There can be a large difference between how the Census was *supposed* to be taken and how each census taker actually *did* the field work ;-)
I'm only familiar with the US censuses, but I know that the census takers did *not* always verify who *lived* in the house versus who was *in* the house the day of the census. My wife has at least two ancestors who were counted twice in pre-1900 censuses; in each case, the person was counted once at home and once at a grandparent's house on a different day. My maternal grandparents were counted twice in the 1920 Census - two census takers covered part of the same block. Unfortunately, having someone listed as a family member may or may not mean that they lived in that house. John > Tks to all who replied. I appreciate the help. One think though, I read an > article recently re Census in England that said that the Census > information > for the address was the people who NORMALLY stay their. That could mean > that > a person could be listed at that address on the night of the Census, but > not > actually be there. I was initially under the impression that it was only > those in the house on the night, but that might not be so. Any thoughts or > info? > Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
