Posted by on May 10, 2010 in Ancestry.com Site, Content

“All politics is local” was a favorite saying of former Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill. A quick look at the 1850 U.S. Federal Census mortality schedules for California leaves me thinking all history might be local, too.

Mortality schedules for California and Maine went live on Ancestry.com this week, and as I browsed through them, I was intrigued by how vivid—and how different—these one-year snapshots of communities in the same state could be. Take Calaveras County, for example.

The schedule for Calaveras District, Calaveras County, California, 1850, records the deaths of 59 men and 1 woman.

Residents came from more than 15 different states and at least 9 foreign countries, and 55 of the 60 have their occupation listed as miners.

The remarks note: “This district is remarkably healthy, most of the deaths having occurred by accident or by marked carelessness or exposure to water in working—and the use of bad provisions and much intoxicating beverages.” The cause of death for the first dozen names bears this out—and  paints a pretty rugged picture of life on the frontier mines: Dysentery, Shot Accidental, Dysentery, Burnt by Indians, Murdered, Dysentery, Delirium Tremens (2), Stabbed (4).  Shot, Accident, and Murder weave in and out with Dysentery and Fever through the rest of the schedule.

And if you weren’t a miner, apparently you had a 1 in 30 chance of being a gambler—or dying as one—like Juan Acosta, a 21-year-old from Mexico,”Shot.” Talk about the Wild West.

But that’s just Calaveras County. Marin County recorded only three deaths: all lumbermen, and all three dead from diarrhea.

In Sacramento City, a cholera outbreak threatened to empty the newborn boomtown. In Los Angeles County, almost 45 percent of the names on the schedules are female.

Names and dates aside, in the case of California, the mortality schedules speak to both patterns of and reasons for settlement, and in telling us how our ancestors died, they also offer us a brief look at how they lived.

3 Comments

Nancy 

The records that I have looked at so far are picking up the census year as the death date. The mortality schedule actually records “the month in which the person died” without a year. If the death occurred June through December, the death date is actually the year BEFORE the census date.

May 11, 2010 at 8:34 am
Karis 

There were not too many people for each of these but it was unique info for the ones that I looked at. Thank you for remembering CA. I don’t know whether it is appropriate to suggest a source but take a look at Ernest P. Peninou’s Viticulture books which have a lot for CA including census materials and bios. I’ll understand if this shouldn’t go here and gets deleted.

May 11, 2010 at 5:19 pm
Eileen 

Picking up on Nancy’s posting (May 11), there has been an error in the Ancestry tabular presentation of morality index info. Transcribed entries for individuals show month of death and then, separately, census year. However, when individual entries are presented in a tabular database, these two categories of information have been merged. This is an error for all deaths occurring in months Jun-Dec in 1850, 1860, 1870, 1880–because, for purposes of these Mortality supplements, the “census year” ran six months back into the prior calendar year.

Example: 1850 Mortality supplements: deaths in months Jun-Dec occurred in 1849; deaths in months Jan-May occurred in 1850. Same approach used 1860, 1870, 1880. Localities were instructed in advance to keep particular track of deaths in the last six months of the year leading into the census year.

May 18, 2010 at 11:58 am