Amanda Butterfield Genealogy

I have been struggling for weeks on the problem of which of the 12 children of George Madison Canter and Elizabeth Hannah Gilliland were alive in the 1900 census. According to both the 1900 and 1910 census, Elizabeth gave birth to 12 children. 8 were still alive in those census years. I had been able to verify that two of the deceased children were Eliza Etta Canter and Lydia Eunice Canter. However, I have had no such luck verifying the other two. George M. and Louisa Jane were the most likely candidates, as I have found no other records for these two past the 1880 census in Kansas. However, I have not been able to find any information on Sarah L. after her marriage to Jesse Webb in 1896. She also could have been one of the deceased in 1900. I had ordered George Madison's civil war pension file (the shortened genealogical version), and one of the documents states that in 1898, George had 8 living children, listing them by name: Mary, Catharine, William, Della, Sarah, Stella, Chloe and Janey (Cora Jane). George M. and Louisa Jane must have died sometime before 1898.

I will continue to try to find the death records for these two, but at this point, I'm not sure they ever made it out of Kansas. Their family moved back to Ohio in 1882, and I have searched death records between 1882 and 1900 with no luck. Unfortunately, civil registration in Kansas did not occur until after 1900, so I have struggled to find replacements for birth and death records of these two children.

As I have progressed throughout my research, I have tried to find my families in every census year they would appear. So far, thanks to Ancestry.com, this has been quite successful. However, multiple families are missing from the 1860 census. George Madison's family, his wife's in-laws, and some of his brothers' families are not to be found. I am almost certain they are still living in Jackson County, but just to make sure, I have done national searches for them. What is curious is that multiple families are missing. They are farmers, so they live in rural areas, and from what I have gathered, they live next to each other.

My current theory is that their area or neighborhood was missed by the enumerator either due to unclear enumeration districts, or bad weather which has been known to prevent census enumerators from traveling to rural houses. Any other thoughts as to why these families would all be absent from the 1860 census?

For the past while, I have been searching for birth records of the children of Catharine Canter and Thomas Eblin. I mentioned earlier in a post that I have had little luck. I am beginning to wonder if they moved frequently during those early years of marriage, so I will have to start searching for other residences. On another note, I spent 5 hours at the family history library today in Salt Lake, with only two successful searches. I have come to the conclusion that genealogy has times of drought and times of plenty. Currently I am in a drought. I want to keep searching for the missing birth records and marriage records of this family, but I have yet to touch the 4th generation in my 4-generation project. I only have 3 weeks left, so because of time constraints, I have to move on and leave the major problems for later research.

As a Family History major, I have fallen into the trap of the Family History Library Catalog. Don't get me wrong, the Family History Library is a wonderful resource, and its catalog aids researchers in finding microfilms and records. However, the way it categorizes records does not always suit a project. The catalog breaks down records by county jurisdiction. Usually, this works just fine to find our ancestors. However, county boundaries change. Your family may have been in one county for 50 years, but suddenly disappear. The county still exists, the family is still alive and living in the same place as far as you can tell, but they are no longer in the county records. A slight shift in the boundary may have placed them in a neighboring county. Or, often families on or near county boundaries may report to whatever courthouse is closest, not necessarily which county court house they belong to. As genealogists, we need to remember to take a step back, and forget about boundaries. Families were not trapped by invisible lines in the dirt. They may have owned land in another county, or may have friends and family living in another county they would visit often. If we take a closer look at where those friends and family are located, we may find that they are really just down the street.

The trap of the FHLC that I fell into this week was slightly different, though. Sometimes we get so caught up in searching in our counties and neighboring counties, that we forget to step back and look at the statewide records and collections. I have been searching for death records in Ohio in the 1900s, and searching the counties provided few results. I was then informed that the FHL has microfilmed all death certificates for the state of Ohio. I wasn't finding them in the county collections, because they were listed in the Ohio State catalog. I guess we all have to learn by experience.

In my Professional Genealogy class with Dr. Ryskamp, we are discussing the application process for certification or accreditation. I have heard countless times that it is highly recommended that you accumulate at least 1000 hours of experience in the area you wish to certify in. I had originally been under the impression that these were to be strictly research hours on various projects in the given area. Dr. Ryskamp clarified that hours spent in any genealogy courses, conferences, etc. that apply to your area of emphasis or to general genealogical research count toward the 1000 hour recommendation. Family History majors usually are closer than they think to their hour requirements by the time they graduate. Thanks for the clarification Dr. Ryskamp!

I have been searching for the birth records of the children of Thomas Ashbury Eblin and Catharine Rebecca Canter. I have now searched three counties Thomas and Catharine are known to have lived in, with only 3 out of 11 birth records found. However, one of the films was rather faded, and I have been told that the new computer microfilm readers in the library can read difficult films. Technology once again saves genealogy (that is if I can find the children among the washed out entries).

I have been working this week again on the family group of George Madison Canter and Elizabeth Hannah Gilliland. I have to say, Ancestry.com has made my life so much easier this week. I was able to find nearly all siblings in all census years available, and I have now narrowed down my list of possible children deceased before 1900. I also was able to track down some death dates thanks to Ancestry.com's Ohio death index database. I would love to order the death certificates, but lack the funds to order all of them. However, I am accepting research donations. :)