From roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com Mon Aug 7 22:16:04 2006 Received: from mail.rootsweb.com (mail.rootsweb.com [192.168.65.34]) by admin.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k784G4jb022457; Mon, 7 Aug 2006 22:16:04 -0600 Received: from roots-l.rootsweb.com (roots-l.rootsweb.com [66.43.16.22]) by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k784G2V1007417 for ; Mon, 7 Aug 2006 22:16:02 -0600 Received: from roots-l.rootsweb.com (roots-l [127.0.0.1]) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k781aoFI014368 for ; Mon, 7 Aug 2006 21:36:50 -0400 Received: (from roots-in@localhost) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.8/Submit) id k781anrD014367 for roots-approved@rootsweb.com; Mon, 7 Aug 2006 21:36:49 -0400 Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [66.43.27.41]) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id k781IkFI014283 for ; Mon, 7 Aug 2006 21:18:46 -0400 Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) id k783vn9Y003223 for roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com; Mon, 7 Aug 2006 21:57:49 -0600 X-Envelope-From: marilyneb@gmail.com Mon Aug 7 21:57:49 2006 Received: from mail.rootsweb.com (mail.rootsweb.com [192.168.65.34]) by admin.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k783vnjb003212 for ; Mon, 7 Aug 2006 21:57:49 -0600 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.170]) by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k783vk9d000493 for ; Mon, 7 Aug 2006 21:57:46 -0600 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id m2so348785uge for ; Mon, 07 Aug 2006 20:57:45 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=lQ5xPBmGiRW/1S7SPQgRc5qTtHFadYGwNdoAmyUyMb2sMasZXKv/KaDqmQg7n7jrGCkS5mQTWAyeuX3K/q6NjV6i33AwMxoj2IKuNiqBd6RUJ7izI5zRoOcip01HMNmiszMXqjctGY2ZVfLEvD0xZlE4YmA5PBd1jboRQYAVdZ8= Received: by 10.67.22.2 with SMTP id z2mr9057602ugi; Mon, 07 Aug 2006 20:57:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.66.236.13 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Aug 2006 20:57:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <65d66f240608072057x37bfa9bbh79e0180338cf85fb@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 22:57:45 -0500 From: "marilyn e brown" Subject: Re: [ROOTS-L] Re: lost family in the 1880 census Cc: ROOTS-M@rootsweb.com In-Reply-To: <44D79D24.5010703@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed References: <200608071919.k77JJETq011272@lists5.rootsweb.com> <44D79D24.5010703@comcast.net> X-Spam-Score: 1.379 (*) BAYES_00,RCVD_BY_IP,UNDISC_RECIPS X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 192.168.65.34 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 192.168.65.34 Sender: roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com I had a similar situation. In searching for my mother's family in the 1930 census I had used every spelling for Garrett and soundex. Nothing came up where it should be. Then I entered the name Lenore with qualifying infomation and there they were. Garrett had been transcrib ed as Gavveat. I believe it to be an error in transcribing as the families in this area had been there for many, many years. There were few unknowns in the area. The use of rare first names can aid in finding that elusive family. Marilyne On 8/7/06, Carolyn Scott wrote: > > In the 1880 census, I scoured the country-side looking for the HOWSDEN > family, using 'exact' name, and 'Soundex,' and 'wild-card' searches. > The trick that worked for me was to do an exact name search on 'Minnie' > - the given (and most uncommon) name of a daughter in the household, > along with the state and county where they had been in 1870, but with NO > SURNAME. And, there they were!! Right where they were supposed to be! > And, why hadn't I been able to find them before? > Because they were indexed as K-E-O-W-S-D-E-N. > If doing the given name search had not worked, I would have done a > search by county and state, with NO name. (I was not looking forward to > that next logical step!) > > Carolyn Scott > Auburn, WA > mailto:ckscott3132@comcast.net > > > > >They may be listed with yet another spelling you have not discovered (I > have a > >few people that were counted twice in the same census which makes up for > the > >ones they missed ). Or as a more likely reason, they were missed when > the > >census was taken. I have one family I can not find it two consecutive > >censuses, they were in RI or MA but I can not find them, I find them in > RI > >before and after. > > > > > > > >