Census Question

[Gary Barnett]

Can someone tell me at what point in the census process annotations such as 'inn', 'carver' and 'wash' above were added to the census form?

I understand why they were required (I think, having read this: http://www.visionofbritain.org.uk/census/Cen_Guide/4), but I can't get my head around when the notes would have made.

Gary

Edit: This is the wrong forum, sorry. I'm sure there is an answer to this particular question and that someone on here has the answer.

[Debra Arif]

[ATTACH]15897[/ATTACH]

Can someone tell me at what point in the census process annotations such as 'inn', 'carver' and 'wash' above were added to the census form?

I understand why they were required (I think, having read this: http://www.visionofbritain.org.uk/census/Cen_Guide/4), but I can't get my head around when the notes would have made.

Gary

Edit: This is the wrong forum, sorry. I'm sure there is an answer to this particular question and that someone on here has the answer.

Hi Gary.
It's a good question.
I could never understand why the additional details weren't just added wholly when the householders forms were copied over to the enumerators books, instead of being scrawled as an afterthought. Perhaps when an enumerator handed in his books that didn't include these specifics he was asked to add them to make sure his books complied with regulations? By that I mean maybe the householder originally included the specific 'waiter at an Inn' on his household form but when the enumerator copied the details to his book he just wrote 'waiter', later being asked to put the specifics back in.

[Gary Barnett]

Hi Gary.
It's a good question.
I could never understand why the additional details weren't just added wholly when the householders forms were copied over to the enumerators books, instead of being scrawled as an afterthought. Perhaps when an enumerator handed in his books that didn't include these specifics he was asked to add them to make sure his books complied with regulations? By that I mean maybe the householder originally included the specific 'waiter at an Inn' on his household form but when the enumerator copied the details to his book he just wrote 'waiter', later being asked to put the specifics back in.

Hi Debra,

Often the notes seem to be in the same hand as the original entry. I wondered whether it might be the other way around, the enumerator transcribed the data from the household forms and then used a different writing implement to add the neccessary refinements. Sometimes the notes seem rather superfluous. I've seen the word 'dress' written against dressmaker.

[Robert Linford]

Some info here :

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=aaY8AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA89&lpg=PA89&dq=census+enumerator+books+pencilled&source=bl&ots=b0iV9fREGz&sig=V6h64JPUrOTuxpu6oC2bv__NIis&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj6yrLCvZDLAhVItxoKHZU1B5gQ6AEIMTAD#v=onepage&q=census%20enumerator%20books%20pencilled&f=false

[Debra Arif]

Hi Debra,

Often the notes seem to be in the same hand as the original entry. I wondered whether it might be the other way around, the enumerator transcribed the data from the household forms and then used a different writing implement to add the neccessary refinements. Sometimes the notes seem rather superfluous. I've seen the word 'dress' written against dressmaker.

Was there a requirement to specify what area the occupation was in? For example clarify whether they were waiter in an Inn or restaurant or club?
I was thinking in cases where the enumerator had failed to copy over these specifics included by the householder then he might be asked by the head pen pusher to add those details back in, producing additional squeezed in notes in his own hand.

[Robert Linford]

Also here :

http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=275241.0

[Debra Arif]

Thanks Robert.
The first source does describe a practice where notes may have been added in pencil by checkers using the household schedules against the enumerators books.

[Gary Barnett]

I've chipped in on the Joseph Barnett thread over on Casebook. The Hostlers had two other lodgers called Potling whose places of birth were originally shown as NK. A note was added 'England not stated'. That seems like it was a doorstep conversation between the enumerator and the householder.

I suppose it could have worked both ways, but if an enumerator hadn't got the full story on the doorstep is it likely he would have the information to hand to make the notes subsequently?

[Gary Barnett]

Also here :

http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=275241.0

Thanks, Rob.

[Debra Arif]

I've chipped in on the Joseph Barnett thread over on Casebook. The Hostlers had two other lodgers called Potling whose places of birth were originally shown as NK. A note was added 'England not stated'. That seems like it was a doorstep conversation between the enumerator and the householder.

I suppose it could have worked both ways, but if an enumerator hadn't got the full story on the doorstep is it likely he would have the information to hand to make the notes subsequently?

I was working on the idea that the householder was left a form he filled in himself which was collected and then copied into the enumerators book but there must have been cases where an enumerator had to fill in the details for a householder who couldn't read or write and didn't know anyone else who could. I think even now if someone hasn't filled a census form in on time there are people who go round and help them fill one out there and then?

[Robert Linford]

Well currently if anyone has a problem owing to linguistic or disability issues etc then a census worker will go to their home to help.

Then there are those who simply haven't returned their form and then I think there's a push to get them to fill in the bare minimum acceptable.

Here's a doc from 1891 - a lodging house managed by William John Cragg. What a nightmare!

[Robert Linford]

Er - How, please resize.

[Gary Barnett]

'The class of lodgers are those whose statements it is impolitic to question'.

[Gary Barnett]

At the risk of sounding like a stuck record, one of the more frequent notes is the word 'cats' written beside the occupation of horsemeat dealer/purveyor etc. The same individuals often fail to mention the C word on marriage/birth certs, so I assumed it was a case of the enumerator unmasking the euphemism.

(BTW, the reason I'm curious about this has nothing to do with cats' or any other kind of meat.)

[R. J. Palmer]

This is neither here, nor there, but I challenge anyone to find a worse page in any UK census than this. It looks like evidence of a horrible crime.