 Welcome to the National Archives and Records Administration's 2022 Genealogy Series. We are pleased to present this educational series of lectures on how to conduct family research using the 1950 Census. My name is Andrea Matney, and as the program's coordinator, please allow me to do a quick introduction and provide instructions on how to participate. These lectures will demonstrate how to use records from the 1950 Census and other federal resources for genealogical research. Our presenters include experts from the National Archives and Records Administration and the U.S. Census Bureau. Sessions are intended for beginners to experienced family historians. All are welcome. We invite you to join the conversation. Please participate with the presenters and other family historians during each session's premiere. You can ask questions via chat by first logging into YouTube. Keep your eye on the chat during the broadcast because the speaker will answer your questions there in the chat. Type your questions in at any time, but please keep your questions on today's topic. In addition, find live captioning, handouts, and the events evaluation form under the video box by clicking on Show More. Note on our schedule that all sessions are broadcast on Wednesdays at 1 p.m. Eastern. And yes, all of the recorded videos will remain available for viewing later and at any time. Today's presentation is the story of the 1950 Census PE-8 Indian Reservation Schedule. I'm so pleased to introduce today's presenter, Cody White. Mr. White is an archivist with the National Archives at Denver and the agency subject matter expert for Native American related records. He holds a BA in history from the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, and a master of library and information science from UCLA. He has been with the National Archives since 2012. I am now turning the program over to Mr. White. Thank you, Andrea. And hello everyone. Thank you for listening. Now, live or in the future, I am recording this only days back at work after taking parental leave from my new daughter. So if YouTube survives a few decades and may as watching this as an adult, well honey, even you keeping me up all night didn't hold back this talk at all. My name is Cody and today we're going to talk about the 1950 census efforts on the res, the PE-8 Indian Reservation Schedule. Records that were part of the big census release this month. Big. You know, it's funny. I just heard from a retired mentor of mine the other day who was reminiscing about her census releases with the National Archives. Her first was 1920. I myself was hired just a month after the 1940 release. So this, the 1950 is my first. You ask in our archivists, they never forget their first. So for those of you not familiar with it, the law, the rule is that the federal decennial censuses are sealed for 72 years to just the individual. You can request your own line entry. But after that period of time, we then release them in full. This applies to any schedules that were taken along with the general population schedule. And in 1950, one of the special additional schedules conducted was a native reservation one. Now usually these special schedules were never saved, but in this case, they were. And largely up until last year, these were a bit of a mystery why they were taken, how they were answered, where they were even taken. I was approached to dive in. And while the forms themselves have been sealed until this month, our general Bureau of Indian Affairs and Census Bureau records are for the most part open. And that's how I was able to piece together the story. But the story, it's just a seed, an academic seed, enough for the layman, but someone could definitely build upon this research and dive in deeper. Everything I talk about today, all the records I reference are fully available via our online catalog. So one more thing before we start, I'm just going to apologize right out of the gate. Usually when I build these talks, I love to load them up with images, great photographs from our holdings. But this topic and the dates don't lend themselves to that. So you're going to see a lot of letters, lists, handwriting, carbon copies. It is what it is. So with that ringing endorsement, let's just dive in. Now, Mrs. Begay, I want to ask you about the names of the people in your family. Is your husband known by any other name than Richard Begay? Sometimes he is called Hastinez. Are you known by any other name than Marie Begay? Yes, some people call me Etsy, but usually I am called Kazba. This conversation never happened. Rather, it's a script of a possible conversation a census enumerator might have had with a theoretical Navajo woman. The script is two pages long, focusing on the unique questions regarding additional names, tribal and clan affiliation, languages spoken. The year was 1950 and staff from the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which we'll call the BIA from here out, as well as even Native American residents had been pressed into service on nearly 100 reservations nationwide to conduct a supplemental schedule to that year's decennial census, the P8 Indian reservation schedule. Given that the P8 schedule had many unique questions and that non-census staff would be doing much of the work, training material was sent out to BIA agencies. Here we see the first page of the script and a sample schedule showing how it was to be filled out, records of which, along with everything else I'll share today, are found in our online catalog with links throughout my slides. That aside, this month these schedules, along with the rest of the 1950 census, were made publicly available via the National Archives 1950 census webpage and can be browsed, searched and downloaded there. Now elsewhere in our genealogy fair, one learns how to navigate the webpage, but I'm here today to talk history, to try to explain the records. While every Native American was enumerated on the main census form, the P1 that was used across the entire United States, the P8 schedule was not conducted on every reservation. In fact, those that it would cover was not even finalized until shortly before the census was taken. This is that story. So let's set the context, get some background. But first, in the field of Native American records, the word census usually invokes those conducted by the BIA itself, most famously the massive nationwide congressionally mandated collection from 1885 through 1941 that is found on a host of sites. Those years aren't exclusive, however, the BIA had conducted roles sporadically prior to 1885, often used during removals, and after 1941, such as the 1953 Crow census that their tribal nation relies on for enrollment purposes. So it's important to not confuse these with the federal decennial census efforts that we're looking at today. Okay, so until the mid 19th century, Native Americans were not either enumerated at all or not clearly noted as native in the census. The Constitution's text on the census excluded Indians not taxed from enumeration and instructions for enumerators in the 1790 through 1850s censuses reiterated this. However, neither the Constitution nor the early instructions ever really defined Indians not taxed, which led to confusion about whether or how the count natives, especially in the mid 1800s, when many tribes were living on these newly created reservations and were thus considered wards of the government. So in 1860, the Census Bureau just estimated the overall native population in the United States. In 1870 Indian agents were tasked with a more precise estimation for census tables. In 1880, a small number of reservations were specifically enumerated. Here on this slide we see one such schedule from Montana, but it all changed in 1890 when the Census Act called for all natives to be enumerated with mixed results, large reservations and language barriers creating issues in places. A special native schedule was conducted in 1900. And then again in 1910 seen in part here on this slide. This one had 14 specific questions focusing mostly on how well the government's assimilation efforts were working. Now think this was near the peak of the boarding school and a lot men eras. The government wanted to see how well their policies were working to those ends. In what became sort of a 20 year cycle then, special focus was placed on capturing native information in 1930. Though no special schedule was used, they just tweet the general questions. For example, using the columns for father and mother birth location to instead capture tribal affiliation and degree of blood. In 1930 they pressed enumerators to ensure they were capturing native citizens. And I say native citizens here because finally in 1924, we cleared up all the confusion and passed a citizenship law for all natives. Before it was sort of a hodgepodge of who was a citizen based on circumstances and land allotments and military service and whatnot. In 1940, no special effort was really made. And as we'll see later that affected the data. In this chart from the Census Bureau, we get a good snapshot of what information was captured for natives in each decennial census, going back to the 1891 that I mentioned. We see here the 1931 was the most complete as far as general data goes, the kind of information today that genealogists love. And when the Census Bureau had no interest in the assimilation based questions that dominated the 1910 schedule. And that will arise again as they planned the 1950 census. The Census Bureau's main job, in essence, is to provide data on the population that then citizens and other agencies use. But data on natives was often uneven. For example, this was very acute on the massive Navajo Nation seen here. Now, for those of you who haven't traveled the West, and I mean travel, you know, not just fly over, cross over the interstates, but like taking Highway 64 in northwest New Mexico, coming down from the four corners, going to Abaco, and you get a very, very good sense of the massiveness and ruralness of the land. Now, this was an issue across the West in conducting native censuses. And on our records from the 1940s, this theme is bemoaned again and again. They just couldn't get good statistics, and they often pointed to all the issues on the Navajo Nation as an example. There was a 1940 Navajo Agricultural Census that was a disaster, but it went back even further. In the 1930s census, enumerators just stuck to the few established roads. Then they sent out riders on horseback to make the counts. I've heard the 1940 decennial census called the Trading Post Census, because enumerators relied on the many trading posts that dotted the res, capturing information when folks came and went. And even when enumerators could find people, issues still arose, differing names, no birth dates, certain superstitions related to speaking names out loud. Our records make it clear that in the run up to the 1950s census, the issues in enumerating the Navajo was a prime driver, but the problems were also nationwide. Another example, when in 1930 efforts were explicitly made to enumerate natives, Oklahoma counted nearly 92,000. Ten years later, during the 1940 census, no special attention was paid to enumerating Native Americans, and the total count of Oklahoma's native population plummeted to around 63,000. So the need for a better count of the native population nationwide was noted again and again by the BIA in the years leading up to 1950. But unlike in 1930, when the regular census schedule was utilized to great effect, the BIA pressed for a special schedule, one that would feature very specific questions. So let's explore those questions. So as our records show, the push for the P8 schedule was by the BIA, and thus the selection of questions was entirely the BIA. The Census Bureau wasn't opposed, but the records make it seem they weren't really excited either, and they didn't want to conduct the P8 at the same time as the P1 because they felt the former would drag down the ladder. The BIA took their time. Starting the planning in 1947, they didn't have these questions settled until early January 1950, with just months for the Census Bureau to format, print, and distribute them. With that timeline, a planned question for Alaska Natives was cut right away. The census material had already been sent up to the territory, so they couldn't include the P8 there. The BIA offered to pay for the P8 with how many possible questions they wanted were told to budget around $40,000. So one can wonder if that's why some questions were cut, because in the end, the P8 schedule that was ultimately used fits onto one page with only 10 questions and then a block for housing data structure, and overall only costs 15,000 to print. Questions regarding land use and animal husbandry were discarded, as were two for the Navajo Nation only regarding extended family and land co-ops. The BIA had wanted to ask about participation in social groups, quote, characteristically American rather than Indian, end quote, such as the PTA and 4-H, noted as a way to measure acculturation, but this question was dropped. Questions regarding income earned, including one about arts and crafts with each kind delineated, was also dropped. Asking about the number of handicapped family members was nixed. All of these are noted in the records, seen here in the images on this slide. So let's take a look at the final P8 form to see what questions made the cut. And here it is. I buried the lead on the seventh slide. The final form, one sheet per family unit. The box at the top looks at housing. You have a name blank, column for other names used, tribal affiliation, clan affiliation if applicable, degree of Indian blood, several columns on the speaking and writing of English and other languages. And then one final question, if the person had attended or participated in native ceremonies in 1949. Now much of the real estate of the P8 schedule explores a particular theme, the quote, extent to which Indians are adapting to the culture of the white population, end quote, as the Census Bureau explained in its training material. Throughout the historical record, the BIA coily noted that this supplemental schedule was needed for planning purposes. However, not every reservation was planned to be enumerated with the P8, which begs the question of what sort of planning wouldn't involve every reservation. For a possible explanation, one could look at the overall movement in the late 1940s towards termination. The federal government's termination policy represented this dramatic shift from its former policy of self-determination for tribal governments only set in place in the 1930s. Termination was this extreme act of assimilation that sought to end federal recognition of tribal nations. It would close the trusteeship over reservations, essentially dissolving them, and place all natives under the legal sovereignty of each state they lived in. So in 1947, William Zimmerman, the associate commissioner for Indian affairs, divided reservations into three lists according to what he saw as their readiness to leave trust status. But as we mentioned earlier, the agency had poor data on many of the reservations, so entered the P8 schedule. It is actually the Census Bureau that best documents the possible link between the termination of tribal nations and the 1950s Census P8 schedule. Okay, so have you ever been out with friends and family, or family, and you don't really want dessert, but they talk you into it, and then, when you finish, they stick you with the bill? So in February 1950, despite what had been assumed before, the BIA suddenly claimed they could not guarantee the cost of the P8 schedule. So the Census Bureau picks up the tab, making it clear that the BIA would still have to pay for the tabulation of any data afterwards. But to cover this unexpected cost, the Census Bureau wrote a memo to the Bureau of Budget for the funds. And in the first paragraph seen here on this slide, they wrote that the BIA needed the information that would be collected by the P8 schedule for, quote, in connection with their present program in aiding Indian citizens to become economically self-sustaining and in order to lessen or remove governmental supervision, end quote. Sounds a lot like a definition of the termination policy, and if there's any academics out there listening, someone could follow this possible trail. So we mentioned that not every reservation was enumerated with the P8 schedule, and the ones done were fluid, seemingly up until the final buzzer. Here we see some memos from the BIA of reservations to add to the list. These were attached to a list of enumeration districts we'll talk about in a bit. Once the census kicked off, there was further confusion in the field of which reservations were to be done. In the spring of 1950s, superintendents were writing headquarters asking all kinds of questions. In California, a superintendent asked if he should be using the P8 on the smaller reservations around San Diego. The BIA reiterated that if the reservations were not on the list, then no. Up north, it was realized that the entire South Dakota portion of Standing Rock wasn't on the list. In that case, the census headquarters stated that the South Dakota portion was to be omitted because it was primarily, quote, non-Indian. So I just mentioned enumeration districts. Let's touch on that for a bit now. Both the Census Bureau and the BIA agreed that conforming enumeration districts, EDs, to reservation boundaries would ease the process. This wasn't an entirely novel approach. In 1930, the two agencies had collaborated to split up areas when deciding where BIA staff would conduct a census. And in some cases, even then, had conformed EDs to BIA grazing districts. In August of 1948, the BIA's Division of Geography spent 150 hours of their draftsman time. The records are singular, so records indicate they only had one. And they produced 77 maps that covered the reservations in question and split them into EDs. Here we see an excerpt from the crosswalk of reservations to their EDs. These weren't perfect. On the Navajo Nation, it was reported that one included a chunk of the city of Gallup, which isn't part of the res, so the PA was not used in those areas. With the questions only settled on in January 1950, officials were cutting it close in creating the PA schedule. On March 9th, the forums were sent out with just weeks to spare. But as we see on this slide of a telegram from Northern Minnesota, some staff were asking DC where the forums were. Also that March began the training of staff, so the BIA selected the numerators on each reservation as well as the crew leaders to manage them, which was a new thing in 1950, the crew leader position, one per 15 enumerators. CARE was taken to select those familiar with each reservation, the people, their customs, languages. The Census Bureau and the BIA noted that gaining the confidence of the tribal members was a high priority. Staff were told to reiterate that the data would, quote, not be used to deprive Indians of their rights or property, end quote, and it would be all held in the stripped confidence. So the BIA selected their own staff and often natives themselves to conduct this census and spent the latter part of March in training, such as a script and form we saw at the start of this talk. And they got to work. Enumerators were paid a dollar an hour plus five cents a mile if using their personal vehicle. If needing a horse, not an unlikely proposition given the expanse and the poor infrastructure of many Western reservations, enumerators were simply told to rely on the local prevailing rate. BIA staff doing the enumeration could take paid leave while also getting paid by the Census Bureau, work after normal working hours, or just take leave without pay. Now this issue of dual compensation was on the Comptroller General's radar. The Census Bureau records admit this, but it appears they went ahead regardless because time was of the essence. For example, on the Papago Reservation, poor roads slowed them way down, leading the superintendent to shut down agency operations and putting all his staff into an effort to enumerate the tribe. The rush in that because wage workers left the reservation in the spring for work. Now this was an issue across Western reservations in 1950. Again, especially with the Navajo. And in the decades since there are concerns about undercounting. So a side note, if you're looking for someone and not seeing them, this could be a reason. So how did the questions go over? There was some clarification from DC on how to record certain answers as it appears the enumerators needed help. Non-native spouses were to be noted on the P8, but any non-native lodgers or servants were not. Under question four about whether the person went by any other names, the enumerator could not simply note yes. They had to list one, although any more than that were to be disregarded. Question nine about knowledge of other languages could include foreign languages in addition to tribal ones. Over 75% answered that they were full blood. Very few, one out of 30, said less than a quarter. But these were self-reported and not taken too seriously as blood quantum had then started to be required for many tribal services. So claiming full blood was typical. The questions did raise hackles down in New Mexico. The United Pueblos Agency reported an overall objection to the ceremony attendance question, as well as the refusal of the Kiwa Pueblo in particular to answer the clan affiliation question. So concerns were raised that these protests would, quote, endanger and quote, the results of the census in these areas. So the census headquarters advised simply skipping the questions, which is one thing I want to check first when they are released. Again note I'm recording this talk prior to the release. By September, the bulk of the reservation enumeration was done. Here we see two Census Bureau memos tallying the P8 forms that the D.C. and Philly offices collected from each state. 7,115 had been received, which he was closely to the approximately 33,378 forms we hold today. Though not every reservation was enumerated with the P8 schedule, in 1973 a National Archives reference information paper estimated that 72.1% of all Native Americans were captured on the form. To not complete, what remains is an interesting snapshot of family units on reservations across the country that are now fully open to browse and research for the first time. Though this is where this presentation will get a bit wonky, the government takes the confidentiality of the decennial census very seriously with only special exemptions granted prior to the release. Even if I hadn't been on paternity leave from December to March, I still couldn't have grabbed any images of the actual records to show and walk you through the data at this point. I'm talking to you from the past because I'm recording this in March. So while I can't show you any of the data or any great screenshots, the site seen here is now live and I've since been able to dig around and you probably have to. My colleague Michael Knight gave a great talk a few weeks ago on how to navigate it. So check that out for more help or guidance if needed. And as the great Paul Harvey used to say, now you know the rest of the story. Good day. If you have any questions, let me just plug the other 1950 census related talks that my great colleagues have been giving and will continue to give in this series so so check them out. All right, let's have those questions. Thank you for joining us for today's presentation. We are wrapping up the lecture portion of the broadcast, but we'll continue to take your questions about today's topic in the chat section. Please take a minute to complete our short evaluation form so we can plan future programs based on your feedback. Find the link to it under show more. If we did not get to your question today, please send us an email. Note that the presentation's video recording and handout will remain available on this YouTube page and our website. If you enjoyed this video, check out our Know Your Records program. We have many more educational videos on how to do research with us. Thank you to the genealogy series team who contributed to the success of this program. We are grateful for your work. Again, please stay if you have questions, although we are concluding the video portion of the broadcast. We will continue to take your questions in chat for another 10 minutes.