NY City Census 1860-70
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Jim Elbrecht
NY City Census 1860-70
I've seen some amazing search results out of this group over the
years, so I thought I'd draw on the pool of expertise here.
I've been trying to find my DUBREUIL family in NY city for years.
Joseph Dubreuil, according to his obit in 1908, was born in New York
City May 31, 1860 to Lewis Dubreuil, a piano maker. Perhaps a clue as
to which ward is the same obit which says he attended St Vincent
DePaul's school on 24th Street.
'Lewis' is probably Louis, as that was a common family name for 2
generations. Joseph and his brother, Louis, both report that their
parents were born in France on the censuses that I can find them.
Louis reported his age/birthyear on various censuses as somewhere
between 1858 and 1873. [his daughter provided info for his death
certificate in 1937, and gave day and month- but said "don't know" for
year.]
I've searched Ancestry's index for 1860-70 for any dubr*, soundexed,
born in France, living in NY.
I've looked through all the Louis & Lewis - using no last name- born
in France, living in New York City.
I've searched all of NY for Louis/Lewis Bre* [soundexed] , b. France
to account for someone using 'Du' as a middle initial.
I wish I could search Ancestry on occupation- though information given
by a wife 50 years later might not be that reliable.
[I've also tried a variety of searches to find either brother in 1880,
with no success.]
I've sent for the birth certificate from NY City- but it should be a
month or so before I hear if there was one.
Jim
years, so I thought I'd draw on the pool of expertise here.
I've been trying to find my DUBREUIL family in NY city for years.
Joseph Dubreuil, according to his obit in 1908, was born in New York
City May 31, 1860 to Lewis Dubreuil, a piano maker. Perhaps a clue as
to which ward is the same obit which says he attended St Vincent
DePaul's school on 24th Street.
'Lewis' is probably Louis, as that was a common family name for 2
generations. Joseph and his brother, Louis, both report that their
parents were born in France on the censuses that I can find them.
Louis reported his age/birthyear on various censuses as somewhere
between 1858 and 1873. [his daughter provided info for his death
certificate in 1937, and gave day and month- but said "don't know" for
year.]
I've searched Ancestry's index for 1860-70 for any dubr*, soundexed,
born in France, living in NY.
I've looked through all the Louis & Lewis - using no last name- born
in France, living in New York City.
I've searched all of NY for Louis/Lewis Bre* [soundexed] , b. France
to account for someone using 'Du' as a middle initial.
I wish I could search Ancestry on occupation- though information given
by a wife 50 years later might not be that reliable.
[I've also tried a variety of searches to find either brother in 1880,
with no success.]
I've sent for the birth certificate from NY City- but it should be a
month or so before I hear if there was one.
Jim
-
Jim Elbrecht
Re: NY City Census 1860-70
Jim Elbrecht <elbrecht@email.com> wrote:
-snip-
Add to that- 1870, all Joseph's b. bet1858-1860 in Wards 16, 18, 20, &
21
[the wards closest to and including 24th Ave]
After the search, I've been browsing and looking at anything that
could have been mis-heard or mis-transcribed from Breuil, or Dubreuil.
I'm going to leave it alone for a while-- but it's like a song I can't
get out of my head. I know the best plan is to go do something else &
I've got plenty to do. . . . but then I'm drawn back to try 'one more
angle'.
Jim
-snip-
I've searched Ancestry's index for 1860-70 for any dubr*, soundexed,
born in France, living in NY.
I've looked through all the Louis & Lewis - using no last name- born
in France, living in New York City.
I've searched all of NY for Louis/Lewis Bre* [soundexed] , b. France
to account for someone using 'Du' as a middle initial.
Add to that- 1870, all Joseph's b. bet1858-1860 in Wards 16, 18, 20, &
21
[the wards closest to and including 24th Ave]
After the search, I've been browsing and looking at anything that
could have been mis-heard or mis-transcribed from Breuil, or Dubreuil.
I'm going to leave it alone for a while-- but it's like a song I can't
get out of my head. I know the best plan is to go do something else &
I've got plenty to do. . . . but then I'm drawn back to try 'one more
angle'.
Jim
-
Jim Elbrecht
Re: NY City Census 1860-70
Jim Elbrecht <elbrecht@email.com> wrote:
Wow! They've done something new. I requested the certificate online
on Jan 26- and got a response today.
No Joseph DUBREUIL registered in Manhattan in 1860. poo
Jim
I've sent for the birth certificate from NY City- but it should be a
month or so before I hear if there was one.
Wow! They've done something new. I requested the certificate online
on Jan 26- and got a response today.
No Joseph DUBREUIL registered in Manhattan in 1860. poo
Jim
-
clifto
Re: NY City Census 1860-70
Jim Elbrecht wrote:
Right now I'm working on an ancestor who worked for National Biscuit Co.
as either a fireman or a foreman, depending on which source you get the
information from. There's reason to believe he never changed jobs there,
so it's probably typographical or transcription error or something.
--
All relevant people are pertinent.
All rude people are impertinent.
Therefore, no rude people are relevant.
-- Solomon W. Golomb
I wish I could search Ancestry on occupation- though information given
by a wife 50 years later might not be that reliable.
Right now I'm working on an ancestor who worked for National Biscuit Co.
as either a fireman or a foreman, depending on which source you get the
information from. There's reason to believe he never changed jobs there,
so it's probably typographical or transcription error or something.
--
All relevant people are pertinent.
All rude people are impertinent.
Therefore, no rude people are relevant.
-- Solomon W. Golomb
-
Michael Kenefick
Re: NY City Census 1860-70
Jim do you know the mothers name? Mike in Ohio
Jim Elbrecht wrote:
Jim Elbrecht wrote:
I've seen some amazing search results out of this group over the
years, so I thought I'd draw on the pool of expertise here.
I've been trying to find my DUBREUIL family in NY city for years.
Joseph Dubreuil, according to his obit in 1908, was born in New York
City May 31, 1860 to Lewis Dubreuil, a piano maker. Perhaps a clue as
to which ward is the same obit which says he attended St Vincent
DePaul's school on 24th Street.
'Lewis' is probably Louis, as that was a common family name for 2
generations. Joseph and his brother, Louis, both report that their
parents were born in France on the censuses that I can find them.
Louis reported his age/birthyear on various censuses as somewhere
between 1858 and 1873. [his daughter provided info for his death
certificate in 1937, and gave day and month- but said "don't know" for
year.]
I've searched Ancestry's index for 1860-70 for any dubr*, soundexed,
born in France, living in NY.
I've looked through all the Louis & Lewis - using no last name- born
in France, living in New York City.
I've searched all of NY for Louis/Lewis Bre* [soundexed] , b. France
to account for someone using 'Du' as a middle initial.
I wish I could search Ancestry on occupation- though information given
by a wife 50 years later might not be that reliable.
[I've also tried a variety of searches to find either brother in 1880,
with no success.]
I've sent for the birth certificate from NY City- but it should be a
month or so before I hear if there was one.
Jim
-
Jim Elbrecht
Re: NY City Census 1860-70
On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 17:22:36 -0500, Michael Kenefick
<kenefick@copper.net> wrote:
Nope. My ancestor, who stayed within a hundred miles of NYC and
lived until 1937, never talked about his youth. He was probably
married in a Catholic church and didn't register his marriage
anywhere.
I only have a name for his father through an obituary of his brother
who went to Kansas when he was 21 or so.
Jim
<kenefick@copper.net> wrote:
Jim do you know the mothers name? Mike in Ohio
Nope. My ancestor, who stayed within a hundred miles of NYC and
lived until 1937, never talked about his youth. He was probably
married in a Catholic church and didn't register his marriage
anywhere.
I only have a name for his father through an obituary of his brother
who went to Kansas when he was 21 or so.
Jim
-
ecunningham
Re: NY City Census 1860-70
Jim Elbrecht wrote:
Jim: "Didn't register his marriage"? Needed a marriage license--keep
on looking.
Also, I see numerous Dubrueills but not a single Joseph. Either is
very adept at avoiding the census taker, OR he changed his first name!
I see August, age 38, in 1880 at 279 Seventh Avenue with wife
Catherine, children, Julius, August and Josephine. In 1890 there is a
Jules Dubreuil operating an eating house at 450 W. 14th and a
Prospere, shoemaker, at 8 E 16th and living at 10 # 16th.
Also see a variation as Dubruville.
Suggest you mine http://www.italiangen.org databases for any
possibilities. Good hunting.
ecunningham@att.net
He was probably> married in a Catholic church and didn't register
his marriage
anywhere.
I only have a name for his father through an obituary of his brother
who went to Kansas when he was 21 or so.
Jim: "Didn't register his marriage"? Needed a marriage license--keep
on looking.
Also, I see numerous Dubrueills but not a single Joseph. Either is
very adept at avoiding the census taker, OR he changed his first name!
I see August, age 38, in 1880 at 279 Seventh Avenue with wife
Catherine, children, Julius, August and Josephine. In 1890 there is a
Jules Dubreuil operating an eating house at 450 W. 14th and a
Prospere, shoemaker, at 8 E 16th and living at 10 # 16th.
Also see a variation as Dubruville.
Suggest you mine http://www.italiangen.org databases for any
possibilities. Good hunting.
ecunningham@att.net
-
Jim Elbrecht
Re: NY City Census 1860-70
ecunningham <ecunningham@att.net> wrote:
There were no licenses in New York until 1908- long after he was
married. Registrations were spotty before that, but the Catholic
church [at least the New York City Diocese, from what I understand]
held that a marriage was a sacrament and was between the couple and
the Church-- not the state- so they didn't register them either.
There are several possibilities- the least of which is that the
enumerator or transcriber butchered the name beyond recognition; the
DUBREUILS might have had vacations that avoided the enumerators- or
his mother remarried and he and his brother were counted under her new
last name. [I found my EGGERS that way- by searching for 3 sibling's
names in the 1880 census] Someday Ancestry might make that possible
for the 1870 census.
It isn't as uncommon a name as I had always thought. There were
even a couple [in]famous DUBREUILs in NY City- but apparently no
relation. [one an artist who painted money, another in the performing
arts]
I've never seen DUBRUVILLE as a variation of DUBREUIL-- but even at
that- still nothing to tie them to my Joseph or Louis.
In case anyone wonders- that isn't just Italian & it has some good NY
City databases. [Unfortunately it also has some annoying music that
insists on loading before you can look at the site. Took 60 seconds
on my cable connection this morning. Not recommended for dial-up or
old systems.]
jim
Jim Elbrecht wrote:
He was probably> married in a Catholic church and didn't register
his marriage
anywhere.
-snip-
Jim: "Didn't register his marriage"? Needed a marriage license--keep
on looking.
There were no licenses in New York until 1908- long after he was
married. Registrations were spotty before that, but the Catholic
church [at least the New York City Diocese, from what I understand]
held that a marriage was a sacrament and was between the couple and
the Church-- not the state- so they didn't register them either.
Also, I see numerous Dubrueills but not a single Joseph. Either is
very adept at avoiding the census taker, OR he changed his first name!
There are several possibilities- the least of which is that the
enumerator or transcriber butchered the name beyond recognition; the
DUBREUILS might have had vacations that avoided the enumerators- or
his mother remarried and he and his brother were counted under her new
last name. [I found my EGGERS that way- by searching for 3 sibling's
names in the 1880 census] Someday Ancestry might make that possible
for the 1870 census.
I see August, age 38, in 1880 at 279 Seventh Avenue with wife
Catherine, children, Julius, August and Josephine. In 1890 there is a
Jules Dubreuil operating an eating house at 450 W. 14th and a
Prospere, shoemaker, at 8 E 16th and living at 10 # 16th.
It isn't as uncommon a name as I had always thought. There were
even a couple [in]famous DUBREUILs in NY City- but apparently no
relation. [one an artist who painted money, another in the performing
arts]
Also see a variation as Dubruville.
I've never seen DUBRUVILLE as a variation of DUBREUIL-- but even at
that- still nothing to tie them to my Joseph or Louis.
In case anyone wonders- that isn't just Italian & it has some good NY
City databases. [Unfortunately it also has some annoying music that
insists on loading before you can look at the site. Took 60 seconds
on my cable connection this morning. Not recommended for dial-up or
old systems.]
jim
-
ecunningham
Re: NY City Census 1860-70
Jim Elbrecht wrote:
jim: Now I AM confused! Are we talking NY City or State? If city,
which boro?
Because I see LDS has films for marriage records back thru 1866.
I am looking at paperwork for Brooklyn marriages for 1879/80 and
I have seen Catholic marriages listed in groups on the films. I
noted them because it seemed strange that they were copied in
batches in the film.
Maybe our NYC/State experts can solve this confusion.
ecunningham@att.net
There were no licenses in New York until 1908- long after he was
married. Registrations were spotty before that, but the Catholic
church [at least the New York City Diocese, from what I understand]
held that a marriage was a sacrament and was between the couple and
the Church-- not the state- so they didn't register them either.
jim: Now I AM confused! Are we talking NY City or State? If city,
which boro?
Because I see LDS has films for marriage records back thru 1866.
I am looking at paperwork for Brooklyn marriages for 1879/80 and
I have seen Catholic marriages listed in groups on the films. I
noted them because it seemed strange that they were copied in
batches in the film.
Maybe our NYC/State experts can solve this confusion.
ecunningham@att.net
-
Jim Elbrecht
Re: NY City Census 1860-70
On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 14:10:15 -0500, ecunningham <ecunningham@att.net>
wrote:
The 1908 license requirement was statewide. The resistance of the
church to comply with the statewide registration requirement [which
started in 1880, I think] was at least citywide.
*Some* were registered from quite early. Even some catholic ones.
Possibly individual churches who allowed LDS to copy their registers.
I don't think I'm confused-- but if I've mis-remembered any of this,
I'd rather be corrected than wrong.
Jim
wrote:
Jim Elbrecht wrote:
There were no licenses in New York until 1908- long after he was
married. Registrations were spotty before that, but the Catholic
church [at least the New York City Diocese, from what I understand]
held that a marriage was a sacrament and was between the couple and
the Church-- not the state- so they didn't register them either.
jim: Now I AM confused! Are we talking NY City or State? If city,
which boro?
The 1908 license requirement was statewide. The resistance of the
church to comply with the statewide registration requirement [which
started in 1880, I think] was at least citywide.
Because I see LDS has films for marriage records back thru 1866.
I am looking at paperwork for Brooklyn marriages for 1879/80 and
I have seen Catholic marriages listed in groups on the films.
*Some* were registered from quite early. Even some catholic ones.
I
noted them because it seemed strange that they were copied in
batches in the film.
Possibly individual churches who allowed LDS to copy their registers.
Maybe our NYC/State experts can solve this confusion.
I don't think I'm confused-- but if I've mis-remembered any of this,
I'd rather be corrected than wrong.
Jim
-
ecunningham
Re: NY City Census 1860-70
Jim Elbrecht wrote:
Jim: No these were not individual churches. These were civil
registrations on a civil LDS film, but the registrations were grouped
by church.
If I remember correctly, it appeared they were in
registration number order and the church had registrations that ran in
order and that is how they were filmed and ordered by the department.
True,they SHOULD have been in numerical order; but it means either the
church had a stack and used them in order, OR, they went and got
them as they needed them and filled them in in groups.
Ah well, too many brain cells have been expended on this already. As
long as you are satisfied you have done what you can, so be it.
Good hunting.
ecunningham@att.net
Because I see LDS has films for marriage records back thru 1866.
I am looking at paperwork for Brooklyn marriages for 1879/80 and
I have seen Catholic marriages listed in groups on the films.
I>>noted them because it seemed strange that they were copied in
batches in the film.
Possibly individual churches who allowed LDS to copy their registers.
Jim: No these were not individual churches. These were civil
registrations on a civil LDS film, but the registrations were grouped
by church.
If I remember correctly, it appeared they were in
registration number order and the church had registrations that ran in
order and that is how they were filmed and ordered by the department.
True,they SHOULD have been in numerical order; but it means either the
church had a stack and used them in order, OR, they went and got
them as they needed them and filled them in in groups.
Ah well, too many brain cells have been expended on this already. As
long as you are satisfied you have done what you can, so be it.
Good hunting.
ecunningham@att.net
-
ecunningham
Re: NY City Census 1860-70
Jim Elbrecht wrote:
Jim: No these were not individual churches. These were civil
registrations on a civil LDS film, but the registrations were grouped
by church.
If I remember correctly, it appeared they were in
registration number order and the church had registrations that ran in
order and that is how they were filmed and ordered by the department.
True,they SHOULD have been in numerical order; but it means either the
church had a stack and used them in order, OR, they went and got
them as they needed them and filled them in in groups.
Ah well, too many brain cells have been expended on this already. As
long as you are satisfied you have done what you can, so be it.
Good hunting.
ecunningham@att.net
Because I see LDS has films for marriage records back thru 1866.
I am looking at paperwork for Brooklyn marriages for 1879/80 and
I have seen Catholic marriages listed in groups on the films.
I>>noted them because it seemed strange that they were copied in
batches in the film.
Possibly individual churches who allowed LDS to copy their registers.
Jim: No these were not individual churches. These were civil
registrations on a civil LDS film, but the registrations were grouped
by church.
If I remember correctly, it appeared they were in
registration number order and the church had registrations that ran in
order and that is how they were filmed and ordered by the department.
True,they SHOULD have been in numerical order; but it means either the
church had a stack and used them in order, OR, they went and got
them as they needed them and filled them in in groups.
Ah well, too many brain cells have been expended on this already. As
long as you are satisfied you have done what you can, so be it.
Good hunting.
ecunningham@att.net