of local history in a climate controlled environment.

sacramento room

The Central Library's Sacramento Room

Elsewhere in the library, you’ll find Ancestry Library Edition and the New England Ancestors database. The Central Library also has a collection of Sacramento city directories, a fair selection of genealogical books, and publications from hundreds of genealogical organizations around the country.

I’ll also point out that Sacramento has its LDS Regional Family History Center in the suburb of Arden-Arcade, and in other Family History Center in the suburb of Elk Grove.

So now it’s time to head for the train station.  Fortunately, from the Central Library, it’s just three blocks to the Amtrak Sacramento Valley station. We’ll be catching the California Zephyr to Salt Lake City.  See you on board!  Don’t be late!

The Grand Genealogy Journey 2010 (Virtual Edition) Starts Anew

Believe it or don’t, but it’s been three years since the Big Train Trip.  I’m really ready to go again, but circumstances currently won’t allow that.  So we started to lay out our virtual genealogical dream trip traveling via Amtrak and other conveyances.  We ran into a set of difficulties soon after the beginning of the trip.  As a result, we’re restarting the trip. At each stop along the way, we’ll describe what research we’ re going to do, where and how we’re going to do it and other sights to see in that locality.

We’ll start in Sacramento.  Our route will take us from California’s capital to Utah’s capital, Salt Lake City.  And you know what we’ll do there!  From Salt Lake City, we’ll move on to Colorado’s capital, Denver.  We’ll spend a few days in and around Denver, then  we board the train and head for Kansas City.  We’ll keep on heading east from Kansas City to Jefferson City, and then on to St. Louis.  While in St. Louis we’ll also step over the Missouri River to Southern Illinois.

From St. Louis we’ll take a short flight to Atlanta, which will be our base for exploring central and western Georgia.  When we’re finished in Georgia, we’ll board the train in Atlanta and rumble on to New Orleans.  After a couple of days in the Crescent city, we’ll hop back aboard for Houston.

Houston’s location affords us a number of opportunities.  We have work to do in Houston itself.  We’ll take bus trips from Houston to Milam County, Nacogdoches, Longview, and Shreveport. Shreveport will be a major stopover itself because we need to explore much of of northwestern Louisiana.

We’ll go back to Houston on our way to the Gulf Coast.  There we’ll stop in Galveston, Corpus Christi and Rockport.  From the from the coast we’ll move north to San Antonio.  After finishing up in San Antonio, we’ll move northwest to Austin and Midland.  We’ll leave Texas for Albuquerque, eventually going to Los Angeles.

Los Angeles will be a two or three day stop.  Then we’ll work our way back to Sacramento via both the coast in the Central Valley by train and automobile.

On each leg of the trip, we’ll describe what is or who it is we’re going to research, the resources will use in that area, the travel options to get there, other historical sites or points of interest.

There will be special editions of The Peripatetic Graveyard Rabbit describing the graveyards we find along the way.

We’ll have regular editions of GeneaBlogie during the trip as well, covering our usual eclectic set of genealogy and historical issues.

Grand Journey Map

Some of the stops on the GeneaBlogie Grand Journey 2010

(Click map to enlarge)

The GeneaBlogie Grand Journey 2010  starts later this week at Sacramento’s historic California Railroad Museum! Join us, won’t you?

Port Chicago: Tragedy and Travesty

[We were about to board the California Zephyr in Sacramento for the beginning of our Grand Genealogy Journey. But first, for the occasion of the third edition of the Carnival of African-American Genealogy, let's backtrack in time and distance. The theme of the Carnival is "They served with honor~In Memoriam~African-Americans in the Military, 1914-1953."  Here, we follow the route of the train back to the story of black sailors, the names of some known but to God. The east-bound Zephyr passes Suisun Bay on its route from its origin in Emeryville, California, to Sacramento. On Suisun Bay in Contra Costa County, not far from the Zephyr's present route, there once was a little town called Port Chicago.]

Port Chicago, Contra Costa County, California, had been known as Bay Point until 1931, when its local business leaders renamed it Port Chicago.  They apparently believed that a new name might herald a new future for the Depression-struck town.  They couldn’t have had any idea what was to come.

Just a decade after Bay Point became Port Chicago, the United States entered World War II following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.  The West Coast naturally became the logistics points for the war in the Pacific, with many Naval installations along the length of California.

One such installation was Naval Ammunitions Depot Mare Island, near Vallejo, California.  But the tempo of the Pacific war was so great that by mid-1942, the Mare Island facility had run out of capacity for storing and shipping munitions. The Navy turned to the town of Port Chicago to build another munitions handling depot.  As a Navy rteport later said, “Port Chicago was remote from industrial activities, in a sparsely settled area, had deep tide water along the northern boundary, and was served by two transcontinental railways. There was room for further expansion.”

The U.S. Naval Magazine Port Chicago was completed in May 1944.  It had a ship-loading pier that could handle two ships at a time, designed so that explosive munitions  could be handled directly from rail cars onto deep-water ships.

Although the design was 1944 state of the art, the handling of munitions still had to be done by human beings.  It was extremely hazardous work. As the Navy later admitted, its personnel had “no clear definition” how best to handle the task.  The men doing the actual work were almost all African-Americans; the officers directing the work were all white. Neither the laborers or the officers had received adequate training in this dangerous endeavor.   Compounding the situation at Port Chicago was a lack of adequate houisng and recreational facilities.

To improve morale and to speed the work, the officers encouraged competitions between loading crews to see  who could transfer the most bombs in the shortest time. These competitions increased the hazards, since shortcuts wre often taken with what few safety regulations there were.

On the night of July 17, 1944, two merchant ships, the E.A. Bryan and the Quinault Victory, being loaded at Port Chicago.  According to the Navy’s official history, the two ships held a total of 4,606 tons of “high explosive and incendiary bombs, depth charges, and ammunition.”  More than 400 tons of munitions remained aboard railcars on the pier.

The Navy’s history recounts that:

At 10:18 p.m., a hollow ring and the sound of splintering wood erupted from the pier, followed by an explosion that ripped apart the night sky. Witnesses said that a brilliant white flash shot into the air, accompanied by a loud, sharp report. A column of smoke billowed from the pier, and fire glowed orange and yellow. Flashing like fireworks, smaller explosions went off in the cloud as it rose. Within six seconds, a deeper explosion erupted as the contents of the E.A. Bryan detonated in one massive explosion. The seismic shock wave was felt as far away as Boulder City, Nevada.

Port Chicago Damage

A report from the Associated Press the next day said that “almost every house in the little town of Port Chicago was wrecked.” The AP described the Bryan as “literally shredded;” indeed, the biggest piece of the massive ship intact was no larger than a suitcase.

The Navy’s official investigation  by a Court of Inquiry found that smoke and gases from the explosion reached 12,000 feet into the sky.   This fact has led to some speculation that Port Chicago was secretly handling atomic weapons.  There has been no credible evidence produced yet that such was the case.

More Port Chi Damage

In the end, 320 men–202 of them African-Americans–were killed and nearly 400, mostly African-Americans, were injured.  The tragic incident accounted for 15% of all African-American casualties in World War II.

The Findings of Fact and Opinion of the Naval Court of Inquiry is a mixed bag.  On the one hand,  the Court concluded that the dead and wounded “were killed or injured in line of duty and not as a result of their own misconduct.” [This is an important legal finding in military law which allowed the surviving members and the survivors of the deceased to receive proper government benefits].

The Findings of Fact also set forth the following problems on the Navy’s part:

a. A general failure to foresee and prepare for the tremendous increase in explosives shipments.

b. A failure to assemble and train the officers and crew for their specialized duties prior to the time they were required for actual loading.

c. A failure to provide initially the collateral equipment so necessary for morale.

d. A failure to provide an adequate number of competent petty officers or even personnel of petty officer caliber.

But then the Court seems to take a different direction, stating that

[T]he officers at Port Chicago have realized for a long time the necessity for great effort on their part because of the poor quality of the personnel with which they had to work. They worked loyally, conscientiously, intelligently, and effectively to make themselves competent officers and to solve the problem of loading ships safely with the men provided.

. . .

[T]he enlisted personnel [meaning the black sailors] comprising the ordnance battalions at Port Chicago were poor material for training in the handling and loading of munitions, and required an unusual amount of close supervision while actually engaged in this work.

. . .

[A] very sustained and vigorous effort was made to train these men in the proper handling of munitions. Despite this, there was a considerable history of rough and careless handling by individuals. . . .

And then the Court tacks yet again in a different direction:

[I]n the months immediately preceding the explosion real progress had been made toward a better training program for officers and men. This work had been retarded by a lack of competent senior officers.

So the Court seemed to walk a tightrope between blaming the white officers and blaming the African-American sailors.  The Court, however, did note that “the behavior of the officers and men after the explosion was exemplary and reflects credit on them and on their commanding officer,” and also concluded that “the explosions and the consequent destruction of property, death and personal injuries were not due to the fault, negligence or inefficiency of any person in the naval service or connected therewith or any other person.”

The surviving sailors were reassigned to other bases, many to the depot at Mare Island, which the Port Chicago facility had been built to supplement.  They were assigned to other duties.

But that’s not the end of the story.

Just weeks after the Port Chicago explosion, three hundred of the “poor quality” enlisted sailors were ordered to resume loading munitions and explosives at Mare Island.   More than 250 of them refused the order.  They made it clear that they had not received any more training than before and stated that they  were prepared to follow any order except one to load explosives.

The men were accused of mutiny, which at that time carried the death penalty.  In the face of that circumstance, all but fifty returned to work.  These fifty were put on trial in the largest mass criminal proceeding in U.S. military history and the very first U.S. mutiny trial.

The trial was held on Yerba Buena Island in the middle of San Francisco Bay.  Thurgood Marshall, then chief counsel of the NAACP attended the trial as an observer. According to the Oakland Tribune of October 11, 1944, Marshall praised the Navy officers who were the defense attorneys, but asserted that the prosecutor was “prejudiced” especially against “Southern Negroes.”

The trial ended on October 25, 1944, but the verdict and sentence weren’t announced until three weeks later.  All fifty were convicted of mutiny and sentenced to various terms ranging from eight to fifteen years in prison, with dishonorable discharges from the Navy.

The longest term actually served by any of the men was 17 months.

For years after the explosion, the Government paid claims to those people who lost their houses or businesses in the town of Port Chicago.  Nothing was done for the surviving sailors who were imprisoned.

In 1967, the Congress effectively put an end to the claims process by essentially allowing the Navy to exercise eminent domain over the affected area. With that act, Port Chicago, California ceased to exist.

A number of individuals and groups called for a review of the trial of the fifty men convicted and finally, in 1994, the Navy conducted the review.  It concluded that the verdict was just because military personnel cannot pick and choose which orders to obey.

In 1999, the President of the United States pardoned the last known survivor of the Fifty, Freddie Meeks of Los Angeles, then eighty years old.  He died in 2003.

In the early 1990s, Congress authorized a memorial to the dead on the Port Chicago site.  In October 2009, the President designated the Port Chicago Naval Magazine National memorial as a unit of the National Park Service.

The Port Chicago Dead

Missing/Presumed Dead

US Navy. Press and Radio Release. “Commanding Officer Praises Negro Personnel Who Served at Port Chicago After Explosion Monday Night.” 20 Jul. 1944.

The Port Chicago National Memorial

Photo Credits: U.S. Naval Historical Center

Census Sometimes Little Help Tracking Migrations

I put my census form in the mail a little after the first of the month. I also scanned it, and I’m making some family group sheets to go with photographs.  All these items together will constitute our family’s census 2010 documentation.

Seventy-two years from now, family researchers may conclude that I have lived in the same county for an uninterrupted thirty years or more.  I was here on Census Day 1980, Census Day 1990, Census Day 2000, and Census Day 2010.  Of the six censuses on which I should appear including the present, four of them show me living in Sacramento County.  In fact, during that 30 year period of time, I have lived in Prince George’s County, Maryland; Pima County, Arizona; Suffolk and Norfolk counties in England; El Paso County, Colorado; Alexandria city, Virginia (twice); and Fairfax County, Virginia (basically in that order).  But somehow, I always manage to be back in Sacramento County at census time.

At the time of the 1970 census, I lived in Monterey County, California.   Before the 1970 census, I had spent more than half my life to that point, living in Bernalillo County, New Mexico.  At the time of the 1960 census, I actually lived in Karlsruhe, Baden-Wuerttemburg, Bundesrepublik Deutschland [Federal Republic of Germany, then popularly known as "West Germany"], very near the French border.

So in 1960, my family was among the 1,374,422 Americans living abroad. (Oops, make that 1,374,421 –Elvis had left the Bundesrepublik on March 1 before Census Day).  These consisted not only of military personnel and their dependents living with them, but included federal civilian employees stationed abroad and their dependents living with them; crews of vessels of the US merchant Marine at sea or docked at a foreign port; and private US citizens living abroad for an extended period and their dependents living with them.   In 1960, none of these people were enumerated stateside, and hence were not included in the apportionment of Congress.  (See Mills, Karen M., Americans Overseas in US Censuses, Technical Paper #62, US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1993, available at http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/overseas/techn62-1.pdf ).
My dad, an Army first lieutenant at the time, received a form like the one below, and filled it out.  He returned the form through his chain of command, and it, like all such forms, was eventually shipped to the Census Operations Center at Jeffersonville, Indiana.
1960 military census form

1960 military census form (back)

Census form used by military personnel overseas in 1960 (front and back)

One result of the 1960 census for my family was that the government had two different domiciles for us: the Census Bureau said we were domiciled “overseas,” and the Army said we were residents of Harris County, Texas, a place I had only visited for less than a week in my entire life to that point. What a country!

The rule about where to count Americans overseas, i.e., as part of their “home state” population or some “Americans abroad” population, has been different from time to time.  Starting in 1990, the rule was to count them as part of their home state population, which of course has an effect on congressional apportionment.  In 2010, the pre-1990 rule will be back in effect: Americans abroad will not be counted as part of their home states populations.

At the time of the 1950 census, my dad was a high school senior, and a census enumerator.  And I, well, I simply was non-existent.

No census shows me at the place of my birth or reflects the time I spent living in Marion County, Indiana.

Where were you during the censuses of the last fifty years?  How well does the census document where you’ve been?

Halloween Census Whacking

With the crisis of my father’s recent illness and the minor drama of my own, I feel like I’ve been way out of touch the last two weeks.  It’s time get back into the flow of things.   I thought  little census whacking for Halloween would ease my way back into writing.  So I went hunting for Vampires, Zombies, Ghosts, Ghouls, Goblins, Witches and Pumpkins.

Vampires

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the incidence of Vampires is extremely low in the United States.  In 1880,  four Vampires: Otto; Jean; Julianne; and Mary, all in their twenties, were living in Cheyenne,  Wyoming.  They claimed to be actors. In 1870,  there was just one Vampire in the United States, 26 year-old machinist George Vampire.  Of course he lived in New York City.   What happened to these five Vampires  in the 20th century?  Were they forced to leave or did they on their own just pull out up stakes and leave?

According to the World Names Profiler (WNP), Germany and the United States have the greatest incidence of Vampires in the world.  Germany’s statistic is 0.04 per million, while in the U.S., the figure is 0.01 Vampires per million people.  Regionally, the American Vampires are located in Oklahoma, according to the WNP.  The Sooner state has a Vampire index of 1.04 per million.  With a 2008 estimated population of 3,640,000 or so,  there would be about four Vampires in Oklahoma.   I found in public records three listings in Lawton, Oklahoma, for Madonna Vampire.  Unfortunately for her, there are at least thirty people named Buffy in Oklahoma presently.

Zombies

Nearly all the Zombies in the census records turned out to be mis-transcriptions of other names.  The WNP reports no Zombies in the United States.  Public records reviews show about 14 Zombies in various places around the country.

Ghosts

Kraft Ghost of Fayette County, Pennsylvania, and Leonard Ghost of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, both listed on the 1790 federal census appear to be the first two Ghosts in America.  But in the 1900 census, the number of Ghosts expands exponentially.  Most of these “new” Ghosts are Native Americans in the upper Midwest.  The WNP indicates a Ghost index of 18.29 per million in South Dakota and 3.37 per million in Nebraska.  South Dakota’s estimated 2008 population was 804,000, which would yield about 15 Ghosts. Public records reveal about 17 Ghosts in South Dakota (when obvious duplicates are eliminated).

Nebraska’s estimated population is about 1.8 million, suggesting something a bit more than six Ghosts.  I was able to find only one Ghost in Nebraska in public records. The rest seem to have vanished.

And how about Pennsylvania where it seems to have begun for Ghosts in America?   WNP’s Pennsylvania Ghost index is 2.58 per million.   That would mean about 32 Ghosts presently among Pennsylvania’s estimated 12.45 million folks.  I was able to identify 25 Ghosts in Pennsylvania public records after eliminating duplicates and two entries which appeared to refer to religious organizations.

Ghouls

Apparently, the first Ghoul in America was 66 year-old Christian Ghoul of Maryland, a German immigrant.  He appears on the 1870 census.  Few other Ghouls seem to have been counted until the 1900 census, where like the Ghosts, the Ghouls grew rapidly in number.  And like the Ghosts, most of the “new” Ghouls were Indians, living primarily in Tehama County, California.

When it comes to Ghouls, the United States doesn’t even register in the WNP top ten. (Number one is France, with a Ghoul incidence of 4.59 per million; Switzerland is a distant second at 1.92 per million, supporting evidence that the Gauls may be the most Ghoulish people on Earth). (Hey, I just report the facts!)

Within in the U.S., however, Ghouls seem to be concentrated around Las Vegas and Chicago, at least according to the WNP.  Clark County, Nevada, which includes Las Vegas, and Will County, Illinois, adjacent to Chicago, were the only two counties in which the WNP found any Ghouls at all. Curiously, public records show no Ghouls in Nevada and six in the Chicago area.  Overall, public records indicate something more than 100 Ghouls in America presently, with perhaps as many as 10% of those in California.   This is the biggest disparity I’ve ever seen between WNP data and public records. [The WNP's FAQs state: "All our names and location data are derived from publicly available telephone directories or national electoral registers, sourced for the period 2000-2005."]

Goblins

A man named Goblin was first in recorded in New York City in the 1850 census.  In 1860 there was still just one Goblin on the census and that was 14-year-old Lucinda Goblin who lived with the Davenport household in Columbia, Missouri.  But just 10 years later, the 1870 census showed that three fourths of the (four) Goblins in the USA lived in North Carolina.  By 1900 however, the number of Goblins in America had increased nearly eight-fold to a total of 33, to be found in every region of the country.

Globally, the number of Goblins in the U.S. doesn’t make the slightest statistical ripple, using WNP data.  Number one is France, again, with  0.2 Goblins per million.  The United Kingdom is far, far, behind with 0.02 per million.

Witches

We all know the history of Witch hunts in America. Surprisingly enough however only one Witch appears on the 1790 census and that would be Peter Witch of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania (just what is it with Pennsylvania and Lancaster in particular?).  There was also a Witch in Rutledge County, Alabama, in 1790.  By 1900, Witches were routinely enumerated in the census all over the country.  Sadly, two of them were little boys: Jacob Witch, 10 years old, and his brother, Henry Witch five years old, who were apparently in an orphanage in Las Galinas, Marin County, California.

Turns out that there are far more Witches in the U.K. and Canada than in the USA (the only countries reporting any Witches at all).  The British Witch population (0.5 per million) is concentrated in Newport (Casnewydd), Wales, and the southwest jurisdictions of North Somerset, Bath and Northeast Somerset, as well as the City of Bristol.  There are also a few Witches in Surrey.

According to WNP, Manitoba’s  Witch frequency of 2.93 per million accounts for the whole of Canada’s 0.23 per million Witch index. Manitoba has an estimated population of 1.2 million; all of Canada consists of 31.6 million people. Mathematically, that does not work out.  Unfortunately the WNP provincial map of Manitoba gives no further details.

The U.S. Witch frequency is a comparatively minuscule 0.04 per million.  WNP finds Witches concentrated in Dickinson County, Kansas, and Howard County, Maryland.  A public records search reveals about twelve Witches in  the USA (eliminating commercial enterprises like plumbing and construction ["Ditch Witch"] and fast food restaurants [Fish Witch"]).  None of the Witches were found in Kansas and of the two in Maryland, neither was in Howard County.

Pumpkins

John Pumpkin appears as the only one of his surname on the 1820 census.  He lived in Fayette Count, Kentucky.  Virtually no other Pumpkins are found in the census until 1880.  In that year, Pumpkins were concentrated in two areas of the country: Fresno County, California, and Greene County, Georgia.  The latter jurisdiction included a young lady, 15 years old, named  Etta Pumpkin.  Following a pattern that we’ve seen before, the 1900 census showed a huge increase in the number of Pumpkins in America. Again this had to do with the number of Native Americans enumerated on the census in that year.  The Indian Pumpkins were primarily on reservations in the upper Midwest.  By 1910, however, they were concentrated in Madera County, California, and Cherokee County, Oklahoma.  The Oklahoma Pumpkins included one Mary Pumpkin Gritts.

The WNP data shows the expected distribution of Pumpkins in the USA based on historical data.  South Dakota, Montana, and Oklahoma are leading Pumpkin states, based presumably on the frequency of the name among Indians.

Other “Important” News

While I was whacking away on Halloween themes, I started wondering about some other things. Not only did I find unexpected discrepancies with the usually reliable World Names Profiler, but I also now have reason to question the competence of the Census Bureau, whose data report not a single Fool, Clown, or Jackass has ever been enumerated in Washington, D.C.

Confidential Marriage in the United States

Even If There Is No Record, There Still Might Be A Marriage

Another issue for genealogists to consider is that of “confidential marriage.”  In California, a couple who have lived together may obtain a so-called “confidential” marriage.  They need only apply at the county clerk’s office or before a notary specially trained in confidential marriage procedures and claim that they have lived together prior to being married.  The California Family  Code has no time provisions for the cohabitation.  The couple then will receive a confidential marriage license.  Once the marriage is solemnized, the couple may apply for a copy of their confidential marriage certificate.

Confidential marriage records are not open to tje public.  Only the parties to the marriage may obtain these records, except by order of a court.

The question has been asked why, in this era where many, perhaps most, couples have cohabited prior to marriage, would someone want a “confidential marriage”?  The answers vary.   Some say certain people just want the privacy.  Others say that in some cases where pregnancy has resulted before marriage, the couple can keep that fact away from their children later on.  On a California notaries website, I found the story of a couple who had been married in another country in a manner that California did not recognize (this would be  a very rare and unusual situation since California law provides that ” A marriage contracted outside this state that would be valid by the laws of the jurisdiction in which the marriage was contracted is valid in this state.”) So this couple needing to be legally married some time later, opted for a confidential marriage.

There was a time in California and many other states that a “waiting period”  was required between the issuance of a marriage license and the marriage ceremony.   California and many of the other such states also required blood tests of one or both of the parties, most usually for rubella, or in some states, venereal diseases.   These tests generally are no longer required, but in the day, the confidential marriage was a way around them. (The District of Columbia and Mississippi still require blood test for both partners; Montana requires a test for the bride only; New York requires sickle-cell test of all African-American and Hispanic couples).

A California notary opined on the above-mentioned notaries chat forum that confidential marriages seem to occur most frequently in resort areas that have wedding chapels used by people who elope.  I think that’s probably correct.  My first encounter with the concept came when  I (as a former judge) performed a marriage ceremony at Lake Tahoe, California.

There’s another reason for a confidential marriage–not indulged in by the vast majority of people, but it occurred to one particular woman.   According to the U.S. Attorney’s office in Sacramento, Janet Manser-LaMont purchased a confidential marriage license in 1991 and for the next fifteen years, fraudulently received more than $130,000 in Social Security benefits by claiming she was unmarried.

California is the only state that presently permits confidential marriage.  Other states may have authorized it in the past, but I don’t know specifically.   Readers may recall having seen reference in this earlier post to a marriage license of a certain well-known individual who got married in Missouri; the handwritten words “Please do not publish” appear on the face of the document. Below, presented for what I believe is the first time publicly, is that marriage license.

aurandt marr

Marriage License issued to Paul Harvey Aurandt (aka “Paul Harvey”) and Evelyn Betts (aka Lyn “Angel” Cooper)

Ste Genevieve County, Missouri, August 1940

(click to enlarge)

Los Angeles County Record Request Requirements–Just Quirky? Or Unconstitutional?

I was alerted to this issue by a commenter on the Find-A-Grave California Discussion Forum.

If you go in person to the main office of the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder in Norwalk, California, and ask to view their birth, death, or marriage records, you will be required to sign a form similar to the one below (the example is for birth records, but the ones for death and marriage records contain the exact same provisions)

Los Angeles County Application to Examine Records

Los Angeles County Application to Examine Records

(click image to enlarge)

Frankly, I don’t understand most of what’s here in the section after “Please read and sign the following”.

The first item is somewhat clear, but I wonder why L.A. County wants researchers to sign it?  What effect, other than a potentially chilling one, would this have on a researcher’s ability to characterize, analyze, or describe data contained in the records?

The second item is extremely confusing.  What is meant by “any technical descriptions of the birth or death record indices”?  What are the descriptions provided by the State Department of Health Services and how would a researcher know if they are “consistent” with whatever?

I might understand that item #3 is designed to discourage commercial use of the information (a common, but  dubious governmental objective).  What, however, is meant by the phrase “otherwise transfer”?  Does that mean if I have received certain information from L.A. County’s records, I can’t tell you what it is?

Item #4 is the only one that makes any sense.

The most objectionable requirement is the fifth one, that the researcher “not post information from the [records] on the Internet.”  There is no statutory basis for this requirement that I could find in California law. Furthermore, even if
there is a statute permitting the county to impose this requirement, it’s likely unconstitutional as a violation of the First Amendment’s guarantees of free speech and free press.  It serves no compelling governmental interest sufficient to overcome an individual’s constitutional rights.  And how would the county enforce it?  Could they get an injunction blocking proposed publication on the Internet? Or a court order requiring a researcher to remove the information from the Internet?  Not likely.

Note that a researcher could broadcast the information on television or radio, or post it on a billboard in downtown Los Angeles, or publish it on the front page of the Los Angeles Times, or even email it to a million people.  You just  can’t post it on the Internet!

What makes this form all the more amazing is that persons ordering records by mail are not required to sign any such similar form!  At this link is the document needed to order records by mail from Los Angeles County.

To use the words we lawyers love to use, the Los Angeles County form contains provisions which are vague and overbroad, arbitrary and capricious, and an unlawful infringement on the right to free expression under the U.S. and
California Constitutions.  I would not sign such a form.

For this bit of foolishness, Los Angeles County and its Registrar-Recorder, Dean C. Logan, have earned a place in the Public Records Hall of Shame.  Let’s hope they redeem themselves soon!

Names, Places & Most Wanted Faces

I started this with a note on Facebook and it was suggested that it would make a good meme for bloggers.  The idea is to publicize your surnames and locales to see if anyone elseknows something about them.  For me on Facebook, I got several research-helpful replies. So how much better to take it to a wider audience.

List the surnames you are researching and the general localities.  Then tell the names of your “Most Wanted Ancestors,” that is, the ones you most want to find behind that brickwall.   (You can tag people if you want; I’ve chosen not to do that here so that all readers are included).   Let’s see your lists; maybe we can each help someone out!

Surnames & Locales:

MANSON: Georgia (Talbot, Taylor & Upson Counties) Texas (Milam, Midland Counties)
BOWIE: Louisiana (Cataholua, Avoyelles, Monroe, Rapides Parishes) Texas (Gregg, Harrison Counties)
BIRDSONG: Georgia (Talbot, Upson Counties)
BRAYBOY: Louisiana (Caddo, De Soto Parishes) South Carolina
BRYANT: Texas (Aransas, DeWitt, Nueces, Refugio, San Patricio Counties)
GILBERT: Missouri (Clay, Jackson, Platte Counties)
GINES: Louisiana (Bossier, Caddo, Tensas Parishes) Mississippi (Claiborne, Hancock, Hinds, Pearl River, Walthall Counties) Texas (Harris, Nacogdoches Counties)
JOHNSON: Missouri (Clay, Jackson, Platte Counties)
LeJAY: Louisiana (Caddo, De Soto Parishes)
LONG: Kansas (Johnson County) Missouri (Jackson County)
MICHEAU/MISCHEAUX: California (San Mateo, Los Angeles County) Illinois (Randolph County) Missouri (St Louis)
SANFORD: Tennessee (Williamson County) Texas (Milam County)

Most Wanted Ancestors: Parents of Sarah GILBERT (b. 1849, Clay County, Mo); Parents of Richard William GINES (b. 1860, Bossier Parish, La); Parents of George MICHEAU (1813-1907; Prairie du Rocher, Ill.)

What about you?