What “chain migration” looks like
Somewhere around 1886, Auguste Paulina Graumüller and her husband Herman Franz Schreiner left their home in what is now the German state of Thuringen (Thuringia in English) and came to America.1 Auguste’s sister, Emma Graumüller Geissler, was The Legal Genealogist‘s great grandmother.
The Schreiners settled in Chicago where, in 1890, childless still by then, they brought her niece Hattie — Emma’s oldest child — to America to live with them.2
In 1904, Auguste’s sister and brother, Anna and Emil Graumüller, followed in the Schreiners’ footsteps, traveling on the SS Graf Waldersee, leaving Hamburg on 23 September 1904 and arriving at Ellis Island on 6 October 1904. Hamburg departure records show Anna Graumüller, age 36, “hausmadch.” (house servant), traveling with Emil Graumüller, age 39, “korbm.” (basketmaker).3 They gave their U.S. destination as Chicago, Illinois, and identified Franz Schreiner as a brother in law (“broth il.”) residing at Bischoffstrasse 4839 (4839 Bishop Street).4
Next, Anna went back to Germany and brought another niece — Elisabeth Graumüller — back to America with her in 1907.5
You can find most of these people in Chicago on the 1910 census.6 Emil may have been missed by the enumerators — at least I can’t find him in the census7 — but in December 1910, he filed a petition for naturalization in the U.S. District Court for Chicago, giving his address as 4839 So. Bishop — the Schreiners’ address.8
They were followed, in January 1923, by another niece, Hattie’s sister Elly, who arrived on the SS President Harding on January 17, 1923, and listed Hattie’s new husband, Paul Knop, as her relative in the United States.9
March of that same year brought another niece to America — Hattie’s and Elly’s sister, Martha Geissler Benschura, who arrived on the SS President Arthur.10
Martha’s sons Alfred and Willy then joined their mother in January of 1924, arriving on the SS George Washington.11
And it was that same ship — the SS George Washington — that brought the last of our family’s immigrants to America. Arriving on 6 February 1925, my grandparents Hugo Ernst and Marie (Nuckel) Geissler and my then-three-year-old father Hugo Hermann Geissler were the tail end of our particular immigration parade.12
These immigrants primarily spoke German at home. They sang in groups called the Damenchor. Their obituaries were published in German-language newspapers. They visited family back in Germany. They lamented the splintering of family caused by the Second World War.
Yet though these immigrants personally may not ever have fully assimilated in the United States, they most assuredly contributed directly and personally to this country.
In many cases, they married here in America.
They worked long and hard here in America.
They paid taxes here in America.
They sent their children to school here in America.
They — and their children — and grandchildren — and great grandchildren — are my family.
And their children — and grandchildren — and great grandchildren — most assuredly are fully assimilated and contribute directly and personally to this country.
We have served this nation in the United States Army, Air Force, Marines and Navy.
In the civilian service of the United States and of several states.
In the ranks of the medical profession. The legal profession. As educators. As scientists.
As parents.
And even as grandparents.
This is what my family looks like.
We are precisely what “chain migration” really looks like.
And we’re damned proud of it.
SOURCES
- See 1910 U.S. census, City of Chicago, Cook County, Illinois, population schedule, enumeration district (ED) 1272, p. 20A (penned), family 345, Frank Schreiner household; digital image, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 12 Jan 2018); citing National Archive microfilm publication T624, roll 275. ↩
- Manifest, SS Rhein, August 1890, page 7 (penned), passenger 329, Hedwig Geisler; digital images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 12 Jan 2018); citing NARA microfilm publication M255, roll 48. ↩
- Departure List, SS Graf Waldersee, page 1792, lines 23-24, Emil Graumüller, age 39, and Anna Graumüller, age 36; “Staatsarchiv Hamburg, Hamburg Passenger Lists, 1850-1934,” digital images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 12 Jan 2018), citing Staatsarchive Hamburg, 373-7 I, VIII A 1 Band 159 A, Seite 1792 (Mikrofilm Nr. K_1785). ↩
- Manifest, SS Graf Waldersee, page 31 (stamped), lines 29-30, Emil Graumüller, age 39, and Anna Graumüller, age 36; digital images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 12 Jan 2018); citing NARA microfilm publication T715, roll 501. ↩
- Manifest, SS Pretoria, 23 August 1907, stamped page 160, lines 13-14, Anna Nitschke and Elisabeth Graumüller; digital images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 12 Jan 2018); citing NARA microfilm publication T715, roll 972. ↩
- For the Schreiners and Hattie, see 1910 U.S. census, Chicago, Cook Co., Ill., pop. sch., ED 1272, p. 20A (penned), fam. 345, Frank Schreiner household. For Anna and Elisabeth, see ibid., fam. 344, Anna Nitckle household. ↩
- Not even by a line-by-line examination of the records for Enumeration District 1272, which encompassed the area where his sisters, brother-in-law and nieces lived. ↩
- U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Petition for Naturalization, Emil Graumueller, 29 Dec 1910; Records of District Courts of the United States, 1685-2009, Record Group 21, National Archives, Chicago. ↩
- Manifest, SS President Harding, 17 January 1923, stamped page 131, line 1, Elly Nasgowitz; digital images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 12 Jan 2018); citing NARA microfilm publication T715, roll 3244. ↩
- Manifest, SS President Arthur, 19 March 1923, stamped page 125, line 2, Martha Benschura; digital images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 12 Jan 2018); citing NARA microfilm publication T715, roll 3269. ↩
- Manifest, SS President Arthur, 19 March 1923, stamped page 125, lines 15-16, Willy and Alfred Benschura; digital images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 12 Jan 2018); citing NARA microfilm publication T715, roll 3439. ↩
- Manifest, SS George Washington, 6 February 1925, stamped page 59, lines 4-6, Hugo, Marie and Hugo Geissler; digital images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 12 Jan 2018); citing NARA microfilm publication T715, roll 3605. ↩
Wonderful description! Similar stories in my own family from Germany, Ireland, and Italy.
That is what chain Migration looked like a century ago. People came and they didn’t get anything just for being here….other than opportunities to work, dream, and make a life better than what they might have been able to achieve where they came from. It worked out beautifully for many of our families. The sacrifices of those first generation(s) here cannot be disputed. Most all of us have similar family stories. Somehow, the social policies of the US have evolved to the point where people can come….and their contribution is nothing close to the benefits they receive. And it is expensive. It is sucking the life out of our health care system, small towns and communities. I grew up in a rural town in WA… I have great respect for those who come here, work hard and participate in the American dream. But the social policies and benefits available today weren’t 100 years ago. Would that everyone that came added the value that many of our ancestors did 100-200 years ago….but it is a different time. And in many respects, it’s not the same at all. Chain migration does NOT look like this TODAY.
You’re right: it doesn’t look like this today. Today it’s much much much harder to bring family members over. Get the facts. Not the hype or the slogans. The facts. Every single person who enters the US under so-called “chain” migration policy must prove that he or she individually qualifies. Complete vetting.
Hype or slogans. Indeed. Perhaps chain migration is harder to achieve today. But what is “complete vetting”? (No hype or slogans please!) And the reason the country is in such a predicament to limit all immigration is because of complete failure to enforce immigration law as is. Thus, millions of undocumented immigrants continue to drain resources. I don’t blame anyone for coming. But we are not the America of 100 years ago. I can be thankful for the way it used to work/function… but clearly, it is a different day.
Lots and lots of checking. You can look at the green card procedures outlined at https://www.uscis.gov/greencard/green-card-processes-procedures. Very very few of our ancestors would ever have made it under these rules.
Correct. Whereas for my pre-20th-century immigrant ancestors there was literally zero vetting.
It’s very clear from my genealogical research that under the immigration rules and practices of recent decades several of my own immigrant ancestors never would have gotten into the U.S. And if we’re perfectly honest about it in a couple of cases they probably shouldn’t have! And the first part, at least, is true for virtually all of us in America who have European ancestry.
A very cogent presentation that likely parallels the family history of many of us. There are, however, a few things left out – among them the historical context both in the country of origin and in the United States. Only 30 or 40 years earlier the massive German and Irish migration to the US created a horrendous nativist backlash (which during the draft riots of 1863 devolved into similar Irish sentiments against the black population in NYC). Some of that had evaporated by the late 1880s when the Germans in your anecdote were arriving, in part because Germans were at least “white like us” and the new threat was the “swarthy complected” southern Europeans from Italy and the Slavic areas. [We ignore the yellow peril entirely in this retelling – I wonder what “Trumpeter” Elaine Chao and her hubby in Congress, for example, really think about immigration?] The suspicion of those “different from us” has never disappeared from American thought or, in fact, in any other country that I can think of. My German line had been in the US for 70 years but my father recalled the Federal investigators questioning his 90 year old German-speaking “grosmutter” in 1918 to make sure the family was really “American.” I got a laugh only last week after finding a close dna match – turned out to be a middle-aged guy born out of wedlock to a 16 year old 2nd cousin on my German side and adopted out to a childless couple. I looked at his Facebook page and couldn’t help but sigh at the irony – it was full of alt-right anti-immigrant invective. It was with some pleasure that I informed him that his not-even-dirt-poor great-grandparents arrived in the 1850s migration and lived their first years in slums of Five Points, Manhattan (the area depicted in Daniel Day Lewis’ movie, “The Gangs of New York” and where the draft riots began). I hope he can reconcile his family history with his political views . . .
Once again, Judy, you are right on target.
As genealogists, we must accurately record and reflect the truth of our family history. “No Irish Need Apply.” Or the anti-German crackdowns during WWI. Or…
Thank you, Judy, for putting a real human face on the concept of chain migration, and thank you, Wallace, for turning a spotlight on the way native-born Americans thought about the arrival of so many of our own immigrant ancestors at the time they came here.
I have been struck, in particular, by the way expressions of sentiment against Irish famine immigrants so closely resemble the arguments we hear today. Irish immigrants were viewed as lazy, good-for-nothings, addicted to alcohol and inclined toward violence. They were accused of grabbing a disproportionate share of the charitable resources intended for our own deserving (natibe-born) victims of genuine misfortune, not (like the Irish) misfortune of their own making due to laziness, stupidity and other bad habits. And Celtic ethnicity of the Irish, coupled with the fact that they were Roman Catholics, challenged our native-born ancestors’ vision of what American culture ought to be.
Our native-born ancestors didn’t see (and didn’t want to hear about) any potential benefit “these people” had to offer our country. With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, we can see that “these people” quickly became the backbone of professional Police and Fire Departments in Boston, New York and Chicago and all the other places where they settled, and punched above their weight when it came to the building of our nation’s armed forces. Take a look at the names of the members of the NYFD and NYPD who died at the World Trade Center on 9-11 and note how many of their surnames are Irish.
I am thankful for those unwanted Irish immigrants and the many physical and spiritual contributions they and their descendants have made, and I’m ashamed of my native-born ancestors for thinking “these people” and their families were a danger to our society. I’m equally ashamed of my present day neighbors who feel the same way my ancestors did about the current wave of immigrants from impoverished third world countries who don’t look like us, wear clothing that doesn’t look like ours, eat food that doesn’t smell like ours, speak a language we don’t understand, don’t go to our church, and just generally make us feel uncomfortable by their mere presence.
I guess what I’m trying to say with all those words can be summed up in a line from a song comparing raising children to planting a garden — “You don’t know until the seed is nearly grown, just what you’ve sown.”
No point scale can ever assess the true potential of immigrants from countries beset by poverty, corruption and other ills, because it has to be planted in fertile soil, watered, cared for, and allowed to grow in order for its full flowering glory to be revealed.
America has always benefitted, in the long run, from allowing new seeds the opportunity to be planted, to aspire, to work hard, and grow to become the best they possibly can be. Some have failed or fallen by the wayside, but most have ultimately succeeded, some spectacularly so, and our nation has been enriched.
Thank you! Right on target and not an expletive in sight!
Well, for the record, I did say we were damned proud. And we are.
You’re excused!
🙂
Well said–and very timely. As a retired ESL teacher, my guiding principle was to treat each of my students in the manner that I would treat my Irish immigrant great-grandfather, if he, as a child, was sitting in my classroom.
A great way to proceed, I’m sure.
Thank you, Judy! “We [do indeed] stand on the shoulders of those who came before us [no matter from where or how they came].
There has been some discussion about using the term “chain” as it implies slavery. Perhaps a better term could be used?
Many words have several meanings based on context. This is one of them. The phrase “Chain migration” has a well-understood meaning, so we needn’t deconstruct the phrase.
Because the term is being used as a pejorative by some, I have no problem adopting the more accurate modern term of family-based migration or the even more neutral serial migration.
Absolutely. And the rules today actually call it family-based migration. Genealogists often use the term serial migration.
Perhaps, although that is reading more into it than necessary – successive/unending links in a chain is the intended image. The term recently came into common usage specifically because, to those opposed to the concept embodied in the official immigration term “Family unification,” it suggests (to them) a pejorative connotation and an undesirable result and will serve to rile the base. The President and others have specifically used the term in the past few days. Judy’s use of the word here, in refutation of the hate mongerers, says simply, “call it what you will, without that very concept we would not be the nation [we would like to think] we are.” Sometimes you have to use the language of hate to overcome that hate.
“Chain migration” is a term that has used by historians and sociologists for decades. Check Google Scholar; there are hundreds of scholarly articles written using this term. It is a perfectly legitimate description of the phenomenon of serial migration that in no way implies anything having to do with slavery. To superimpose another meaning on an already well-defined and accepted term is specious.
Language isn’t static. What was acceptable once may not be any more. A term that meant something very specific at one time may mean something very different at another. It’s … um … specious to suggest otherwise.
You can use the term all you want, but it marks you as someone of a certain ideological leaning. If that’s your intention, it’s perfectly appropriate to telegraph it.
If the perjorative meaning is not your intention, don’t use it. It makes people outside of geneolgical circles think you’re an anti-immigration bigot.
Honestly, I think Dick Durbin made that reference to slavery up on the fly in an intent to point out that immigration includes people of African origin. Nevertheless, if a phrase is troubling to a group of people, it’s polite to retire it if we have something more accurate and less negative.
Although I have no problem with the term chain migration (invented by geneolgists as a way of explaining a research method!) it has taken on a discriminatory, perjorative meaning in certain circles.
The US’s stated immigration policy is called “family reunification.” It is preferred because it is legally accurate and does not have the same negative connotation.
Think of the evolution of the use of the word “Gay.” “Chain migration” may be accurate enough, but if we have words that are more precise and have less negative connotation, we should use them.
I am active in immigration legal circles. Any time I hear someone use the term “chain migration,” I make certain assumptions about which media they consume and their ideological leanings.
In short, use of the term “chain migration” is a strong indicator that one is a xenophobic nativist. Unless I have other experiences with the speaker, I assume they are not a very nice person. Geneolgy is a weird niche than can go either way, but it’s best to not present oneself in a negative light out of ignorance.
Thank you Judy. I needed this rational post today!
Great blog. Half my ancestry arrived in the US from Europe during the 2nd half of the 19th century in some very complicated chain migrations. Funny thing — they turn out to have been people, some more “productive” than others. The “less productive” ones were usually the ones who assimilated most quickly. The hard working ones who were more “productive” often took longer to assimilate, perhaps because they were working so hard. But in the end, they all contributed something, and they were my ancestors. Just like the other half of my ancestry, who arrived as immigrants in earlier centuries.
As for immigration today, an interesting exercise is to check yourself against the qualification requirements. How many of us would qualify? (I wouldn’t.)
It would be informative to have an immigration attorney speak on the present issues involved in immigration, legal as well as illegal.
My daughter-in-law’s great-grandfather and family were held for special inquiry in 1906 because he only had $1 with him. They were released when an older son already here agreed to be financially responsible for them. Otherwise, they would have been sent back to Russia. So it appears there were some requirements then.
Wow…now THAT is interesting!
Yup, there were some requirements (no polygamists, for example) fairly early on, plus financial and medical restrictions. Things tightened dramatically with the start of the visa program in 1924.
Before or after 1924, the question was “do you have any family or friend here expecting you?” If not, you’d likely be rejected (unless you had enough money/skills to make it on your own).
The full range of questions asked can be seen on the passenger manifests. They included questions about friends and family, education, health, political views and more.
I share your pride, Judy. If not for chain immigration “back in the day,” I wouldn’t exist.
Literally.
Thanks for the terrific explanation and diagram. Well done, as usual.
Cinda
(A fellow damned proud descendant)
There are a lot of us out there!
Well written! My Matuska Family came to America in the 1870’s, and first settled in the Bohemian speaking section of Chicago. The Bohemians had their own cultural publications, music and Catholic Church. Chain migration, after crossing the Atlantic, was to populate farming communities in Minnesota and Iowa. The Catholic Church in Jackson, MN had two alter societies: English and Bohemian. Many of the older immigrants never learned English, but nevertheless sent men to fight in both World Wars.
So many of our immigrant ancestors played such a big role.
Say guess who is a product of chain migration into this country? Starting with an ancestor whose reason to come here was draft dodging which ended up getting him deported out of his home country…
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/21/trump-grandfather-friedrich-banished-germany-historian-royal-decree
There’s a gene for that . . . 😉
I’m so glad to see this! I have a steamer trunk that I use as a coffee table. My grandfather’s aunt sailed, alone, at age 17 from Ireland. She found work as a domestic and sent steamer tickets to her siblings in Ireland. Ultimately, 5 of them came to Chicago. They still faced No Irish Need Apply and anti-Catholic discrimination. The trunk ended up being used to store snowmobile gear at her nephew’s lake house. Think about that – from a domestic whose every possession had to fit in that trunk to it being used in a second home to store recreational clothes within a generation. I’m descended from Germans from Russia on another side. The ones left behind were genocided within a generation.
3 of my 4 grandparents have stories like that one. I can actually trace the other’s lineage to the Mayflower. And there was a subsequent family migration from that!
Between 1890-1910, 50% or more tickets to America were bought by friends or relatives in the US.
We’re all products of chain migration in one way or another. That’s a good thing – immigrants are incredibly brave people – they leave behind almost everything to start over. Someone has to be there to help then start their new lives.
Immigrants used to be met at the train station by their relative, who would then take them home to live with them for a time. If the family had not already arranged a job, they often went down to the church and someone connected them with a job. They’d find housing from there. Sometimes they got around to filing papers. Often, they didn’t, but they worked, and raised families.
Also, an immigration primer – there are 228,000 family preference visas available every year. Theoretically, a naturalized citizen could sponsor 10 siblings, but there are only 228,000 visas. The line is 20 years long for some countries. You have to be a citizen to sponsor siblings and adult children. You must be a legal permanent resident (green card) for 5 years to apply for citizenship. That takes another 12-18 months. THEN you can petition to apply for a visa for a relative. That takes anywhere from 3-20 years to get to the application stage. That takes anywhere from 12 months to 3 years to go through all the interviews, security checks, proof that you will not be a burden on society, medical exams, etc. The sponsoring family member also goes through interviews and has to submit evidence that they can support the family member they are sponsoring.
So, if Jose does everything as soon as possible and perfectly, it’s a minimum of 27 years from the date he emigrated to the US before his sister gets an immigrant visa. If you’re Lee from China it drops to about 12 years. It’s about 8 for Europeans.
No employer sponsor or family member? If you’re from a country without a lot of immigration to the US, you can try a one in 400 chance of getting one of 50,000 diversity visas.
None of those? Sorry, do not pass go.
If we had today’s immigration policies a 100 years ago, most of us would have very different lives, if we had them at all.
There is no cap on the number of parent visas that can be issued, but the population self limits to about 130,000 visas a year. The US has 320 million people.
I think if this trunk often. I’m a lawyer who has done hundreds of hours of pro bono immigration work in the last year. Knowing my family’s story makes me more committed to making sure that other people have the same opportunities I do.
I love your steamer trunk. I wish everybody had one —
or some other tangible evidence of their own family history — to think about…
Judy, thank you so much for writing this post and for sharing the reality of “chain migration.”
I appreciate your efforts to correct the myth that the vast majority of immigrants entering this country are anything other than hard-working, good people who are making a significant commitment to society.
The mischaracterization of human beings serves no one well.
Just telling it as it is — and certainly as it was for my family, and so many others.