VAALBEMA-L Archives

Archiver > VAALBEMA > 2008-12 > 1228767959


From:
Subject: Re: [VAALBEMA] The 1787 Census of Virginia
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 15:25:59 EST



Why not use the Binns lists, which are searchable online _
http:www.binnsgenealogy.com/VirginiaTaxListCensuses_

In a message dated 12/8/2008 2:58:40 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
writes:

Yes, E.W. is a wonderful person to have "on our side" when searching! This
topic prompted me to add a few comments.

1) I think the "1787 Census" series is out of print, but I'm sure copies
of the hard bound 1987 volume ( ISBN: 0-89157-070-5.) can be found in
libraries "here and there".
Individual pamphlets were published for all existing counties incl. W. VA
and KY and offered for sale via U. S. mail. I bought eight of them.
The publishing company was called "Genealogical Books
In Print", 6818 Lois Drive, Springfield, VA 22150.

I wrote again sometime in the mid to late 1990's and both of my letters were
returned by the local Postmaster. (I don't live in VA)

2) The Dual Title, representative of the actual published research, is,
"The Personal Property Tax Lists For .....[name of each
County ]........appears on the
first page in each County Pamphlet.

Women were never tithable or taxable unless they had a male of tithable age
living there. For a couple of Virginia counties I searched the will books
to find names of men who died testate and intestate and looked for given
names of women who would have become widows. I was able to match about 90%
of the presumed widows listed on the 1787 Pers. Prop. Tax lists for Bedford
Co. with a deceased husband. The women were marked "not tithable" by the
tax commissioner. Although "a match" by names doesn't seem to be totally
convincing of a relationship, when adding in some dates, and sometimes a
marriage bond help a bit more. I learned not to assume anything based
merely on similar names. After all, we're a;ways looking for truth; not a
series of guesses.

If a searcher has or had hopes of finding a man with a wife (incl. her name)
along
with perhaps eight daughters or so, I'm afraid they will be disappointed.
Back then females had practically no rights, which automatically placed them
in a
situation where their presence in the community could go unmentioned in
public records for many years, and any requirement to ever mention
them at all would be infrequent to say the least! Minutes of Church
members, etc. is a far better source for females and some relationships than
are the early tax records. In 1787 White Males under age 16
were not counted listed Blacks under 16 and over 16 were listed but only by
quantity of each; never by name.
Hope this helps a bit.
Bill Hunt






**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
favorite sites in one place. Try it now.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000010)


This thread: