Learn how to find your family in the 1820 census and how to read it!
Read the full story here
The 1820 Census provided for a separate enumeration of "foreigners not naturalized". If one checks the numbers in the aggregate reports from all of the then states, and adds up the numbers for each state of the various subcategories of "free white males", "free white females", "slaves" (reduced by 2/5ths to account for the infamous Three-Fifths Clause) , "free colored persons", and "all other persons except Indians not taxed", the totals equal what the summary records as the "total amount in each state and territory".
These latter totals DO NOT, however, include the numbers in the subcategory for "foreigners not naturalized". In other words, if you add in a given state's "foreigners not naturalized" to the total of the above subcategory numbers, one does not get the state's "total amount in each state and territory". This could mean one of two things:
1. "foreigners not naturalized" were separately counted in the 1820 Census, but were not included in the total Census population for each state in 1820.
2. "foreigners not naturalized" were separately counted in the 1820 Census, but their numbers were also buried in the counts for the population subcategory which, in each individual case, was applicable to him/her (for example, if an unnaturalized foreigner was a free white male aged 50, he would be included in the subcategory "free white males of forty-five and upwards") ; thus, "foreigners not naturalized", implicitly, were included in the total Census population for each state in 1820.
Do you have any insight into this problem - including any suggestions of where I might go to resolve it?
Eugene Van Loan
The short answer to your question is...I don't know for sure. From what I have been able to gather from my study, the total number of persons in a given state or territory would have included the foreigners not naturalized. Therefore, option 2 of your comment would be the answer. However, the way to know for sure is to check the laws pertaining to the 1820 U.S. Census and look for how the final numbers were to be tallied. You would likely find the information by looking up Statutes at Large for the U.S. in 1819 (or between 1811 and 1820) at Google Books, Internet Archive, or Hathi Trust. Good luck with your research!
I've pasted above a sample page from the 1820 census as taken in New Orleans. As you'll see on the example, the census marshalls/enumerators made numerous marks that look like ditto marks on virtually every page of the census in New Orleans. I have concluded that these are without import but wanted to ask whether you've seen this on 1820 census records in other areas, and also to ask your opinion on whether these marks have any significance? Thanks in advance for your help. Lili
That is a great question. Usually, ditto marks on a census mean the answer to a question is the "same as above." In this 1850 census example (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:S3HT-6L47-DMH), you will note that Daniel Painter was listed as having been born in "Ky" or Kentucky. The two other persons in his household have ditto marks in their Birthplace column and that means they too were born in Kentucky. However in the 1820 example you shared, the ditto marks represent "no input" just as you thought! The enumerator instructions for 1790-1840 were vague. They were not given direction as to whether to use a ditto mark, a zero, or just to leave the column blank if no one in the household fell into that age bracket and race/gender. It is likely the enumerator either took this liberty himself or the marshal of the area wanted it done that way.