The Case of the Crazy Census Records for the Hendryx Family 4.2.2017
/During my time of research, I have seen some crazy census records omissions or errors here and there, but never have I seen errors every single time a family was surveyed for the national count. The Hendryx family was visited by the specter of mangled forenames and surnames over and over again, so much so, that no one on Ancestry, to date, has ever found the family’s 1870 census records until now. I found them, but it took considerable effort sifting through familysearch.org to do so (it is easier to find missing families at family search, the search tools are more forgiving at the site when dealing with mangled names).
Another factor adding to the confusion is that it seems that a number of the family members have nicknames, and depending on the particular census, the names given are transitory. The mess, that is this family’s census records, even made it hard to determine how many children were born to the parents. Usually one round of census records are good enough to help clean up a mess with other years – that is one solidly capable census taker getting the majority of facts straight can help to answer questions about anomalies on other years, but when ALL of the records are messed up, it creates a frustrating quagmire.
One of the challenges facing this family is that most of the children are born between two census cycles, and then they were coming into their prime just about the time of the 1890 census. Since most of the 1890 Census went up in flames, we are missing valuable information that might have helped to solve some of the mysteries.
While I can’t say for sure that I am right on all accounts, I feel pretty confident that I have a good idea of the general flow of events, by reestablishing the basic facts of this family from the available records. What follows is the reconstruction of the bare family timeline that I created, because I could not find anyone else on the Internet who had assembled this information.
I used the following sources:
Ancestry member profiles (only as clues – I verify EVERYTHING I find using this method)
Census records
Clues left behind in family photos, cards, and other ephemera found in the Johnson family photos albums that I have from Bettie Schmidt.
The Crume family portrait as titled by an Ancestry member on their profile – Taucross1969. It is really a partial Hendryx family portrait of that time, with the addition of one Crume grandson. I cross referenced this photo with the few that I have of the Hendryx family from my own collection.
One other photo of one of the other Hendryx daughters family’s.
Findagrave.com records – fortunately almost the entire family, including spouses, is buried in a family plot in Bellevue, Sarpy County, Nebraska very near to where they lived.
Old newspaper records from newspapers.com
Marriage
Thomas Hendryx and Rosa Gibbs both show up in the 1850 and 1860 census records. They are married on March 28, 1861 in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Their first child is born in 1863. All of the children are born between 1863 and 1873, so the 1870 and 1880 census records are very critical.
The 1870 and 1880 Censuses
This record was seemingly missing from the collective family research community – no one has it listed on Ancestry.com. I found it listed nowhere, until I went sifting for it at Family Search, the LDS website. I searched under every common misspelling while keeping the location the same. I knew from newspapers.com that the newly married couple moved to Bellevue, Sarpy County, Nebraska just at the outset of the Civil War and that Thomas lived in the same area the rest of his life (this was learned from Thomas’ obituary). So after spending some time searching, I found the family. I used the other census records and the pile of other research to authenticate this census record. It listed:
1870 1880
Thos C. Hendricks 39 Thomas Hendryx 49
Louisa Hendricks 39 Rosa A. Hendryx 49
Miranda B Hendricks 6 Miranda Hendryx 16
Clara J Hendricks 4 Clara D. Hendryx 14
Delia J Hendricks 2 Amelia I. Hendryx 12
Willis E Hendricks 2 William E. Hendryx 12
Willis I. W. Hendryx7
“Thos” is a common abbreviation of Thomas and the age listed at 39 is absolutely right on if he was born in 1831, which we know from other records is likely correct. The last name is misspelled, but anyone named Hendryx is used people messing up the name. Hendricks is a VERY common alternative spelling of the name, so that is easy to accept. The next issue is the “Rosa” vs. the listed “Louisa.” I will assume it was Thomas who reported the information to the census taker, and it is clearly possible with midwestern accents of the Great Lakes, and a census taker from who knows where mistaking a mumbled or fast spoken “Rosa” as “Louisa.” This is easy to accept if the census taker didn’t confirm the name. The next name on the list is the eldest child Miranda, and that is very easy to confirm. The same name appears on the 1880 census of the family and the ages on both census records match. Whew! The issue though is that “Miranda” seems to disappear after that point. However, that mystery is pretty easy to clear up. In the family grave plot, there is a “Minnie” Hendryx who was born in 1863 and died on September 18, 1959. Minnie is a known nickname for the Miranda’s of the world. So they are most likely one and the same person. Additionally, they must have named “Minnie” after Rosa’s mother, because her name was Miranda as well. Next we have “Clara J” listed. The 1880 Census also lists a Clara, but is a Clara “D.” The “J” variation on the 1870 Census is correct. Her burial and death records confirm the initial. After examining the actual 1880 Census records, I am confident the transcriber mistook a slopping “J” for a “D.” Additionally, the ages of the two Clara’s from the 1870 and 1880 records fit the listed age progression consistently.
Where we get into a big mess in reconciling the two census records is with the last 3 children. Let’s fix the easiest of the three first. “Delia,” and “Amelia,” are pretty easy to figure out, because the census taker misunderstood the name of the child in the 1870 Census, and the names are remarkably similar if you in that they are both “elia” names and rhyme. The ages listed make sense too. From other records, the “Amelia” child is actually Lelia I. Hendryx Johnson, my Great Great Grandmother. I am unsure whether she was originally named Amelia, and like most of the rest of the children had a nickname that stuck, or her name really was Lelia all along and the census takers just had it in for her. Regardless, she went by Lelia her entire adult life and up unto death. The last child in the 1870 Census, and the next to last child in the 1880 Census is a very eerie and strange mistake that made me gasp. First of all “Willis” of the 1870 Census seems to be a twin of “Delia,” who we now know is actually Lelia. You can see the twin status matches the same results on the 1880 Census. The difference is that the same child is “William” in the 1880 census. So from that you might conclude that the twins were a fraternal sister/brother combination, but you would be wrong. From other records including death certificates and photos that I have in my possession, the twins are girls. So the census taker really screwed up the twins name each time, making “her” into a “him” in both cases. In reality, the twin’s name is Lillian. Of course, by now, you might expect she would have a nickname, and you would be right. Her nickname was “Lillie.” So the census taker might have heard “Willie” instead of Lillie and of course “Willie” would really be a “William.” Now for the eerie part. In the 1870 Census, Lillie is listed as “Willis,” and yet 13 years later Lelia and Lillie and the other children would have a little brother name who was indeed in actual fact Willis. Talk about an amazing coincidence and a source or extreme confusion.
The 1900 Census
Thomas C He* 69
Rosa A He* 69
Miranda E He* 35
Willis J He* 27
The 1900 Census for this family is hard to find, but not nearly as bad as the 1870 version. The transcribers were unable to read the handwriting of the census taker and listed the family as “He*”. But the family is in the right place, the names are right, and the eldest child Miranda (Minnie) and Willis are still living at home with Thomas and Rosa. The ages also match. Finally, the middle initials all match up with other sources including burial and death records. The interesting thing that you can see illustrated in this census record, is that both Miranda and Willis never seemed to marry. Miranda died with her maiden name and Willis is buried in the family plot without a spouse, whereas the other daughters, who did marry, are buried in the same family plot with their husbands. Also, the photos I have of Willis are always with another family member, and not with any spouse or children. From other records, I can definitely prove that Clara, Lelia, and Lillie all married and had children. There are records of many descendants of each of the daughters who married, including myself.
Clara married Roland A Miner; Lelia married George Johnson Sr., and Lillie married Charles Crume. Thomas died in 1902 and Rosa lived in the house, after his death, until sometime after 1916 and before 1920. From the 1920 Census record, it is clear that Rosa went to live with Lillie and Charles Crume, which I learned from death records and his obituary. It seems that Willis lived with Rosa at her home until she moved in with Lillie.
So I believe this untangles the Hendryx family history to give us a basic flow of birth, life, and death of each of the family’s members. It is a miracle that each of the pieces of information I used for this analysis were just enough to give a pretty good idea of what happened. The photos my grandmother preserved were amazingly helpful. Also the family plot in Sarpy County. is the balm to the many mishaps of the census records. In my own personal research, I have never seen a family plot so fully occupied by all of the family’s immediate members. It make for a handy records source and great simplification for the living visiting graves – a whole family in one shot.