1931 census: race or tribe - Irish (not English)

[Lisa in California]

While I’ve run across incorrect names and dates on census returns, I’ve rarely run across puzzling facts. Tonight, I found something puzzling but perhaps it was simply a communication problem?

1931 Ontario census - Gertrude, age 40, William, age 39 (wife and husband)
Gertrude was recorded as born in Ontario (parents born in England), “race or tribe” was English.
That is correct.  Gertrude’s parents, grandparents and most likely her great-grandparents were all born in England.

William was recorded as born in Ontario (parents born in Ontario). That also is correct.
However, William’s race or tribe was recorded as Irish; William’s and Gertrude’s children were born in Ontario and recorded as race: Irish.

William’s paternal family/ancestors were born in England to at least the 1750s.  William’s mother was born in Ontario but her parents were born in Ireland c1820s.

According to relatives, William enjoyed talking about his paternal side. To my knowledge, he never talked about any Irish family and neither his children nor other family even knew they had Irish ancestors.  When I discovered that William’s maternal grandparents were born in Ireland, William’s children were just short of shocked.

The puzzling part: could it have simply been a recording error?  Has anyone ever run across a similar situation?  William’s mother was still alive in 1931 (but not living in his household); perhaps she was visiting and told the census enumerator that William was (and his children were) Irish?  Because William enjoyed telling anyone family stories, I have difficulty believing he or his wife stated that he was Irish.  Thank you for reading this long message, Lisa.

PS. I know the Irish notation is trivial but I always thought his mother was an only child. When we found out William’s mother had several siblings, and aunts and uncles, I was very surprised. This family has been a mystery since I started searching so long ago.

[genealogyem]

Ive looked through a fair amount of census records and found all sorts of strange things and the 1931 census is no exception. If your ancestor was part Irish then I'd say that it was not a transcription error. Also, to my understanding, enumerators were only to collect information from a person living at that address. If the information was provided by somebody outside of the household then the enumerators usually would make note of that.

As far as racial origin goes, Ive found that its not uncommon for that to differ between census returns. Ive found several similar situations in my own family tree. If you want to theorize a reason, maybe take a look at how major dates (such as BMD and immigration) line up with the census.

For example,  I have one family in the 1871 census that  identifies themself as 'Dutch' and in the next census identified themself as 'English'. Both are correct depending on what side of their ancestry they were referencing.

[Lisa in California]

Ive looked through a fair amount of census records and found all sorts of strange things and the 1931 census is no exception. If your ancestor was part Irish then I'd say that it was not a transcription error.

True, I didn’t think of that.

Also, to my understanding, enumerators were only to collect information from a person living at that address. If the information was provided by somebody outside of the household then the enumerators usually would make note of that.

I don’t believe I’ve ever researched how census counts were done. I will check the page again, but I don’t believe there were any notes on the page (for my family).

As far as racial origin goes, Ive found that its not uncommon for that to differ between census returns. Ive found several similar situations in my own family tree. If you want to theorize a reason, maybe take a look at how major dates (such as BMD and immigration) line up with the census.

Excellent suggestion and one that I’ve rarely used with any ancestors.

For example,  I have one family in the 1871 census that  identifies themself as 'Dutch' and in the next census identified themself as 'English'. Both are correct depending on what side of their ancestry they were referencing.

genealogyem, thank you very much for replying.  You’ve been very helpful.  In addition to your suggestions/comments, you’ve unknowingly provided a major clue.

After reading your post, I looked at a paper chart that I created 30 years ago that has ancestors and their siblings. (I’ve updated it through the years.)  William’s brother and sister were given their grandfather’s surname - Stuart.  I suppose it’s possible that William didn’t know the name was Irish/Scottish but he certainly knew they had that name as his brother went through life being called Stu.

William’s mother lost a lot of her siblings when they were very young. Only female siblings survived childhood, so the Stuart surname was not carried on. I would imagine that is the reason for giving a daughter a masculine sounding middle name.  (Another son and daughter were given their paternal grandmother’s surname, also masculine sounding.). Poor children. 

I was so surprised by the census return that I didn’t even think about William’s siblings middle names.  Also, Sarah Stuart, William’s maiden aunt, was living with the extended family in 1921. I will really have to think about things.

Thank you again! You’re really made me think and of course I will do some census fact checking. 

[aghadowey]

As already mentioned, origin in Canadian census records can vary between one year and the next. One branch of my family put either Irish or Scottish in the census- often the same person went back and forth between the two, with their siblings doing the same. In their case both are correct. The family originated in Scotland then our branch moved to Ulster. In the following generation there was another split with my ancestor and a brother moving to Nova Scotia and 2 brothers staying in Ulster. Luckily a very old family Bible still survives to document the transition from Scotland to Canada via Ulster.

[Lisa in California]

Thank you for sharing comments, aghadowey. It’s good to know that our ancestors viewpoints could fluctuate. I suppose my own thoughts have changed over the years. I grew up being told that a somewhat close paternal ancestor was born in France, lived in England for a short time and settled in Canada. I’ve yet to find any link to France for this surname (the family was living in England by the 1720s or 1750s, my ancestor settling in Canada in 1857) so when asked, I no longer mention a possible French ancestor.

My aunt gave me a photocopy of a paper that contains family facts about William’s paternal grandparents.  I treasure that document. How wonderful that you have an old family bible.  I would imagine that it is near and dear to your heart.

Like genealogyem’s post, your comments made me think of something else: I’ve not yet found William’s siblings in 1931!  It will be interesting to see what was recorded for their “race”. Thank you very much for your comments and for inadvertently making me think things through. 

PS. Was the brother who moved to Nova Scotia the one who was given a pebble or rock by his sister or mum? I don’t remember who told me that sweet story; apologies if it wasn’t you.

[california dreamin]

Hi Lisa

Not to be contentious but do you know what part of Ireland the family came from?  Ireland was part of the United Kingdom from 1801 to 1922. Perhaps this is why their answer fluctuates?

CD

[Lisa in California]

Wow.  Excellent point, CD, thank you for mentioning it.  William’s mother’s death certificate stated that her parents were born in Sligo, Ireland.  I don’t know if it was the city or county.  Manorhamilton, Leitrim was mentioned for a few of her aunts and uncles.

While helping others with American naturalization lookups, I have seen Great Britain (or something similar) mentioned for men who were born in Ireland.


Added: In 1931, William’s siblings were recorded as English but three of the siblings were living with their mother; she was noted as Irish.

[genealogyem]

I remembered this morning that the 1931 census also asks if employed family members were at work on June 1st (date of census collection). This may give you an idea of who could have been home and therefore been able to provide the information.

[Lisa in California]

Another great point, thank you, genealogyem!

William was at work that day; Gertrude was a home maker (and not “at work”).

I wonder if Gertrude considered herself “more English” than her husband.    Gertrude’s parents arrived in Canada c1870.  William’s grandfather arrived in 1857.

She most likely knew that two of her husband’s siblings carried on Stuart through their middle names.  Maybe William delighted in telling everyone about his English side but Gertrude knew he had an Irish side as well?

I was very young when she died but family said that she was a kind, gentle soul.

Thank you again, genealogyem.