The first one, that is
Have you, as a genealogist, offered up your most sincere thanks to the members of the United States Congress?
The Legal Genealogist has — a statement that may surprise those of you who’ve managed to figure out that this distinctly apolitical writer isn’t entirely fond of those who inhabit the halls of the Capitol building these days.1
But I have indeed offered up my most sincere thanks to the members of the United States Congress.
The members of the first United States Congress.
The ones that passed the Act of 1 March 1790.
The Act entitled: “An Act providing for the enumeration of the Inhabitants of the United States.”2
The very first United States census act.
It was enacted 125 years ago this month (edit: 225 — never was very good at math…), and provided in part
That the marshals of the several districts of the United States shall be, and they are hereby authorized and required to cause the number of the inhabitants within their respective districts to be taken; omitting in such enumeration Indians not taxed, and distinguishing free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, from all others; distinguishing also the sexes and colours of free persons, and the free males of sixteen years and upwards from those under that age;3
Every person who was a member of a family was supposed to be counted in that family, even if he wasn’t at home when the census takers arrived to take the count.4 There was supposed to be a separate column for those who lived in a particular district but didn’t have a settled place of residence.5
Every person over the age of 16 was legally required to cooperate with the census taker, and “obliged to render … a true account, if required, to the best of his or her knowledge, of all and every person belonging to such family…”6
Census takers were to be paid at the rate of one dollar for every 300 persons in the cities and one dollar for every 150 persons in the countryside.7 But if the population was really thin, then more could be paid but not more than one dollar for every 50 people.8
The chief census taker in each district was to be the U.S. marshal, and he was to file the returns on or before the first of September, 1791.9 Their pay for this ranged from a low of $100 in the district of Delaware to a high of $500 in the district of Virginia.10
Now this wasn’t exactly a charitable act, and it wasn’t for the benefit of future generations of genealogists. The United States Constitution provides that
Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three years after the first meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent term of ten years, in such manner as they shall by law direct.11
But because of that method of apportioning the members of Congress and beginning with the statute of March 1790, we as genealogists can celebrate the census.
So go thank the United States Congress.
The first one.
SOURCES
- Yeah, yeah, I know. I’ve made such a secret of the fact that today’s politicians of all stripes annoy me right down to my toenails. Sigh… ↩
- “An Act providing for the enumeration of the Inhabitants of the United States,” 1 Stat. 101 (1 March 1790); digital images, “A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774-1875,” Library of Congress, American Memory (http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/index.html : accessed 11 Mar 2015). ↩
- Ibid., §1. ↩
- Ibid., §5. ↩
- Ibid. ↩
- Ibid., §6. ↩
- Ibid., §4. ↩
- Ibid. ↩
- Ibid., §3. ↩
- Ibid., §4. ↩
- Article I, §2, Constitution of the United States. ↩
Just though I’d mention the first Congress didn’t have the text noted by footnote 11, since it was added in July of 1868 as part of the 14th Amendment.
Actually, the first Congress did have exactly that language. It was not added by the 14th amendment but rather superseded by the 14th amendment. (Section 2 of the 14th amendment changed it to: “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed.”)
I always thought the “3/5 clause” was part of the 14th. My bad.
If only they’d started out the 1790 census at the detail level of the 1850 census, or better yet, like the 1880 or 1900 censuses… Ugh… Haha. But yes, the pre-1850 censuses are certainly better than not having them at all. 🙂
Exactly: not what we wish they were but better than nothing!
Hello Judy,
Sadly, I understand that the 1790 census records for the states of Virginia, Georgia, Delaware, Kentucky, New Jersey, and Tennessee were destroyed when the British burned the Capitol in Washington during the War of 1812. Unclear if the 1800, 1810 records were also destroyed for those states.
Rebecca
Exactly how various census returns were destroyed may need serious research, but that there are some missing is beyond question. New Jersey, for example, doesn’t have any existing returns before 1830 except for a few sheets of the manufacturers’ census of 1820.
Hi Rebecca, i was hoping to correspond with regarding our common ancestors from Southwest Virginia.. Can you email me at baturner22@icloud.com ? Thanks!
It is certainly unclear how so many 1790 census records came to be lost, but I recall being taught that the original schedules were not in Washington, DC at the time of the British “visit” but were instead at the various federal courthouses, where they had been deposited by the marshals when the enumeration was finished. All that Congress had cared about were the summary statistics, so they would have had little reason to have wanted the raw data.
Of course, it is entirely possible that the courthouses had tossed out the original schedules years before 1814. It seems to me that a federal court clerk needing space is the most likely explanation for why NJ has no pre-1830 schedules.
I can only go with what the US Census Bureau says, Chad, and it says: “A complete set of the schedules for each state, with a summary for the counties, and in many cases for towns, was filed in the State Department, but unfortunately they are not now complete, the returns for the states of Delaware, Georgia, Kentucky, New Jersey, Tennessee, and Virginia having been destroyed when the British burned the Capitol at Washington during the War of 1812.” Bureau of the Census, Heads of Families at the First Census of the United States Taken in the Year 1790 … Virginia (Washington, D.C. : GPO, 1908), 3 (emphasis added).