Author Topic: Publication of Census taken in 1921  (Read 1838 times)

Offline Guy Etchells

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,526
    • View Profile
Re: Publication of Census taken in 1921
« Reply #18 on: Thursday 16 November 17 08:06 GMT (UK) »
According to 1921cenus.og webpage the government seems to be firmly sticking to the 100 year rule with a possible reason being that for the 2021 census there would have to be strong promises of confidentially which wouldn't sit well with the early release of the 1921 census when the promise was made at the time that individuals details would never be made public

So possibly people filling in the census were under the impression it wouldn't be released

Please note all my remarks are about the 1921 census for England & Wales as the Scottish 1921 contained an additional question and comes under different legislation.

Rather than go to a third party site like 1921census.org which though a good site does contain inaccuracies try. This contains various links to census material.
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01l25/

Or to see a blank 1921 census schedule.
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01l26/

As I have mentioned before there was no assurance of confidentiality for either the lifetime of those who appear on the census or for 100 years (the 100 year rule did not come into existence until 1966 approx. 45 years after the census was taken) or that it would never be released.

The census did state STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL on the face of the schedule but the earlier census also contained such wording and were released on average 80 years after they were taken (i.e. within the lifetime of many who appeared on them) so the expectation was the census would be released in their lifetime.

To say anything else is to distort history.

It was also possible for anyone who wished to keep their information confidential the opportunity to make a sealed confidential return (I don’t have details of how many took up that option but it would be possible to find out).
In the case of these their schedules could be redacted for 100 years if thought appropriate.

However what confidence would the public have in Government who publish a consultation paper claiming that in future all government documents will be open and available with only sensitive information redacted pass a law in 2000 entitled the Freedom of Information Act-

( http://www.rootschat.com/links/01l27/ )

-which as its first clause enshrines into law-
(“1 General right of access to information held by public authorities.

(1)Any person making a request for information to a public authority is entitled—

(a)to be informed in writing by the public authority whether it holds information of the description specified in the request, and

(b)if that is the case, to have that information communicated to him.”)

-then refuses to honour that undertaking?

It is far more important that the current crop of MPs honour the current undertakings set in law rather than the ambiguous statements written on a census form almost 100 years ago that could be argued were aimed at the officials handling the schedules rather than the public.

Cheers
Guy
http://anguline.co.uk/Framland/index.htm   The site that gives you facts not promises!
http://burial-inscriptions.co.uk Tombstones & Monumental Inscriptions.

As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline Wendy2305

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 384
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Publication of Census taken in 1921
« Reply #19 on: Thursday 16 November 17 08:40 GMT (UK) »
According to 1921cenus.og webpage the government seems to be firmly sticking to the 100 year rule with a possible reason being that for the 2021 census there would have to be strong promises of confidentially which wouldn't sit well with the early release of the 1921 census when the promise was made at the time that individuals details would never be made public

So possibly people filling in the census were under the impression it wouldn't be released

Please note all my remarks are about the 1921 census for England & Wales as the Scottish 1921 contained an additional question and comes under different legislation.

Rather than go to a third party site like 1921census.org which though a good site does contain inaccuracies try. This contains various links to census material.
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01l25/

Or to see a blank 1921 census schedule.
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01l26/

As I have mentioned before there was no assurance of confidentiality for either the lifetime of those who appear on the census or for 100 years (the 100 year rule did not come into existence until 1966 approx. 45 years after the census was taken) or that it would never be released.

The census did state STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL on the face of the schedule but the earlier census also contained such wording and were released on average 80 years after they were taken (i.e. within the lifetime of many who appeared on them) so the expectation was the census would be released in their lifetime.

To say anything else is to distort history.

It was also possible for anyone who wished to keep their information confidential the opportunity to make a sealed confidential return (I don’t have details of how many took up that option but it would be possible to find out).
In the case of these their schedules could be redacted for 100 years if thought appropriate.

However what confidence would the public have in Government who publish a consultation paper claiming that in future all government documents will be open and available with only sensitive information redacted pass a law in 2000 entitled the Freedom of Information Act-

( http://www.rootschat.com/links/01l27/ )

-which as its first clause enshrines into law-
(“1 General right of access to information held by public authorities.

(1)Any person making a request for information to a public authority is entitled—

(a)to be informed in writing by the public authority whether it holds information of the description specified in the request, and

(b)if that is the case, to have that information communicated to him.”)

-then refuses to honour that undertaking?

It is far more important that the current crop of MPs honour the current undertakings set in law rather than the ambiguous statements written on a census form almost 100 years ago that could be argued were aimed at the officials handling the schedules rather than the public.

Cheers
Guy

Sorry on phone or would've cut some of the quote
My interpretation of the census site was that it covered England and Wales I don't know anywhere near what you do so could be wrong but thought the 1920 Act said that it would be illegal to release information from the census so people in the U.K. possibly understood that when filling in the form it would be confidential

As for Scotland I believe the 1901 and 1911 census were statute barred from being realeased before. 100 years as will the other census according to Scotlands People

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline Guy Etchells

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,526
    • View Profile
Re: Publication of Census taken in 1921
« Reply #20 on: Thursday 16 November 17 09:25 GMT (UK) »

Sorry on phone or would've cut some of the quote
My interpretation of the census site was that it covered England and Wales I don't know anywhere near what you do so could be wrong but thought the 1920 Act said that it would be illegal to release information from the census so people in the U.K. possibly understood that when filling in the form it would be confidential

As for Scotland I believe the 1901 and 1911 census were statute barred from being realeased before. 100 years as will the other census according to Scotlands People

No in fact the Census Act 1920 gave the registrar General the power to provide information to anyone which in his opinion it is reasonable for that authority or person to require

Census Act 1920
http://www.rootschat.com/links/0wkf/

“4.-(1) The Registrar-General shall, as soon as may be after the taking of a census, prepare reports on the census returns, and every such report shall be printed and laid before both Houses of Parliament.
(2) The Registrar-General may, if he so thinks fit, at the request and cost of any local authority or person, cause abstracts to be prepared containing any such statistical information, being information which is not contained in the reports made by him under this section and which in his opinion it is reasonable for that authority or person to require, as can be derived from the census returns.”

The above power was removed by the Census Confidentiality Act 1991
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01l28/

which made it illegal to open any census made under the Census Act 1920 at any time in the future unless there is a change in the law.

There was a change in the law in 2000 with the Freedom of Information Act 2000
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01l27/

which as I wrote earlier gave everyone the right to access information held by a public authority (the meaning of a public authority is given in the Act).

When I decided to campaign for access to the 1921 in 2010 I took legal advice on the points I have mentioned and many more to ensure my reading of the Acts was viewed as correct.
I even (against my better judgement) started a petition, I have always thought petitions are counter productive, but I dropped the campaign when I found genealogists were unfortunately too apathetic to support the campaign.
Many people thought it was a good idea but few were willing to go further than that.

Cheers
Guy
http://anguline.co.uk/Framland/index.htm   The site that gives you facts not promises!
http://burial-inscriptions.co.uk Tombstones & Monumental Inscriptions.

As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.

Offline Mart 'n' Al

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 771
  • Martin H. Watson Gedmatch DNA Kit H062246
    • View Profile
Re: Publication of Census taken in 1921
« Reply #21 on: Thursday 16 November 17 11:36 GMT (UK) »
Is this a five minute argument or a 30 minute argument?

Martin
Gedmatch DNA Kit H062246. Names: Loughborough and Loughbrough, (London, Hull, Pirton and Hartlepool), Watson, (Bedlington, Jarrow & H'pool), Ballard & Glassop (E. London),  Leggett (Corton, Scarborough, Hartlepool, & Barnington, Yorks.)  Young & Wilson, (Hartlepool).  I use GRAMPS 4.2.6 software.

Offline Wendy2305

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 384
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Publication of Census taken in 1921
« Reply #22 on: Thursday 16 November 17 13:12 GMT (UK) »
Sorry if I was being argumentative that wasn't my intention

Offline Guy Etchells

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,526
    • View Profile
Re: Publication of Census taken in 1921
« Reply #23 on: Thursday 16 November 17 14:20 GMT (UK) »
Is this a five minute argument or a 30 minute argument?

Martin

I would not call it an argument at all it is a discussion where views are exchanged.
Isn't that what a forum is for, a place for people to connect in dialogue?

Cheers
Guy
http://anguline.co.uk/Framland/index.htm   The site that gives you facts not promises!
http://burial-inscriptions.co.uk Tombstones & Monumental Inscriptions.

As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.

Offline Mart 'n' Al

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 771
  • Martin H. Watson Gedmatch DNA Kit H062246
    • View Profile
Re: Publication of Census taken in 1921
« Reply #24 on: Thursday 16 November 17 15:55 GMT (UK) »
"Is this a five minute argument or a 30 minute argument?"

It was a quotation.

Martin
Gedmatch DNA Kit H062246. Names: Loughborough and Loughbrough, (London, Hull, Pirton and Hartlepool), Watson, (Bedlington, Jarrow & H'pool), Ballard & Glassop (E. London),  Leggett (Corton, Scarborough, Hartlepool, & Barnington, Yorks.)  Young & Wilson, (Hartlepool).  I use GRAMPS 4.2.6 software.

Offline Mean_genie

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 913
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Publication of Census taken in 1921
« Reply #25 on: Thursday 16 November 17 18:59 GMT (UK) »
Quote
"Is this a five minute argument or a 30 minute argument?"

It was a quotation.

Martin

'Oh no it isn't'  ;D

Offline Mart 'n' Al

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 771
  • Martin H. Watson Gedmatch DNA Kit H062246
    • View Profile
Re: Publication of Census taken in 1921
« Reply #26 on: Thursday 16 November 17 19:17 GMT (UK) »
Mean_genie,
An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.   Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.

I'm sorry, but I'm not allowed to argue anymore.  If you want me to go on arguing, you'll have to pay for another five minutes.

Martin
Gedmatch DNA Kit H062246. Names: Loughborough and Loughbrough, (London, Hull, Pirton and Hartlepool), Watson, (Bedlington, Jarrow & H'pool), Ballard & Glassop (E. London),  Leggett (Corton, Scarborough, Hartlepool, & Barnington, Yorks.)  Young & Wilson, (Hartlepool).  I use GRAMPS 4.2.6 software.