United States Census, 1870 (FamilySearch Historical Records)/Known IssuesEdit This Page

From FamilySearch Wiki

Revision as of 23:23, 11 October 2013 by Jbuckner (Talk | contribs)

Known Issues

Question #1: When I search this collection, why do I find duplicate records?
Answer #1: When the beginning of one locality is on the right-hand side of the image, the page on the left-hand side of the image is included from the previous locality; similarly, when the locality ends with the last page on the left-hand side of the image, the page on the right-hand side is the beginning of the next locality. Images for each locality include all pages. Images with first and last pages are repeated at the beginning and/or end of each respective locality, so no images are lost.

Question #2: When doing a search, if I enter the year 1870 in the residence search boxes I get zero results. If I leave the year blank I get several thousand results. Why is that?
Answer #2: Since this is the 1870 census there is no need to enter the year into the search box. Doing so blocks all search results.

Question #3: When the images are out of order, how can I find the page I want?
Answer #3: The best way to find the images when they appear to be missing, but are out of order is to scroll through the collection using the right arrow at the top of the image.

Question #4: Why can’t I search by county of residence nor do an “exact search” for the place of residence?
Answer #4: Those search filters are not available on this census collection.

Question #5: When searching for an ancestor in the Dakota Territory I found him linked to a large and unrelated family on the record details page. Can you clarify this?
Answer #5: There is an instance in the Dakota Territory where families with the household number of 140 are incorrectly linked together. They are linked to the correct image, however. They can be separated into families as follows:

  • Bon Homme > Bon Homme County - Image 17 - John Frederick, Catharine Frederick
  • Clay > Clay County > Image 57 > John L Jolley
  • Lincoln > Lincoln County > 125 > Michael Prater, Elizabeth Prater, Samuel Prater, Margaret H Prater, John Prater, Rosini Hamen, Willie Prater, George Hamer, Mary A Prater
  • Pembina > Pembina County > image 165 > Henry Andre, Mary Andre, Andre Andre, Battese Andre, Michael Andre, William Andre, Henry Andre, Mary Andre, Louisa Andre, Michael Andre
  • Union > Elk Point > image 244 > Charlotte Collins, Elliott Collins, Herbert Collins, Gertie Collins, Joseph Sargent
  • Union > Sioux Valley > image 278 > Ole Anderson
  • Yankton County, part of > image 292 > Peter Rose, Emly Rose, William H H R Rose, Emly M Rose, John T Mcclure
  • Yankton > East of James River > image 329 > G Stephens, Lois Stephens, Mary Stephens, Walace Stephens, Fred Stephens, Geoie Stephens

Question #6: Some of the images in Georgia appear to be in reverse order. How do I search these images?
Answer #6: Nine (9) counties under Georgia in this collection (Burke, Butts, Calhoun, Camden, Campbell, Carroll, Chelsea, Catoosa, and Charlton) are loaded in reverse order. Within these nine counties, Image #1 is the last page for that locality. Pressing the right arrow moves the images backward, and pressing the left arrow moves the images forward. For example, when browsing Burke County, the images come up page 7, then page 6, then page 5, etc.

Question #7: I am looking for the images for District 1146 in Berrien County, Georgia. Can you tell me where I can find them?
Answer #7: The images located at the waypoint Georgia> Berrien > District 1146 are currently mislinked and take you to District 1156. District 1146 does not appear to be online at this time. Film #0545634 has these images and can be ordered at Online Film Ordering and viewed at a FamilySearch Center near you. We recommend you call ahead and verify hours and that they have the equipment to view the images. For instructions on ordering film please see: Ordering Microfilm or Microfiche

Question #8: I am looking for records for Massac County in Illinois. Where can I find them?
Answer #8: The images for Massac County were incorrectly loaded into the Mason County browse point. The following localities in the Mason County browse point are from Massac County:

Township 14 Range 3 Township 14 Range 4
Township 14 Range 5 Township 15 Range 3
Township 15 Range 4 Township 15 Range 5
Township 15 Range 6 Township 16 Range 5
Township 16 Range 6 Brooklyn

Question #9: I am unable to find some counties I am looking for. Is there a way to find these counties?
Answer #9: A number of counties appear to be missing; however, they can be found by searching as follows:

  • Lake County, Indiana – The towns of Cedar Creek, Centre, Eagle Creek, Hanover, Hobart, North, Ross, St. John, West Creek and Winfield are in Lake County, but images are included under LaGrange County.
  • Records for Monroe County Missouri are filed under Moniteau County Missouri. This includes the localities of Clay, Florida, Granville, Indian Creek, Jackson, Jefferson, Marion, Monroe City, Monroe Township, Paris, South Fork, Union, Washington and Woodlawn.
  • The records for Belmont County, Ohio can be found by searching in the browse collection under North Carolina, then Belmont, and the locality

Question #10: In some cases there appear to be too many individuals in one family. In other cases, families have been separated when they carried over to a new page. How can I find the correct images for family members?
Answer #10: Even though non-family members are linked as a family, when you click on each hyperlinked family member, you are taken to the correct image for that individual. There are various reasons why these anomalies can occur:

  • Often the census taker recorded information in such a way that it was difficult to tell where one family ended and another began.
  • In other instances there seems to be no explanation for the misplacement of names.
  • Often families continued across two pages and were separated on the indexed record details pages.
  • Because of the age and fragile state of the records, pages may have been loose and placed in the book out of order. Because of this families were linked incorrectly. For example, in the Indiana > St. Joseph > Olive browse point, images 29-32 were out of order in the book and so filmed that way. Because of that the families who carried across the pages were linked incorrectly.
  • Enumerator did not record the pages in order, causing the indexer to be unable to link families together correctly.

In all cases, the workaround seems to be to search the desired name, click on the name and the correct image is linked. Then you can search surrounding pages to match pages #s and find correct associations.

Question #11: When looking for an infant in Carroll County Indiana, I found him as the head of the household with another family. Where can I find his family?
Answer #11: In the following towns in Carroll County -- Deer Creek, Jefferson, Mortonsville, Pittsburgh, South Delphi, Tippecanoe, West Delphi -- the enumerator appears to have recorded the Dwelling and Family numbers incorrectly on the line above where the household began, causing children and/or grandparents of one family to be enumerated with the following families, and other possible errors. Record details pages seem to be linked to the correct image. When viewing the image, you should be able to find the full family by looking at the families immediately before and after the name in question.

Question #12: Why weren’t all of the pages for Watertown, Carver, Minnesota indexed?
Answer #12: During the indexing process the names on the right-hand side of image 17 were somehow skipped. However if you know that your ancestors were from Watertown, you would be able to find them by browsing through the images page by page for this town.

Question #13: In the Tennessee > Lauderdale > Ripley waypoint there are only 14 pages in the District. Are there more pages somewhere else?
Answer #13: The Ripley District appears to have been split when placed online. Pages 15-48 are located in the Civil district 02 waypoint.

Question #14: The images in the Wisconsin> Kewaunee >Ahnapee waypoint are too light to read well. Can this be fixed?
Answer #14: The problem here is the quality of the original film. A rescan would not improve the quality. Using the Invert option, when looking at the images on Historical Records, which flips the images from positive appearing to negative appearing, may help improve readability.

Question #15: I am finding households linked together incorrectly in Wyoming. Can you clarify this issue for me?
Answer #15
: There are cases in Wyoming where households are being linked together incorrectly because they share a common household number even though they are from different locations. This issue should be corrected in an upcoming republishing of the collection.

If you encounter additional problems with this collection, feel free to report them at support@familysearch.org. Please include the following information:

  • If searching a specific collection: please include the name of the collection; include all search criteria used, including name, event, dates and places.
  • If browsing this collection: please include the full path you followed to where the problem occurred. The browse path is located above the Image viewer window. 
    For example: United States Census, 1870 > West Virginia > Kanawha > Charleston > Image 27 of 100.
  • If you are reporting a technical issue: please include your operating system and browser version, such as Windows XP and Internet Explorer.

Your assistance will help ensure that future revisions will be considered.

Return to the United States Census, 1870 (FamilySearch Historical Records) Learn More page.

Return to the United States Census, 1870 collection at FamilySearch.org.


Need wiki, indexing, or website help? Contact our product teams.

Did you find this article helpful?

You're invited to explain your rating on the discussion page (you must be signed in).