1
100
27
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/068d1d05ced8564a63a837ee278b9e15.jpg
effed0acf5dde5acd2e4b117e9b17231
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Florida-France Soldier Stories Project Collection
Alternative Title
Florida-France Soldier Stories Project
Subject
Cemeteries--Europe
Veterans--Florida
World War II, 1939-1945
Army
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">RICHES</a>.
<a href="https://projects.cah.ucf.edu/fl-francesoldierstories/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Florida-France Soldier Stories Project</a>.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Epinal American Cemetery and Memorial, Dinozé, France
Contributing Project
Florida-France Soldier Stories Project
Curator
Barnes, Mark
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">RICHES MI</a>
External Reference
"<a href="http://history.wisc.edu/epinal_project.htm" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">The Epinal Project- by Students of History 357: The Second World War</a>." University of Wisconsin-Madison. http://history.wisc.edu/epinal_project.htm (accessed January 3, 2015).
Description
<p><span>The </span>Florida-France Soldier Stories<span>project seeks to tell the stories of the Florida soldiers buried in the American Battle Monuments Commission cemeteries in France. Our goal is to honor and commemorate the brave individuals who gave their lives supporting the Allied forces, liberating France, and defeating Germany in the Second World War. Simultaneously, our goal is to teach the students who participate in this research project about the history of France and Florida during World War II, about the history of individual servicemen, and about how to implement historical research methods in their work.</span></p>
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
World War II Honor List of Dead and Missing Military Personnel from Manatee, Marion, Martin, Monroe, Nassau, and Okaloosa Counties
Alternative Title
World War II Honor List of Dead and Missing
Subject
World War II, 1939-1945
Veterans--Florida
Army
Description
A list of U.S. Army servicemen reporter either killed or missing during World War II. This particular page shows servicemen from Manatee, Marion, Martin, Monroe, Nassau, and Okaloosa Counties, Florida. A notable soldier listed in this record is Sergeant John F. Aylward, Jr. (1912-1944), who died on November 3, 1944, while serving in World War II. Also known as Jack, Sgt. Aylward was a part of the Headquarters Company within the 6th Armored Division, nicknamed the Super Sixth. Sgt. Aylward was originally from Ocala, Florida, and is interred at Epinal American Cemetery and Memorial in Dinozé, France.
Type
Text
Source
Digital reproduction of <a href="https://www.archives.gov/research/military/ww2/army-casualties/florida.html" target="_blank">original record</a>, 1946: National Archives Identifier 305285, Record Group 407, Modern Military Records LICON, <a href="https://www.archives.gov/research/order/textual-records-dc.html" target="_blank">Textual Archives Services Division</a>, National Archives at College Park, College Park, Maryland.
Is Part Of
Record Group 407, Modern Military Records LICON, <a href="https://www.archives.gov/research/order/textual-records-dc.html" target="_blank">Textual Archives Services Division</a>, National Archives at College Park, College Park, Maryland.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/172" target="_blank">Epinal American Cemetery Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Coverage
Manatee County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Martin County, Florida
Monroe County, Florida
Nassau County, Florida
Okaloosa County, Florida
Date Created
1946
Format
image/jpg
Extent
Medium
1 record
Language
eng
Audience
Mediator
History Teacher
Civics/Government Teacher
Rights Holder
This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li><li>create derivative works</li><li>perform the work publicly</li><li>display the work</li><li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li></ul>This resource is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a> of <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a>.
Accrual Method
Donation
Contributing Project
Epinal Cemetery Project
Curator
Jaimes, Kyle
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="http://www.archives.gov/" target="_blank">National Archives &
Records Administration</a>
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
"<a href="https://www.archives.gov/dc-metro/college-park" target="_blank">National Archives at College Park</a>
External Reference
"<a href="http://findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&
GRid=56370982" target="_blank">Sgt John F. "Jack" Aylward, Jr</a>." Find A Grave. http://findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&
GRid=56370982.
Albert Q. Alligod
Alcus G. Reddick
Allen Lundy
Alva C. Powell
Alvan B. Rowe, Jr.
Alvin B. Cannon
Amos F. Brady
Archie D. Clemons
Army
Arthur H. Davis
Averette A. Hinson
Benson P. Odom
Britt Gainey
Burton W. Shirah
Carllies
casualties
casualty
Cecil O. Lippard
Charles E. Osteen
Charles E. Roberts
Charles O. Schudt
Charles R. Sires
Charles V. Purpura
Charlie H. Whidden
Clarence F. Russell
Claude A. Knight
Clyde L. Albritton
Cyrus W. Alley
Dan I. Paulk
Daniel J. Fernandez
David L. Robertson
Earl D. Williams
Early R. Harris, Sr.
Edward A. Luif
Edward B. Collins, Jr.
Edward Peacock
Edward W. Clement
Edwin L. Kennerly
Elborn M. Davis
Eldred F. Scott
Elmer L. Ricou
Elmo J. Freyermuth
Emil Turner
Ernest E. Ogden
Ernest J. Grubbs
Floyd Adams
Frank Alfonson
Frank Dixon
Frank E. Peacock
Frank L. Spencer
Franklin W. Saunders
George F. Mills
Hadley B. Snell
Harold D. Roberts
Harold W. Hatchett
Harry B. Pillans
Harry L. Wickers
Harry N. Gahan
Henry L. Gardner
Herbert I. Turner, Jr.
Herbert P. Tomlinson
Herman Roberts
Hiram A. Gill
Hubert A. Dion
Hubert J. Estes
Hughes E. Hilton
Irbie N. Knoblock
Jack E. Wallace
Jack W. Nesom
Jackson L. Sawyer
James A. Cotton
James A. Thompson
James B. Jolly, Jr.
James E. Baggett
James E. Smith
James E. Steele
James H. Crosby
James H. Helms
James H. McCarty
James J. Hughes
James K. Christian, Jr.
James K. McMillan
James S. Simmons
James W. Baker
James W. Hinton III
Jasper H. Argo
Jewell T. Williams
Joe H. Brewster
Joe L. Metcalf
John A. Owens
John C. Howard
John E. Davis
John E. Langford
John F. Aylward, Jr.
John F. Cannady, Jr.
John F. Parrish
John Moore
John P. Jones
John S. Walker
Joseph J. McGee
Joseph R. Whaley
Joseph W. Birdwell
Julian Lucignani
Julius D. Fulford, Jr.
Justice L. Lawson
Kenneth K. Wright
Kintley L. McCrady
Lee Starling
Leon Roberts, Jr.
Leroy R. Wilson
Louis Brady
Louis M. Pitts
Louis N. Dosh
M. E. McCullough, Jr.
Manatee County
Mario Castro
Marion County
Marion F. Klotz
Marion N. Smith
Marion Nodlin
Martin County
Millard A. Hornsby
Millard M. North
Monroe County
Nassau County
Neil M. McLean
Okaloosa County
Ollie Henderson
Pafford W. McIntosh
Pasco Melvin
Paul D. Walterson
Paul E. Pelot
Paul P. Ruark
Percival H. Pinder
Quincy A. Brunson, Jr.
Quinton O. Steele
Ralph E. Sawyer.
Ralph H. Mixson
Ralph P. Wyman
Ray E. Deneritt
Raymond E. Darling, Jr.
Raymond F. Fox
Richard C. Woodard
Richard U. Ellerbe
Richmond Lee
Robert A. French
Robert A. McLeod
Robert C. Snidow
Robert E. Sudbury
Robert K. Thompson
Roy J. Hicks
Roy L. Chancellor
Rufus E. Davis
Rufus H. Lennon
Sammie Turner
Sampson J. Stephens
Samuel B. Steece
Samuel R. Jones
Sidney S. Underwood
Thomas Douglas, Jr.
Thomas E. Sheley
Thomas G. Folkes
Thomas L. Gordon
Tomlinson R. Russ
Upton S. Peters
Valex Colon
veterans
Victor D. Mette
Walter E. Olliff
Walter H. Wincert
Wilbert L. Robinson
William A. Watkins
William C. Cason
William G. Taliaferro
William H. Vallee
William L. Rogers
William N. Amis, Jr.
William R. Keel
William S. Henderson
William Silberg
Willie D. Atwell
Willie D. Bryan
Winchester Wall, Jr.
Wintford E. Aplin
Woodrow Paulk
Woodruff W. Watkins
World War II
WWII
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/9697452002c0afa7abef3add7278c68d.pdf
18a659428997e9f761e6050afb9f267c
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
General Collection
Description
Collection of digital images, documents, and other records depicting the history of Florida. Series descriptions are based on special topics, the majority of which students focused their metadata entries around.
Florida was first inhabited by Paleo-Indians as early as 14,000 years ago. By the 16th century, several distinct Native American tribes inhabited present-day Florida, primarily the Apalachee of the Panhandle, the Timucua of North and Central Florida), the Ais of the Central Atlantic Coast, the Tocobaga of the Tampa Bay area, the Calusa of Southwest Florida, and the Tequesta of the Southeast Florida.
In 1513, Juan Ponce de León of Spain became the earliest known European explorer to arrive in Florida. During the 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries, Spanish, French, and English pioneers settled various parts of the states, though not all settlement were successful. Most of the region was owned by Spain, until it was ceded to the United States via the Adams–Onís Treaty of 1819. On March 3, 1845, Florida earned statehood. Florida was marred by nearly constant warfare with the Native Americans in the region, particularly with the Seminoles during the Seminole Wars.
On January 10, 1861, Florida seceded from the Union and joined the Confederate States of American on January 20th. The state's participation in the Civil War revolved mostly around the transportation of goods via ships.
On June 25, 1868, Florida regained its representation in Congress. During the Reconstruction period, Florida drafted a new state constitution, which included statues that effectively disenfranchised its African-American citizens, as well as many poor white citizens.
Through much of its early history, Florida's economy relied heavily upon agriculture, especially citrus, cattle, sugarcane, tomatoes, and strawberries. Florida's tourism industry developed greatly with the economic prosperity of the 1920s. However, this was halted by devastating hurricanes in the second half of the decade, the Wall Street Crash of 1929, and the Great Depression. The economy would not fully recover until manufacturing was stimulated by World War II. As of 2014, Florida was the third most populous state in the country.
Contributor
Humphrey, Daphne F.
Alternative Title
General Collection
Subject
Florida
Eatonville (Fla.)
Orlando (Fla.)
Winter Park (Fla.)
Sanford (Fla.)
Daytona Beach (Fla.)
New Smyrna Beach (Fla.)
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Eatonville, Florida
Orlando, Florida
Winter Park, Florida
Sanford , Florida
Daytona Beach, Florida
New Smyrna Beach, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
External Reference
"<a href="http://dos.myflorida.com/florida-facts/florida-history/" target="_blank">Florida History</a>." Florida Department of State. http://dos.myflorida.com/florida-facts/florida-history/.
<span>Knotts, Bob. </span><a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/49672975" target="_blank"><em>Florida History</em></a><span>. Chicago: Heinemann Library, 2003.</span>
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Map of Florida Showing the Land Grant of the Florida South Railway
Alternative Title
Florida South Railway Map
Subject
Railroads--Florida
Agriculture--Florida
Fishing--Florida
Description
A map of Florida showing the Florida South Railway's land grant, published in 1888. The map includes information about towns along the railway, facts about Florida, and hints for potential immigrants. The Florida Southern Railway was established in 1891 when it took over the Gainesville, Ocala and Charlotte Harbor Railroad. Facing foreclosure, the line was acquired by Henry B. Plant (1819-1899) as part of his Plant System in 1892 and reorganized as the Florida Southern Railroad, which stretched from Gainesville to Ocala and then to Punta Gorda. In 1903, the Florida Southern was acquired by the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad (ACL). The ACL merged with the Seaboard Air Line Railroad (SAL) in 1967 to form the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad (SCL). Much of the original ACL lines are now part of the CSX Transportation line, which operates the SCL.
Type
Still Image
Source
Original 24-page map, 1888: Matthews, Northrup and Company. <em>Map of Florida Showing the Land Grant of the Florida South Railway</em>. Map. Buffalo, NY: Art-Printing Works, 1888: <a href="http://www.maitlandpubliclibrary.org/" target="_blank">Maitland Public Library</a>, Maitland, Florida.
Requires
<a href="http://www.adobe.com/products/reader.html" target="_blank">Adobe Acrobat Reader</a>
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/collections/show/36" target="_blank">General Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original 24-page map, 1888: Matthews, Northrup and Company. <em>Map of Florida Showing the Land Grant of the Florida South Railway</em>. Map. Buffalo, NY: Art-Printing Works, 1888.
Coverage
Palatka, Florida
Francis, Florida
Francis, Florida
Hollister, Florida
Mannville, Florida
Interlachen, Florida
Keuka, Florida
McKeein, Florida
Hawthorne, Florida
Grove Park, Florida
Rochelle, Florida
Gainesville, Florida
Micanopy, Florida
Evinston, Florida
Boardman, Florida
McIntosh, Florida
Citra, Florida
Reddick, Florida
Martin, Florida
Mount Tabor, Florida
Kendrick, Florida
Ocala, Florida
Candler, Florida
Ocklawaha, Florida
East Lake Weir, Florida
South Lake Weir, Florida
Conant, Florida
Lady Lake, Florida
Fruitland Park, Florida
Leesburg, Florida
Astor, Florida
Eustis, Florida
Tavares, Florida
Lane Park, Florida
Okahumpka, Florida
Centre Hill, Florida
Webster, Florida
Pemberton Ferry, Florida
Brooksville, Florida
Bartow, Florida
Homeland, Florida
Fort Meade, Florida
Bowling Green, Florida
Wauchula, Florida
Zolfo Springs, Florida
Charlie Creek, Florida
Brownville, Florida
Arcadia, Florida
Nocatee, Florida
Fort Ogden, Florida
Cleveland, Florida
Punta Gorda, Florida
Creator
Matthews, Northrup and Company
Publisher
Art-Printing Works
Date Created
1888
Format
application/pdf
Extent
98.9 MB
Medium
24-page map
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Civics/Government Teacher
Economics Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally created by Matthews, Northrup and Company and published by Art-Printing Works.
Rights Holder
Copyright to this resource is held by <a href="http://www.maitlandpubliclibrary.org/" target="_blank">Maitland Public Library</a> and is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only.
Accrual Method
Donation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
<a href="http://www.maitlandpubliclibrary.org/" target="_blank">Maitland Public Library</a>
External Reference
"<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/audio/Ep25-RailwaysOfCentralFL.mp3" target="_blank">Episode 25: The Railways of Central Florida</a>." RICHES of Central Florida. http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/audio/Ep25-RailwaysOfCentralFL.mp3.
Mulligan, Michael. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/225874809" target="_blank"><em>Railroad Depots of Central Florida</em></a>. Charleston, SC: Arcadia Pub, 2008.
Murdock, R. Ken. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/38291666" target="_blank"><em>Outline History of Central Florida Railroads</em></a>. Winter Garden, Fla: Central Florida Chapter, National Railway Historical Society, 1997.
Turner, Gregg M. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/184906141" target="_blank"><em>A Journey into Florida Railroad History</em></a>. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2008.
"<a href="http://www.csx.com/index.cfm/about-csx/our-evolution-and-history/interactive-timeline/" target="_blank">Our Evolution and History: CSX</a>." CSX. http://www.csx.com/index.cfm/about-csx/our-evolution-and-history/interactive-timeline/.
Alachua County
Altoona
Arcadia
arrowroot
Art-Printing Works
Astor
Baker County
bananas
Bartow
Boardman
Bowling Green
Bradford County
Brevard County
Brooksville
Brownville
Caloosahatchee River
Candler
cassava
castorbeans
cattle
Centre Hill
Charlie Apopka
Charlie Creek
Charlotte Harbor
Chinese sand pears
Citra
citrus
Clay County
Cleveland
climates
coconuts
Columbia County
comtie
Conant
corn
cotton
DeSoto County
Dragem Junction
Duval County
East Lake Weir
Eustis
Evinston
field crops
fish
fisheries
fishery
fishing
Florida Commissioner of Land and Immigration
Florida Southern Railway Company
Fort Mason
Fort Meade
Fort Ogden
Francis
Fruitland Park
fruits
Ft. Meade
Ft. Ogden
Gainesville
Glendale
Grove Park
groves
guava
hammocks
Hawthorne
hemp
Hernando County
hogs
Hollister
Homeland
immigrants
immigration
indigo
Interlachen
Irish potato
Irish potatoes
Jacksonville
Japanese persimmon
Japanese plums
John W. Candler
John W. Weeks
John Welsh
Johnson
jute
Kendrick
Keuka
L.O. Garrett
Lady Lake
Lake County
Lake Eustis
Lake Harris
Lake Weir
Lane Park
LeConte pears
Lee County
Leesburg
lemons
Levy County
limes
Lochbie
Manatee County
Mannville
Marion County
Martin
Matthews, Northrup and Company
McIntosh
McKeein
Micanopy
Monroe County
Mount Tabor
Nassau County
Nocatee
nuts
Oak-Lawn
Ocala
Ocklawaha
Okahumpka
Orange Belt Railway
orange county
Orange Lake
oranges
Osceola County
Palatka
Peace River
peach
peaches
pecans
Pemberton Ferry
pineapple
pines
Polk County
population
Punta Gorda
Putnam County
railroads
railways
rain
ramie
Ravenswood
Reddick
rice
Rochelle
Sherman Conant
South Lake Weir
St. Johns River
Stanton
strawberries
strawberry
sugarcane
Sulphur Springs
Summit
Sumter County
swamps
sweet potato
sweet potatoes
Tavares
timber
tobacco
Umatilla
vegetables
Volusia County
Wait's Crossing
Wauchula
Webster
Welshton
Zolfo Springs
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/SCC00021.pdf
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Orange County Collection
Alternative Title
Orange County Collection
Subject
Orange County (Fla.)
Apopka (Fla.)
Christmas (Fla.)
Maitland (Fla.)
Orlando (Fla.)
Winter Garden (Fla.)
Winter Park (Fla.)
Description
Collection of digital images, documents, and other records depicting the history of Orange County, Florida. Series descriptions are based on special topics, the majority of which students focused their metadata entries around.
Mosquito County, a massive county south of St. Johns County that consisted of much of Central Florida was established in 1824. In 1845, Mosquito County was renamed Orange County when Florida earned statehood. This new county included present-day Osceola County, Seminole County, Lake County, and Volusia County. Orange County was named so for the area's major fruit crop: oranges. The area was devastated by a freeze during the winter of 1895-1896, which allowed for subsequent land speculators to initiate a land boom in Florida, with Orlando becoming a "boom town." Seminole County separated from Orange on April 25, 1913 and was named for the Seminole tribes that originally inhabited the area.
In 1926, Orange County was hit by a hurricane and then by the stock market crash and Great Depression beginning in 1929. Central Florida recovered in the late 1930s and experienced steady growth until 1967. In 1971, Walt Disney World was completed, signaling the beginning of the transformation of the Greater Orlando area into one of the world's major tourist destinations. The citrus industry in the county peaked in the early 1970s, but many groves were destroyed by several freezes during the early 1980s.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Orange County, Florida
Apopka, Florida
Christmas, Florida
Maitland , Florida
Orlando, Florida
Winter Garden, Florida
Winter Park, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
<a href="http://apopkamuseum.org/" target="_blank">Apopka Historical Society and Museum of the Apopkans</a>
Cepero, Laura Lynn
Cepero, Nancy Lynn
Cook, Thomas
Davis, Larry D., Jr.
<a href="http://artandhistory.org/maitland-history-museum/" target="_blank">Maitland Historical Museum, Art & History Museums - Maitland</a>
<a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a>
<a href="http://orlandophil.org/" target="_blank">Orlando Philharmonic Orchestra</a>
<a href="http://orlandoremembered.org/" target="_blank">Orlando Remembered</a>
<a href="http://www.wghf.org/" target="_blank">Winter Garden Heritage Foundation</a>
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
External Reference
Blackman, William Fremont. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1725831" target="_blank"><em>History of Orange County, Florida; Narrative and Biographical</em></a>. Chuluota, Fla: Mickler House, 1973.
Howard, Clarence E. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/62733166" target="_blank"><em>Early Settlers of Orange County, Florida: Reminiscent-Historic-Biographic</em></a> Orlando, Fla: C.E. Howard, 1915.
Has Part
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/53" target="_blank">Apopka Collection</a><span>, Orange County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.</span>
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/52" target="_blank">Apopka Historical Society and Museum of the Apopkans Collection</a><span>, Apopka Collection, Orange County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.</span>
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/60" target="_blank">Christmas Collection</a><span>, Orange County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.</span>
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/112" target="_blank">Maitland Collection</a><span>, Orange County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.</span>
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/113" target="_blank">Maitland Historical Museum Collection</a><span>, Maitland Collection, Orange County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.</span>
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/150" target="_blank"><em>The Maitland News</em> Collection</a>, Maitland Historical Museum Collection, Maitland Collection, Orange County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/20" target="_blank">Orlando Collection</a>, Orange County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/106" target="_blank">Orlando Remembered Collection</a>, Orlando Collection, Orange County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/126" target="_blank">Downtown Orlando Information Center Collection</a>, Orlando Remembered Collection, Orlando Collection, Orange County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/110" target="_blank">Orlando Public Library Collection</a>, Orlando Remembered Collection, Orlando Collection, Orange County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/111" target="_blank">Orlando Regions Bank Collection</a>, Orlando Remembered Collection, Orlando Collection, Orange County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/105" target="_blank">Winter Garden Collection</a>, Orange County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/115" target="_blank">Winter Garden Heritage Foundation Collection</a>, Winter Garden Collection, Orange County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/124" target="_blank">Up From the Ashes Collection</a>, Winter Garden Heritage Foundation Collection, Winter Garden Collection, Orange County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/152" target="_blank">Albin Polasek Museum & Sculpture Gardens Collection</a>, Winter Park Collection, Orange County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials.
Original Format
1 book
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Orange County's Sheriff's Book of Wanted Persons, 1882-1889
Alternative Title
Wanted Persons in Orange County
Subject
Orange County (Fla.)
Sheriffs--Florida
Law enforcement--Florida
Police--Florida
Fugitives from justice--United States
Warrants (Law)--United States
Crime--Florida
Description
The Orange County book of wanted persons from 1882 to 1889, during the tenure of two sheriffs: Sheriff Thomas "Long Tom" Shine who served from January 27, 1877, until February 15, 1885, and Julias Caesar Anderson, who served until his death on January 20, 1901. Sheriff Anderson saw a very different Orange County than his predecessors, because railroads had doubled the local population in five years. While most of the wanted fugitives are from Central Florida, there were also warrants from across Florida. There were also warrants from different states, such as California, Alabama, New York, and Georgia. The reward prices varied from suspect to suspect, but most were within the range of 50 dollars, although some were as high as 450 dollars. While there are no more warrants issued from Florida after 1889, there were national warrants dating to 1897. This book was donated to the Museum of Seminole County History by Sheriff John Polk, who was the dean of Florida sheriffs from 1969 to 1990.
Type
Physical Object
Source
Original color digital image, 2015: <a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a>, Sanford, Florida.
Is Part Of
<a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a>, Sanford, Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/44" target="_blank">Seminole County Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Coverage
Orlando, Florida
Ocala, Florida
Live Oak, Florida
Sanford, Florida
McAlpin, Florida
Jacksonville, Florida
Tampa, Florida
Oviedo, Florida
Bronson, Florida
Leesburg, Florida
Columbia City, Florida
Titusville, Florida
Green Cove Springs, Florida
Seville, Florida
Cedar Key, Florida
Haines City, Florida
Bartow, Florida
Ellaville, Florida
Fort White, Florida
Lake City, Florida
Jennings, Florida
Madison, Florida
Monticello, Florida
Tallahassee, Florida
Date Created
2015
Format
application/pdf
Extent
2.34 MB
Medium
1 book
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Civics/Government Teacher
Rights Holder
Copyright to this resource is held by the <a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a> and is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only.
Accrual Method
Donation
Curator
Fried, Aaron
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
<a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a>
External Reference
"<a href="http://www.ocso.com/officeofthesheriff/historicalhighlights/tabid/58/default.aspx" target="_blank">Historical Overview</a>." Orange County Sheriff's Office. http://www.ocso.com/officeofthesheriff/historicalhighlights/tabid/58/default.aspx.
Perez, Robert. "<a href="http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1991-06-22/news/9106220759_1_john-polk-florida-sheriffs-law-enforcement" target="_blank">Ex-seminole Sheriff John Polk Dies At 59</a>." <em>The Orlando Sentinel</em>, June 22, 1991. http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1991-06-22/news/9106220759_1_john-polk-florida-sheriffs-law-enforcement.
3rd Street
5th Avenue
7th Street
A. B. Efrird
A. B. Shroud
A. D. Adair & McCarty Brothers
A. E. Buck
A. J. Bates
A. J. Ivey
A. J. Spradley
A. J. Sullivan
A. J. Weaver
A. L. Martin
A. M. Kendrick
A. M. Winfree
A. S. Colyar, Jr.
A. Strauss
A. Zeger
Aaron Coachman
abortions
Abraham Bell
Abraham Putnam
Adam Gillison
Adam Thompson
Alabama Penitentiary
Alachua County
Albert Cathey
Alex Henderson
Alexander Anderson
Alexander Ekstrom
Alexander Johnson
Alexander Mincey
Alexander Pitts
Alfred Clarke
Alfred Coffee
Alfred Jones
Alfred W. Burnett
Allan Pinkerton
Allen Ford
Alphens Martin
Amos cummings
Amos Jordan
Anderson McKinnon
Andrew Ellis
Andrew Wilson
Andrews & Martin
Apalachicola
Archer
Archie Loyd
arrest warrants
arrests
arson
arsonists
Asa Whitaker
assault
assault to murder
assault to rape
attempted murder
attempted rape
attorneys
B. A. Wrighstman
B. F. Bennett
B. H. Girele
B. R. Swoope
B. W. Bentley
bail jumpers
bail jumping
Bailey
Barbour County Sheriff's Office
Bartow
Ben Baker
Ben Lock
Ben Watkins
Benajmin F. Adams
Berrien Bryant
bigamay
bigamists
Bill Galvin
Bill Johnson
Bill Martin
Bill Rooth
Bill Sherson
Bill Williams
Billy Camble
Billy Campbell
Blitch
blood hounds
Bollock
Braxton Beacham
Broadway Street
Bronson
Brooks Johnson
Brooks Story
Brooksville
Broome
burglars
burglary
Burton H. Davy
Butch Bradley
Bynum
C. B. Easley
C. B. Hansel
C. C. Johnson
C. E. Hunter
C. F. Conerly
C. Gordon Hicks
C. J. Anderson
C. J. Perry
C. K. Dutton
C. K. Winston
C. P. Hoyt
C. P. Jolly
C. P. Kilgore
C. R. Scott
C. W. C. Wright
C. W. Hursy
Calvin Burton
Calvin Lockett
Cardinal Gibbons
Carl Bachman
Carmelo Salvati
Carson
cattle stealing
Cedar Key
Charles Adkins
Charles Badger
Charles Baldwin
Charles Bluemont
Charles Coleman
Charles David
Charles Johnson
Charles Martin
Charles O. Earnes
Charles P. Johnson
Charles Reddiford
Charlie Davis
Charlie Holmes
Charlie Reeves
Charlie Rose
Charlie White
Charlie Wood
Chataroi Road
Chattahoochee Brick Company
Ches Hughs
Chester Seymour
Chief of Police
Chief Pinion Detective Agency
Chipley
Christian Black
Citra
Clarence A. Seward
Clarence Tear
Clark
Clark Montgomery
Coffey & Hyer
Colorado State Penitentiary
Columbia City
Columbia County
Constantine Algero
convicts
Cooper Winn
cops
county government
Court Street
Creoles
crimes
criminals
Crosby
Cuff Patton
D. C. Hennessey
D. E. Mccarthy
D. U. Fletcher
Dade Coal Company
Dan Scott
Daniel
Daniel Rouse
David Caldwell
David N. Walker
Day & Gordon
Deaderick Street
detectives
detention
Dick Bell
Dimick
Doc Barrentine
Dock Rodgers
Dockie Carson
DOJ
Dry Goods, Millinery, Shoes, and Company
Duval County
E. A. McRae
E. A. O'Neal
E. B. Bailey
E. C. Vaughan
E. G. Elliott
E. H. Covas
E. J. Kelley
E. J. Young
E. R. Whitner
E. T. Dickinson
E. T. Williams
E. Upton Lovejoy
Earp's Detective Agency
Ed Curry
Ed Frazier
Ed S. Carr
Edgar Knowles
Edgward Eggleston
Edward A. O'Neal
Edward Asbury O'Neal
Edward Cunningham
Edward Sterling Harris
Edward W. Bannister
Ellaville
Ellis Phelan
Elmore Johnson
escaped convicts
Eueka Detective Agency
Eugene Day
Eugene Van Norman
Eureka Detective Agency
Eustis
Exchange Place
F. C. Buffum
F. C. Russell
Farrell & Boylan's Detective Agency
felonies
felony
Fernand B. Poupart
Fifth Avenue
Flem Spicer
Florida Penitentiary
Florida State Prison
Ford J. Perkins
forgers
forgery
Fort White
Francis P. Fleming
Francis Philip Fleming
Frank Blint
Frank C. Almy
Frank C. McNeilley
Frank Dusch
Frank J. Cassada
Frank White
Frank Williams
Fred Koehler
Fred numan
Fred Schmidt
Fred Spicer
fugitives
Furman's Job Print
G. B. Howard
G. E. Garretson
G. W. Shackleford
G. Walton
Galillard
George A. Hill David Dickson
George A. Searcy
George Allen
George Archer
George Brown
George Caldwell
George D. Bangs
George E. Malsby
George Favor
George G. Gurley
George Heyward Carpenter
George Johns
George King
George Manders
George Manhon
George Peuser
George W. Shackleford
George Washington
George Wells
Georgia Penitentiary
Gid H. Heck
Gilkinson's American Detective Bureau
government
grand larceny
Grant
Grant Bowlby
Graves Holt
Gravier Street
Graysville Penitentiary
Green Cove Springs
Gus Brown
Guss Story
Guy McLain
H. D. Ballard
H. H. Rudd
H. M. Huffaman
H. T. Gay
H. Williams
Haezen's Detective Agency
Haines City
Hall Trippe
Hamilton Story
Hampton Childers
Hampton Pinkney
Hardee
Hardin & Ramsey
Hardy Todd
Harmon Murray
Harris Miller
Harry Berry
Hartridge
Harvey Merrit
Hazen Detective Agency
Hennessey Commercial Detective Agency
Henry Allen
Henry Briscoe
Henry Davis
Henry Fish
Henry Griffin
Henry Hainey
Henry Johnson
Henry Lanier
Henry McTier
Henry Underwood
Henry Wilson
Henry Wright
Hertel
Highland
Hill Clark
Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office
Hooker
horse theft
horses
Hugh Conley
Hugh Jackson
Humphries & Sykesl R. R. Barrentine
I. H. Cook
incarceration
inmates
intent to murder
International Ocean Telegraph Company
Ira M. True
Ira M. True & Company
Isaac Sateur
Isaac Williams
Isac Cooms
J Q. Gallaway
J. A. Ewing
J. A. Hilliard
J. B. Gordon
J. Bartho Thrasher
J. C Anderson
J. C. Arnold
J. C. Geiger
J. C. Sawyer
J. D. Register
J. D. Wilson
J. E. Gaston
J. E. Haverfield
J. F. Milam
J. F. Rushin
J. F. Stallings
J. G. White
J. Galloway
J. H. Bankhead
J. H. Bear
J. H. Black
J. H. Fish
J. H. Hays
J. H. Mowatt
J. H. Twito
J. H. Wilhite
J. I. Town
J. Ira Gore
J. L. Clanton
J. L. Hilliard
J. L. Johns
J. M. Flemming
J. M. Holder
J. M. T. Petty
J. M. Williams
J. N. C. Stockton
J. Paul Russell
J. R, Perry
J. R. Porterfield
J. S. Barnett
J. S. Wood
J. W. English
J. W. McIntyre
J. W. West
Jack Baker
Jack Bowen
Jack Bryson
Jack Coleman
Jack Hall
Jack Scott
Jack Stemper
Jack Straughter
Jacksonville
Jacob Frey
Jacob Sheaner
jail breaks
jails
Jake Barber
Jake Jackson
James Allen
James Brady
James C. Snell
James Cannedy
James Cook
James Crawford
James E. Rice
James Geary
James M. Lewis
James Mitchell
James Morrison
James O. Archer
James Ora
James P. Martin
James Petit
James Roberts
James Slengle
James T. Garner
James Wiley
James Williams
Jap York
Jefferson County
Jeffrey Snell
Jennie Brinson
Jennings
Jerry Marshall
Jesse Middleton
Jessie Harris
Joe Crenelear
Joe Frisby
Joe Kelley
Joe Killebrew
Joe Pickett
Joe Weston
Joe Wiley
Joe Woods
Joe Young
John A. Pearce
John Brown
John Brown Gordon
John Cheek
John Cornish
John Culley
John Cummings
John E. Davis
John F. Morriss
John G. F. Powell
John H. Crawford
John H. Weber
John Harris
John Howard
John Jackson
John L. Crawford
John M. Breen
John McAleese
John McDuffy
John Monroe Benford
John Owens
John P. Long
John Polk
John R. Towers
John s. Town
John Smith
John Steward
John Summers
John Thomson
John W. RaymondJ. A. Woodall
John Webb
John Williams
John York
Johnson County
Johnson Spates
Jones & Garnet
Jordan Weathersby
Joseph Branch
Joseph Young
Judge Allen
Jules Anderson
Julias Caesar Anderson
Julius Anderson
Julius K. Ward
Julius Worley
K. P. Sumby
Kanawha Circuit Court
Katharine Handroff
kidnappers
kidnapping
Kissimmee
L. B. Story
L. B. York
L. F. Patterson
L. F. Pattinson
Lake City
Lake County
larceny
law enforcement
Lawrence Green
lawyers
Leesburg
Leon County
Levi G. Simmons
Levy County
Levy County Sheriff's Office
Lewis C. Cassidy
Lewis Carroll
Linck's Hotel
Lizzie Mitchell
Llloyd Williams
local government
Long Tom Shine
Lony Rutland
Louis C. Saliniere
M. C. Gantt
M. G. Bayn
M. H. Kelly
M. M. Willoughby
M. Smith
Mack Holloway
Madison
Madison County
Mahitable White
Main Street
Malachia Allen
Marion County
Mart Jackson
Mattie Jackson
Mattthew Burnett
McAlpin
McConnell
McFadden
McGowan Harman
McLeod, Cranford & Company
McLin
Miles Newburn
Milligan
missing persons
Monticello
Mooney & Boland Detective Agency
Moses Braxton
mules
murderers
murders
Mureland Yowns
Myers
N. B. Deatherage
Nashville Metropolitan Police
Nathan Barnes
Neal Taylor
New Orleans Cotton Exchange
New York State Reformatory
Nivision
Nixburg Beat
Nolan Smith
Northern District of Florida
Northern Pacific Express Company
O. A. Budington
O. J. Greenleaf
O. M. Ward
Ocala
Oisbin
Ollie T. Rice
orange county
Orange County Sheriff's Office
Order of Cincinnatus
orlando
Orlando Livery
Oviedo
P. J. Murphy
P. J. Rogers
P. S. Bartlett
Paduck Police
Palatka
Palmer
Parker House
Pascal B. Lang
Pat A. Clinton
Pat Corcoran
Patsy Washington
Peacock
penitentiaries
penitentiary
Pensacola
perjurers
perjury
Perry Vinson
Peter Barkey
Peter Cook
Peter Harrison
Phillip Bryant
Phillip Cook
Phinizee Williams
Phipps
Pine Street
Pinkterton's National Detective Agency
police
Polk County
polygamists
polygamy
Pope Leo XIII
Porter's National Detective Agency
Pratt Mines
Price Broyles
prison break
prison camps
prison escapes
prisoners
prisons
Quah Bivins
R. B. Cuthby
R. G. Hurley
R. J. Linden
R. M. Porter
railroads
Ralph Camfield
rape
rapists
Rees Walker
rewards
Reynolds & McLeod
Rice Gholson
Richard Benning
Richard Gardiner
Richard Graham
Richard Lawrence
Richard Lewis
Richard Meservey
Richard Moses
Richard Pelham
Richard Stephens
Richard Tumlin
Richardson's Detective Agency
Rifis Rice
Rob Huger
robbers
robbery
Robert A. Pinkerton
Robert Board
Robert Colbrook
Robert Frost
Robert Hagar
Robert Huger
Robert Jackson
Robert M. Brown
Robert McLane
Robert Pascal
Robert Smith
Robert Starke
Robert Tom Smith
Robert Wright
Roberts
Rollan Harris
Rome Under Nero
Rufus R. Wade
Russell & Osborne
Russell Randolph
S. C. Grogg
S. G. Todd
S. J. Hilliard
S. M. Farmer
S. P. Hardwick
S. S. Pickett
S. S. Puckett
Saco and Biddeford Savings Institute
Saint Augustin
Sam Devault
Sam Finnegan
Sam Hargettl Henry Wilson
Sam Johnson
Sam Smithson
Sam Snelling
Sam Williams
Sam Yates
Sampson Cason
Samuel B. Kennedy, Jr.
Samuel Davis
Samuel Francis
Sandie Martin
Sandy Polite
Sandys Keys
Sanford
Sebe Russell
seduction
Seth Taylor
Seventh Street
Seville
Shackleford's Georgia Central Detective Agency
sheriffs
Sherman Bram
Sherman Carouth
Shins
Sidney Lowe
Sieben Russell
Silas Brookes
Silas H. Brigham
Silas Harris
Silas Martin
simple larceny
Smith & Wesson
Smith, West & Lyons
South Florida Railroad
Southern Express Company
Squire BlacksheerSam Weston
St. Augustine
St. Johns County
Stanton
Starke
steal
Stephen E. Rice
Stephen F. New
Steve Fannin
Steven Wiggins
Studebaker
Sullivan's Detective Agency
Sumpter Nichols
Sunderland
Suwannee County
swindlers
T. B. Blount
T. B. Robbins
T. D. Newland
T. J. Fish
T. N. Boylan
T. T. Ellison
Tallahassee
Tavares
Taylor Nixon
Tennessee Coal Iron & Railroad Company
The Cincinnati Enquirer
The Criminal Record
theft
thieves
Third Street
Thomas
Thomas Byrnes
Thomas Campbell
Thomas Hays
Thomas Mike
Thomas Porter
Thomas Shine
Thomas Watts
Thomas Williams
Thompson Richards
Titusville
Tobe Crystal
Tobe Jackson
Tom Brinson
Tom Telfer
Tony Salvati
Travis Sumpter
U.S. Department of Justice
U.S. Marshal
Vincenzo Gioacchino Raffaele Luigi Pecci
Virgil Earp
voluntary manslaughter
voluntary manslaugther
Volusia County
W. B. Beard
W. B. Lowe
W. B. Parker
W. C. Bube
W. C. Parker
W. D. Kellett
W. E. Minchin
W. F. Wilson
W. G. Dyer
W. H. Bigham
W. H. Bowie
W. H. Davis
W. H. Deaver
W. H. H. Bush
W. H. Yater
W. J. Footner
W. J. Winstead
W. K. Knight
W. L. McDowell
W. L. Richardson
W. L. Trappard
W. M. Raulerson
W. O. Wadley
W. P. Harrison
W. P. Hazen
W. P. Loftis
W. P. Rogers
W. P. Thomspon
W. R. Eason
W. R. Gaulding
W. S. Hubbs
W. S. West
W. T. Dowda
W. T. Linck
W. W. Simpson
Wade Holmes
Wadsworth
Walter Ford
Walter J. Howaland
Walter T. Williams
wanted
warrant
Warren & Thomas
Warren Peavy
Warren Wilcher
Washington County
watch
watches
Whoreley Building
Wiley Jordon
Wiley Warren
Will Burney
Will Hammond
Will Hazen
Will Jacobs
Will Johnson
William A. Pinkerton
William Allen
William Averitt
William Brinson
William Buford
William C. Bird
William C. Wrightsman
William Coleman
William Creal
William Henderson
William J. West
William Jefferson
William Jordan
William Kemble
William Killebrew
William McKnight
William Mitchell
William Morriss
William Pierce
William S. Tyson
William Springer
William Stanley
William Stephens
William Strickland
William Walker
William Wright
Williams
Williams Vales
Willie Hansel
Willie Jordon
Willie Smith
Willis Hodges
Wilson Evans
Wood & Brother
Z. L. Baxter
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/30bdf6e99912cd3e9f43c5a2584ef5dc.jpg
b58a939900b4bcf4cef8803dc0746b88
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Silver Springs Collection
Description
Collection of digital images, documents, and other records depicting the history of Silver Springs, Florida. Series descriptions are based on special topics, the majority of which students focused their metadata entries around.
Silver Springs was originally settled by the Timucuans in the early 1500s. Although they were able to reclaim their territory after Spanish invasion, the Timucuans were ultimately succeeded by other tribes, such as the Seminoles.
In the 1860s, Samuel O. Howse purchased 242 acres of land in the area around Silver River. Silver Springs became known as Florida's first tourist attraction beginning with glass-bottom boat (invented by Hullam Jones and Phillip Morrell) tours in the late 1870s. W. Carl Ray and W.M. "Shorty" Davidson of Ocala further developed the land surround the springs into what is now know as Silver Springs Nature Theme Park.
Alternative Title
Silver Springs Collection
Subject
Silver Springs (Fla.)
Contributor
Cepero, Nancy Lynn
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/50" target="_blank">Marion County Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Silver Springs, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
External Reference
Martin, Richard A. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/952964" target="_blank"><em>Eternal Spring; Man's 10,000 Years of History at Florida's Silver Springs</em></a>. St. Petersburg, Fla: Great Outdoors Pub. Co, 1966.
Rockwell, Lilly. "<a href="http://www.floridatrend.com/article/15745/spring-woes-in-florida" target="_blank">Spring woes in Florida</a>." <em>Florida Trend</em>, June 20, 2013. http://www.floridatrend.com/article/15745/spring-woes-in-florida.
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials.
Original Format
1 color postcard
Physical Dimensions
9 x 7 centimeters
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Silver Springs: Nature's Underwater Fairyland Postcard
Alternative Title
Silver Springs Postcard
Subject
Silver Springs (Fla.)
Springs--Florida
Parks--Florida
Description
A color postcard featuring a model posing next to a horseshow palm at the Silver Springs State Park, formerly located at 1425 Northeast 58th Avenue in Silver Springs, Florida, in 1949. Silver Springs was originally settled by the Timucuans in the early 1500s. Although they were able to reclaim their territory after Spanish invasion, the Timucuans were ultimately succeeded by other tribes, such as the Seminoles. In the 1850s, Silver Springs began to attract tourists for steamboat rides. The park's popularity skyrocketed when the glass-bottom boat was invented in 1878.
Type
Still Image
Source
Original 9 x 7 centimeter color postcard: "Model Posing Next to Lucky Horsehoe Palm Tree at Silver Springs." 1949: Image number PC12591, Postcard Collection, <a href="http://dos.myflorida.com/library-archives/" target="_blank">Florida State Archives</a>, Division of Library and Information Services, Florida Department of State, Tallahassee, Florida.
Is Part Of
Postcard Collection, <a href="http://dos.myflorida.com/library-archives/" target="_blank">Florida State Archives</a>, Division of Library and Information Services, Florida Department of State, Tallahassee, Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/38" target="_blank">Silver Springs Collection</a>, Marion County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Original 9 x 7 centimeter color postcard: "Model Posing Next to Lucky Horsehoe Palm Tree at Silver Springs." 1949.
Has Format
Digital reproduction of original 9 x 7 centimeter color postcard: "<a href="https://www.floridamemory.com/items/show/157665" target="_blank">Model Posing Next to Lucky Horsehoe Palm Tree at Silver Springs</a>." 1949: Image number PC12591. Florida Memory.
Coverage
Silver Springs State Park, Florida
Date Created
1949
Date Copyrighted
1949
Format
image/jpg
Extent
55.7 KB
Medium
9 x 7 centimeter color postcard
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Geography Teacher
Rights Holder
Copyright to this resource is held by <a href="http://dos.myflorida.com/library-archives/" target="_blank">Florida State Archives</a> and is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only.
Accrual Method
Donation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://www.floridamemory.com/" target="_blank">Florida Memory</a>
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
<a href="http://dos.myflorida.com/library-archives/" target="_blank">Florida State Archives</a>
External Reference
Martin, Richard A. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/952964" target="_blank"><em>Eternal SpringMan's 10,000 Years of History at Florida's Silver Springs</em></a>. St. Petersburg, Fla: Great Outdoors Pub. Co, 1966.
Rockwell, Lilly. "<a href="http://www.floridatrend.com/article/15745/spring-woes-in-florida" target="_blank">Spring woes in Florida</a>." <em>Florida Trend</em>, June 20, 2013. http://www.floridatrend.com/article/15745/spring-woes-in-florida.
Transcript
Silver Springs—Nature's Underwater Fairyland
bathing suits
horsehoe palms
Marion County
model
models
parks
Silver Springs
Silver Springs State Park
spring
springs
swimsuits
tourism
tourist attractions
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/330b481d11752c95bb7ee8e364ce2778.mp3
f2fba4678f31251f7f6dec05c9a55f83
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/41846bbdf8d53b88ff0b72258acdde63.pdf
845d9983bdb4a30744de4c4b8047cc8f
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Seminole County Centennial Celebration Collection
Description
The Seminole County Centennial Celebration Collection contains digital items related to the 100 year celebration of the creation of Seminole County. Items include ephemera distributed before and during the celebration, photographs, and other digital items.
Seminole County will turn 100 years old on April 25, 2013. This centennial benchmark is being commemorated as Seminole Celebrates A Century of Success with a 100-day celebration beginning January 16, 2013, and will conclude with a community-wide Centennial Festival planned for April 20, 2013.
Seminole Celebrates will highlight the county Points of Pride and is designed to celebrate Seminole County's heritage while embracing its future. Collaboration among the business community, faith-based organizations, art and historical societies, civic groups, and educational institutions will provide our residents with numerous fun family oriented events and activities over the 100 days of celebration.
Contributor
<a href="http://www.celerysoupsanford.com/" target="_blank">Creative Sanford, Inc.</a>
<a href="http://www.goldenrodhistoricalsociety.com/" target="_blank">Goldenrod Historical Society Museum</a><a href="http://www.goldsboromuseum.com/" target="_blank"><br /></a>
<a href="http://www.goldsboromuseum.com/" target="_blank">Goldsboro Historical Museum</a>
<a href="http://www.sanfordwelcomecenter.com/" target="_blank">Historic Sanford Welcome Center</a>
<a href="http://www.lakemaryhistory.org/" target="_blank">Lake Mary Historical Museum</a>
<a href="http://www.usgennet.org/usa/fl/county/seminole/Geneva/museum.htm" target="_blank">Museum of Geneva History</a>
<a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a>
<a href="http://oviedohs.com/" target="_blank">Oviedo Historical Society</a>
<a href="http://www.ruralheritagecenter.net/" target="_blank">Rural Heritage Center</a>
<a href="http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.aspx?page=108" target="_blank">Sanford Museum</a>
<a href="http://www.publichistorycenter.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">UCF Public History Center</a>
Alternative Title
Seminole Centennial Collection
Subject
Seminole County (Fla.)
Goldenrod (Fla.)
Sanford (Fla.)
Lake Mary (Fla.)
Oviedo (Fla.)
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/30" target="_blank">Seminole County Centennial Celebration Collection</a>, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Creative Sanford, Inc., Sanford, Florida
Goldenrod Historical Society Museum, Goldenrod, Florida
Goldsboro Historical Museum, Goldsboro, Sanford, Florida
Historic Sanford Welcome Center, Sanford, Florida
Lake Mary Historical Museum, Lake Mary, Florida
Museum of Geneva History, Geneva, Florida
Museum of Seminole County History, Sanford, Florida
Oviedo Historical Society, Oviedo, Florida
Rural Heritage Center, Geneva, Florida
Sanford Museum, Sanford, Florida
UCF Public History Center, Sanford, Florida
Contributing Project
<a href="http://apps.seminolecountyfl.gov/centennial/index.aspx" target="_blank">Seminole County Centennial Celebration</a>
Curator
Marra, Katherine
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
External Reference
<a href="http://apps.seminolecountyfl.gov/centennial/index.aspx" target="_blank">Seminole County Centennial Celebration</a>
<span>Francke, Arthur E. </span><a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/39871004" target="_blank"><em>Early Days of Seminole County, Florida</em></a><span>. [Sanford, FL]: Seminole County Historical Commission, 1988.</span>
Oral History
A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Oral History of Mart Tucker
Alternative Title
Oral History, Tucker
Subject
Orlando (Fla.)
Christmas (Fla.)
Gainesville (Fla.)
Description
An pral history of Mart Tucker, conducted by Stephanie Youngers on November 10, 2010. In the interview, Tucker discusses the various towns and cities that she resided in, her college education, her career as a typist, her family history, her children and grandchildren, her husband's career, her involvement in the Seminole County Farm Bureau and the 4-H program, and opening Tucker's Farm and Garden Center. The interview also includes commentary from her husband, Cecil A. Tucker II.
Table Of Contents
0:00:00 Introduction<br />0:00:18 Biographical information<br />0:02:33 Living in Holopaw<br />0:05:51 Family life<br />0:11:58 College education and career as a typist<br />0:18:21 Children<br />0:19:44 Living in Marion, Seminole, and Orange counties<br />0:23:36 Seminole County Farm Bureau and 4-H<br />0:27:21 Opening Tucker€™s Farm and Garden Center<br />0:32:05 Grandchildren<br />0:34:17 Family history<br />0:40:07 Closing remarks
Abstract
Oral history interview of Mart Tucker. Interview conducted by Stephanie Youngers at the <a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a>, Sanford, Florida.
Type
Sound
Source
Tucker, Mart. Interviewed by Stephanie Youngers. November 10, 2010. <a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a>, Sanford, Florida.
Requires
Multimedia software, such as <a href="http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/" target="_blank"> QuickTime</a>.
<a href="https://get.adobe.com/reader/" target="_blank">Adobe Acrobat Reader</a>
Is Part Of
<a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a>, Sanford, Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/44" target="_blank">Seminole County Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Coverage
Orlando, Florida
Christmas, Florida
Holopaw, Florida
St. Cloud, Florida
University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida
Ocala, Florida
Sanford, Florida
Citrus Heights, Sanford, Florida
Tucker's Farm and Garden Center, Sanford, Florida
Creator
Youngers, Stephanie
Tucker, Mart
Date Created
2010-11-10
Date Modified
2014-10-01
Date Copyrighted
2010-11-10
Format
audio/mp3
application/pdf
Extent
412 MB
166 KB
Medium
40-minute and 49-second audio recording
19-page digital transcript
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Provenance
Originally created by Stephanie Youngers and Mart Tucker.
Rights Holder
Copyright to this resource is held by the <a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a> and is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only.
Accrual Method
Donation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
<a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a>
External Reference
Sanford Historical Society (Fla.). <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/783150094" target="_blank"><em>Sanford</em></a>. Charleston, SC: Arcadia, 2003.
Antequino, Stephanie Gaub, and Tana Mosier Porter. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/48909411" target="_blank"><em>Lost Orlando</em></a>. Charleston, S.C.: Arcadia Pub, 2012.
Edwards, Wynette. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/53015288" target="_blank"><em>Orlando and Orange County</em></a>. Charleston, SC: Arcadia, 2001.
Akerman, Joe A. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/2647695" target="_blank"><em>Florida Cowman: A History of Florida Cattle Raising</em></a>. Kissimmee: Florida Cattlemen's Association, 1976.
Transcript
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>My name is Stephanie Youngers. Today is November 19, 2010, and I am interviewing Mrs. Mart Tucker and Mr. Cecil Tucker here at the Museum of the Seminole County History. How are we all today?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>We’re doing great.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Just fine [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Good. Well, we’re going to start where and when you were born.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Okay. I was born in Fort Pierce. January 19<sup>th</sup>, 1932.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And when did you come to the area here?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well—here?</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Did you move around a lot before you moved to the Seminole/Orange County area?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>No. I remember—the thing that I remember first was when we moved to the two-story house on Lake Barton—Little Lake Barton Road<a title="">[1]</a>—out just outside of Orlando. And we lived there for about 12 years, I think. And then Daddy, of course—he was going up and down the state when the tick eradication was on. And when that was over, he then became a foreman of the ranch south of Christmas. And, so when he was in the tick eradication, he never knew where he would be moved to another place. And so we rented the house that we lived in for about 10 or 12 years.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Wow.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>But, this[sic] was[sic] the [World] War [II] years, and you couldn’t find housing in Orlando. And somebody found that house, and bought it, so we had to find another place. And couldn’t go out to the ranch, because there was no school bus going there.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>How far was the ranch from civilization?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well, it was 18 miles south of the main highway.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Oh, wow.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>That was 18 miles south of Christmas. And Christmas was 20 miles from Orlando.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Wow. And you went to school in Orlando?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yes. Well, when that house was bought. If you worked for the company, they would give you housing in Holopaw. And the ranch was—that he was foreman of—was…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Osceola County.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well, it was in Osceola County, but it was owned by the Holopaw outfit. And therefore, we went to Holopaw. And we lived there. Best year of my life—well, not really.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>[<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>But I had lots of fun out there in Holopaw. Mother was—helped to do out the—what is it?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>The commissary. Food stamps.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>No, the—food stamps and things. Still the war—we still had that. And that was in the commissary. So I’d come to the commissary and I’d help the guys put cans up in that grocery department, and then I’d go to a guy that cuts up all the meat, and I’d do help there. And then at the end of the week, they would do their hand in their pocket and give me out some change. And I still have the .22 rifle that I bought with that money.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Oh, my goodness. So, the commissary—that was like the grocery store?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yeah.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>That was out in Holopaw.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yes. Because you didn’t have to go to town if you need clothes or, if you need…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>That was P. V. Wilson Lumber Company. Big outfit.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Oh, okay. Yeah.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>And they’re not there anymore. Not at all.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>No. they’re not. Do you know—what is the school that you attended?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well, I went to the school in—what is it? I had it down here. The city that was…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Holopaw.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>No, no, no. They had to go out.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Fort Pierce?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>St. Cloud?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>St. Cloud. St. Cloud. Rode into there.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>That’s still quite a drive. I’ve been down that road.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yes. It was.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And they had a grammar school there, or…</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>No. I don’t think so.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>What—in St. Cloud?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>No. in Holopaw they did.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>But in St. Cloud? Did you attend grammar school? Or was it a large school? Or was it a small place?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Just regular. St. Cloud.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>It wasn’t that large.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Wasn’t anything like Orlando. But it was bigger than Holopaw.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And you all lived in Holopaw for a year?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Just a year.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>When did you—where did you go after you left there?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well, when we left there, the ranch was just officially our home. But Mom and us—well, there’s[sic] four girls at the time—had not yet finished all high school. So we went into Orlando and rented in Orlando until my twin sister and I…</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Oh, you’re a twin, too? Wow.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yeah.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Tell us about your brothers and sisters.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Oh, hm. Well, Sally [Albritton] and Betty [Albritton]. Helen [Albritton] was the oldest. And then I had a brother, Boots [Albritton], that[sic] was about, I guess, four years younger than she. And then there was two sets of—Sally and Betty. And then there was Miriam [Albritton] and Margaret [Albritton].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So two sets of twins? Goodness.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Two sets of twins. Twenty months apart.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Oh, my goodness.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>You can figure why I guess she had her tubes tied. Didn’t need any more kids. And what else did you…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Well, just tell us about your brothers and sisters, because that…</p>
<p><strong>Youngers <br /></strong>Did you all help out at home a lot on the ranch?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well, see, we didn’t live on the ranch. I was privy to be able to—well, in the sixth and seventh grade, Daddy would go out for two weeks in the summer. And even then, on Wednesday, he would let me ride. I’d cow-hunt with him. I sat up on horse, and all that. He was my dad, but you took care of whatever you was supposed to do. So I loved to cow-hunt. We’d ride all day. We’d ride all morning and then have lunch and take a snooze before we rode some more. So you could get tired of it, but I didn’t.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>How about your brother?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well, my brother, Boots—he was out at the ranch. He married and was out at the ranch. But he—he didn’t stay there very long. Thing of it is, you have to not let hollerin’ at you bother you, because when you’re having to do something, or things are quick—and Daddy hollers at you to do something—you don’t get out of sorts, because that’s just the way it is. But he couldn’t take it. And so he went into Orlando there.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Now, did your other sisters do this with you too?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>No.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>She was, um—Mart<a title="">[2]</a> was the only boy.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>They didn’t. They didn’t never come out to the ranch when for—you know, like I did.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Her dad said that he had a pretty good cowhand in her until I came along and started courting her and messed it up [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>[<em>laughs</em>] Oh, well, you could have jumped in and helped us. No.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>When you went to the high school in Orlando, were you part of any groups or anything there? Did you have any kind of social functions that you attended?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well, I was athletic. So we had a group—a club—that I was head of. And as far as us girls that were athletic were concerned, we stayed after school and played the different sports that were available at that part of the year.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>What were some of the sports that y’all played?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Speedball was one. Of course, basketball. Volleyball.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Softball?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yeah, yeah. Softball. I was pitcher. But my main thing in high school was sports. And that and makin’ honor society.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>What about rifle team?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Oh, I forgot about the rifle team.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>You were on the rifle team too?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well, we had a rifle club. I got a picture home, shows this old, oh, eight or ten boys and girls up there with their rifles, out from the school building there. Now, can you imagine? They’re letting people bring rifles to school today? [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Oh, yeah. Were the boys a little put off by the fact that you could shoot a rifle?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Oh, no. No.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>No? They liked that? They weren’t afraid?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>I still have the rifle. Oh, when I was in Holopaw, and the guys—well, did I say that? And the guys, when they would give me money…</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And you bought your .22.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yeah, that’s when I bought that .22. When I was in the eighth grade. So…</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Oh, wow. And they let you buy it all by yourself?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Oh, yeah.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>See, can’t do that anymore either.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>[inaudible] Right, yeah. That was better days.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Yeah. And from high school, you went to University of Florida. Did you do that right out of high school, or did you take some time in between?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>No, I went right out of high school and I was going to major in animal husbandry. And, when did I see you first?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>The summer before you went up there.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well, I can’t…</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>You saw him here back home?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>When my sister and I graduated from high school, then the ranch was our home. And that’s where I lived. And our post office was in Christmas. We’d go into Orlando to get groceries and stuff, and so one of those days before I went off to college, got the mail, came out and told Mom, “Oh, I saw the postmaster’s son. He was waiting—in there waiting on customers.” She said, “Oh, you should have told him you’re one of the lucky ones. You’re going to be in Reid Hall.” And I was really surprised that Mother would want me to—but I knew what—she was afraid I was going to get homesick at university and didn’t know anybody, and at least I would know one person. Of course, since I was a beginner there, I had to go a week early for the week of orientation. Well, it just so happens there’s this guy sitting on the steps of the big building we were waiting for something, the next thing to be done. But because he was a transfer student…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>I had to go to orientation too.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>He had to do the same. And so that’s where I really met him. And, of course, we went to the frat[ernity] house and met all those guys.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Yeah. He said he used to invite you to dinner every week to come have dinner with him and all the boys there.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Of course, he made sure to tell everyone one of them—oh, man. Whole house full of guys, you know. He told every one of them, “Hands off.” Never did give—well, he was out of town, he had to go home for his teeth or something, and old McGregor—tall, lanky fellow—asked me out. And I had already planned to do ironing and what not, but I said, “No.” That was the only…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>The only opportunity you had. He hadn’t gotten a word yet at that point.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yeah. He hadn’t gotten to the frat house yet. But that was great. And I went that one year. But if I really wanted to go again back, I’m sure money would have been able to be found. Mother had an operation that took what normally would have sent me, but by then, I was…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Sidetracked.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well, yeah. I was wanting to get a job and save up money so that whenever we were—we were getting pretty close, and so I didn’t mind not going back to work there. I worked there and I forget where it was in Orlando, but then we were married.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Jacob’s Packing House.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yeah. That’s it.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So when he finished out his education up there…</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>No, when he finished his—see, he had his first year in Orlando. Second year when I was up there too, and then the third year before—which way was it? We got married before he was graduated from college.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So, did you stay down here?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>No.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Yeah. You did. You stayed one year working at Jacob’s.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>After we were married?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>No. Not after we were married, before we were married.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well, the next year, then what?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Then we got married and you moved to Gainesville with me.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>And I got a job in the animal husbandry department at Typhus. I was supposed to type this book they were wanting to have. And they ended up finally making it not a book, but something else. And they—do you remember?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>It was a book, but go ahead.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well, anyway. That was—we had a lot of fun up there. One professor’s—of course I was a typist. They would give their handwritten stuff, and I would type it up. So I typed up this test that was going to be given out. And I went back to the fellow and I handed him the typed thing. And I had his handwritten, I says[sic], “Do you want this? I usually give it to Cecil.” He says, “Don’t.” [<em>laughs</em>]</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>At that point, I was working on my Master’s [Degree].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Oh. They didn’t want him having the test questions.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Of course, she was teasing, but…</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Aww.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Those were good men in the ag[riculture] —animal husbandry. Until I was pregnant with Miriam [Tucker].</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>They weren’t good after that?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yeah. They were, but—then I was no longer working. So, what else is there to be said?</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>When you all had twins too, right?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Mmhmm.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Goodness gracious.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>We had a little girl first. Then had twins. And Dr. Hoffman from Orlando—he saw to things. I mean, here I was pregnant, but in Gainesville, and we’d come home for, you know—back and forth. And in Thanksgiving—I think it was—came home and stayed.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>But now the twins were born in Ocala. They were born in Orlando, while we were living in Ocala.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>True, true. Okay, so, it’s Ocala still. And he informed me that he’d tied my tubes. He contended with three on the ground, and coming in two’s, I didn’t need—and his financial status at the time, we couldn’t afford to have any more. To me, that was the best thing. That just made life so much easier, to not worry about getting pregnant.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers</strong><br />Right.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Good deal.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Right. And when you all moved back to this area, it was so that Mr. Tucker could take his job at the Extension Office?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Right.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yeah, when were first in Ocala, and then…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>We were in Ocala for two years. I was Assistant County Agent in Marion County. And then we came here. I was [Seminole] County Agent and we came—I think it was in 1957.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Okay.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>What else we got here?</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>What else did you do back here? Did you go back to work, or did you stay home?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Oh, what did I do? Cecil?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>You had three children. What do you think you did? [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Alright. We were living out by…</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Christmas.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Well, first we lived in Rosalia Drive.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yeah.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>In Sanford. In about 1960, we moved out on old Orlando Highway.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>We had acreage there—oranges and pasture. Well, that was one. And we had cattle. Cecil was workin’ at the dairy and he—they had calves that weren’t going to be dairy cattle. And we started building up a herd there.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>It was 1956 that we came here.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>But whatever had to be done with cattle and whatnot around the place, I usually did it. Because he had to go to work. We were feeding out—how many? Seven steer? That year?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Well, y’all raised a bunch of heifer yearlings first. And later on it was about 10 steers that y’all fattened up.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>What do you mean, “Y’all?”</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>You [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>In other words, the kids didn’t help out.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /> </strong>Well, they probably had to go to school or something. It was probably wasn’t in the summertime or not. But that’s…</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So, you did a lot of work.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Oh, and also, we had some cattle…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Lake Osprey[sp]. North of Osteen.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>And so I primarily would go out there and check the cows or take them feeding. And he wasn’t always with me.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Right.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>We’d do it real nice [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>About 1960, we moved out to Citrus Heights—Ginderville[sp] [Heights], or near Ginderville[sp]. And that’s when we were able to have a lot more cattle she could look after, and the kids could have 4-H projects.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>And really, what was really nice was there was an old house down the way, and Mom and Dad were able to—he kept the livestock market in Orlando. They lived there until finally when he retired. And this little house—with Daddy’s expertise on carpentry and stuff, they made the house a nice little place and lived there.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So you were close to your Mom and Dad. Oh, good.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Mmhmm.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And you were—when you were part of the women’s club for the [Seminole County] Farm Bureau, was that while Mr. Tucker was working at the Extension Office?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>It was after that, when we started a store in 1972. And at that point, I became president of Seminole County Farm Bureau. And it was a law in there that she became chairman of the women’s—deal.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>What did you do while you were on that board there?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>I knew that would be asked. I don’t know. Well, when we would have the whole group would have an annual meeting, and supper, and whatnot. Of course, I was involved in getting all that prepared. Getting tables right and things like that.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Did you help set, like, regulations? Or were the ladies involved in that way?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>No.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Not much. Not much. It was primarily just providing information of programs of what was available to them and what was going on.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /> </strong>Okay. Very good.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>But also, when we moved out to Citrus Heights area, you became more active in 4-H. Because the boys became active in 4-H.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And did they raise heifers?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>No, they raised chickens.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Chickens and pigs.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Oh.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil </strong>And they did raise heifers, but they never did raise any to show.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Oh, okay.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>At one point, they won all of the trophies [<em>laughs</em>]. With the chickens at the show.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Oh, yeah. They felt kind of bad, I guess. Or we did [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>They raised all the best chickens.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>I can see why. They had the best of help.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /> </strong>They had the best parents. That’s right.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Help ‘em learn.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Good.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Oh, goodness.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>But when we’d have our annual 4-H contest and things, she was in involved in helping us judge things like the lamp contest and making lamps.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>They make lamps? Really?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Yeah, and electrical, you know—learn things about electricity. And she also judged these speaking contests.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>The what?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Speaking contests.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Oh, yeah. Okay. A lot of this I don’t remember [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>That’s okay.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>I remember him, so far [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>That’s important.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>But it’s been really, really great being involved in those kind of things. Being around with the kids, and…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>We—we started the store in 1972. Were you involved in that?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Slightly. I always brought the main attraction of the store. And where did we find that little pig?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>My son-in-law found him. He was a little wild pig. And he was so young that he still had, you know, fawn with half-spots on it. Wild pigs have similar spots as well.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>So he became mine. And did he have a collar on?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Yes.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>A leash. Because when he was littler, if I was going to go mail something…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Or deposit something. Make a deposit at the bank.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>I would take him along down the streets of Sanford and take him in on a leash and finally he got bigger and bigger and bigger. And he’d come up on the porch. I’d chain him up there out of the sun.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>At the store?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yeah. At the store. But he would come in, I’d bring him in to the store in the car. And he would be in the front seat. And one day I went there, heard someone said, “Hey!” I saw somebody on the corner there with a friend, who went on to work. She told me later she said, “The person said, ‘Was that a pig?’” And she said, “Oh, that’s Mart Tucker. That’s all she can get to ride with her.” [<em>laughs</em>] What a good friend. So a car would stop in the middle of the street from the store and the lady would get out, come up the steps, and give something to Pete right there, and go down, get in her car, and go off.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>It was a daily ritual with her to give him some piece of candy. Something.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Some edible thing.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So they would just come up and give him treats then.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Yeah [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So how long did you have him for?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Until we finally, I quit bringing him in to the…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>He got to be about 700-800 pounds.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Wow. Yeah. You wouldn’t be toting him around too much.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>So he had a place there, at the barn at the house, and I guess…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>He got an infection. Yeah.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Well, he got to be an awfully big boy, so…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil <br /></strong>He did.<br /><br />[<em>phone rings</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>He must have been a happy boy.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>He had lots of friends. Lots of attention.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Excuse me. I forgot to turn this thing off.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>That’s alright.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Let’s see. That was at the store.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So, you helped with the store, doing like all the stock. And, like, when the customers would come in, you’d help them?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yeah. It’s Cecil and I. we did it all. It was a real enjoyable, and funny. Um, Horstmeyers?</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Horstmeyer [Farm and Garden].</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yeah, they have it now. Of course, we come in and get our feed there. And we came in and Miss Horstmeyer was behind the counter, and she made some comment about, “There’s the Tuckers.” And her telephone rang and she said, “Tuckers?” Instead of “Horstmeyer’s.” We had the biggest laughs over that. Her calling her own store by the wrong name. Oh, goodness.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And you sold the store to your son first, right? And he just took it over, and did you retire, or did you move on to different things?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well, we didn’t do any—I don’t know. You’d have to ask Cecil.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Okay.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Um, I don’t—I haven’t been—I haven’t thought of that in a while. Oh, goodness. So…</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Do you have grandchildren?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yep, we got great-grandchildren. We had Miriam, and then Cecil and John. Miriam is in—still in Christmas. She’s in Christmas. And Cecil III—he lives in a house that was ours in Sanford, and John is on the coast.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Daytona [Beach]?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>No, closer by.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Melbourne?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>That’s south. What is it, right down Cheney Highway? Um, Titusville.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Titusville?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Titusville. When, let’s see. I was trying to think, I guess Drew, his son, one of his sons, moved up to Titusville and he wasn’t going to be left behind from being around his grandchildren. And so they moved up. And they live in that area. So it’s real nice. Drew has four children—two boys and two girls. So John and Pam just make do over there profusely. [<em>laughs</em>] Which is really nice. So, we’ve spent time over there ourselves.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>You like it over there on the coast?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yeah. It’s nice. Yeah. We were talking about John and Pam and the kids there.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>I had asked Mrs. Tucker what she did once the store closed. If y’all retired, or if you just kind of—what you did.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Well, we sold the store to my son. And when we moved out to Christmas, we just spent more time working on the ranch. So. And that went on, we were pretty much full time on that until Mother—well, my dad passed away in ’95, and in the next couple years Mother came to live with us. And Mart looked after her for the next 10 or 12 years.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Wow.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Mother lived to be 101, one month, one week, and one day old.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>She was the one. She was quite a lady.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And how about your parents?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well, my dad passed away. I don’t know when.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Well, he was in his late 80s. And then later, your mother came to live with us, and she was in her 90s when she passed away.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>She was living the little house, where she did when we were in Sanford. And my sister Betty was living with her when, after Daddy died. And keeping care of her. And it was getting to be a burden for her. So I just had her and Mother to come on over to our house and she would be looking after Mother, but she wouldn’t have that, you know, burden of having to do all the shots of making decisions that she had us to be able to do that too. And…</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Well, I was going to take you back a little bit, because Mr. Tucker told me your maiden name was Albritton. And I know that’s real prominent down in the South Florida area. I know that the families would run cattle and different things. Was your family involved in that kind of thing as well?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Oh, yeah. And, of course, Daddy—he was—how long was he foreman of the ranch south of Christmas?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>15-20 years.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>The thing of it is, he was involved in the tick eradication, and then whenever that was over, then he got the job of being foreman of that ranch. And so…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>But his family, the Albrittons, were raised around Polk County/Hillsborough County area.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well, I was thinking of another—I can’t think of it. Where the Albrittons came from, I mean most of them were…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Well, some came from that area.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Okay. What’s the name of the area you’re talking about? [<em>laughs</em>]</p>
<p><strong>Cecil </strong>Pine Level in Pine Crest. Plant City.</p>
<p><strong>Mart </strong>Oh, okay.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Arcadia. By the way, Arcadia was named after Arcadia Albritton.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yeah.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>That’s really neat [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>[<em>laughs</em>] Oh, something came on my mind.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>But Mart’s family came from—there’s two lines of Albrittons. There’s fence-cutting Albrittons and hog-stealing Albrittons. She’s from the fence-cutting Albrittons. [<em>laughs</em>] That’s another story.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Yeah. Yeah. Because cattle people move their cattle up and down the state of Florida, according to the weather. Weren’t any fences anywhere. People fenced their yard in, and things. And then whenever the—what is it? The people that put the fence across?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Oh, the, uh…</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Phosphate…</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Phosphate mining.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>That came in. And so they didn’t want cattle going through, and they put a fence over, and so a group of men went and tore the fence down. And there was a big shootout there.</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>Well, the second or third time that they tore the fence down was when the shootout happened [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>I think we talked about that too.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Oh, did you? What else?</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Do you have anything else that we didn’t talk about that you want to talk about?</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Don’t know. No, I don’t guess so.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Okay.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Guess we’ve got everything.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>How about you, Mr. Tucker? You want to add anything?</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>No. I think we did pretty good[sic].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Alright, then. Thank you very much, Mrs. Tucker.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /></strong>Well, you’re welcome.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /> </strong>And Mr. Tucker.</p>
<p><strong>Mart<br /> </strong>I hope it’ll be worth having [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Cecil<br /></strong>[<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Oh, it will. Yes, ma’am.</p>
<div><br /><div>
<p><a title="">[1]</a> Correction: Barton Road.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p><a title="">[2]</a> Correction: Boots.</p>
</div>
</div>
Contributor
Tucker, Cecil A. II
4-H
agriculture
animal husbandry
Arcadia Albritton
Betty Albritton
Boots Albritton
cattle
Cecil A. Tucker II
Christmas
Citrus Heights
commissaries
commissary
cow hunting
cows
dairy
food stamps
Fort Pierce
Ginderville Heights
Helen Albritton
high schools
Hoffman
Holopaw
Horstmeyer
Horstmeyer Farm and Garden
Jacob's Packing House
Little Lake Barton
Margaret Albritton
Marion County
Marion County Extension Office
Mart Albritton
Mart Tucker
McGregor
Miriam Albritton
Miriam Tucker
Museum of Seminole County History
Ocala
orange county
oranges
orlando
Orlando Highway
Osceola County
P. V. Wilson Lumber Company
Reid Hall
rifle clubs
Rosalia Drive
Saint cloud
Sally Albritton
Sanford
Seminole County
Seminole County Extension Office
Seminole County Farm Bureau
SNAP
sports
St. Cloud
Stephanie Youngers
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
tick eradication
ticks
Tucker's Farm and Garden Center
typists
UF
University of Florida
World War II
WWII
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/5ffc5f5b2bc8eaeaa1df6d6494d81794.mp3
0bdb2f7aea21e3304ca11976e497402a
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/90940a60da0b4092b863636334d7e439.pdf
f6d69399e30e75cc389a9e764dd96350
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Seminole County Collection
Alternative Title
Seminole County Collection
Subject
Seminole County (Fla.)
Altamonte Springs (Fla.)
Casselberry (Fla.)
Goldenrod (Fla.)
Heathrow (Fla.)
Lake Mary (Fla.)
Longwood (Fla.)
Oviedo (Fla.)
Sanford (Fla.)
Winter Springs (Fla.)
Description
Collection of digital images, documents, and other records depicting the history of Seminole County, Florida. Series descriptions are based on special topics, the majority of which students focused their metadata entries around.
Mosquito County, a massive county south of St. Johns County that consisted of much of Central Florida was established in 1824. In 1845, Mosquito County was renamed Orange County when Florida earned statehood. This new county included present-day Osceola County, Seminole County, Lake County, and Volusia County. Orange County was named so for the area's major fruit crop: oranges. The area was devastated by a freeze during the winter of 1895-1896, which allowed for subsequent land speculators to initiate a land boom in Florida, with Orlando becoming a "boom town."
Seminole County separated from Orange on April 25, 1913, and was named for the Seminole tribes that originally inhabited the area. In the early-1900s, Seminole County was known for its agricultural development and close proximity to shipping lanes. By the 1920s, citizens in Seminole County, particularly in Sanford, soon shifted their interests in making the area a tourist destination.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
<a href="http://www.cfmemory.org/" target="_blank">Central Florida Memory</a>
Cepero, Laura Lynn
Cepero, Nancy Lynn
<a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a>
<a href="http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.aspx?page=456" target="_blank">Sanford Museum</a>
Has Part
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/118" target="_blank">Altamonte Springs Collection</a>, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/117" target="_blank">Casselberry Collection</a>, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/54" target="_blank">Geneva Collection</a>, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/55" target="_blank">Geneva Historical & Genealogical Society Collection</a>, Geneva Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/56" target="_blank">Goldenrod Collection</a>, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/57" target="_blank">Goldenrod Historical Society & Museum Collection</a>, Goldenrod Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/129" target="_blank">Heathrow Collection</a>, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/119" target="_blank">Lake Mary Collection</a>, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/43" target="_blank">Longwood Collection</a>, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/128" target="_blank">Oviedo Collection</a>, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/147" target="_blank">Oviedo Historical Society Collection</a>, Oviedo Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/16" target="_blank">Sanford Collection</a>, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/82" target="_blank"><em>Celery Soup: Florida's Folk Life Play</em> Collection</a>, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/65" target="_blank">Churches of Sanford Collection</a>, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/131" target="_blank">Creative Sanford, Inc. Collection</a>, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/41" target="_blank">Georgetown Collection</a>, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/78" target="_blank">Marie J. Francis Collection</a>, Georgetown Collection, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/101" target="_blank">Sanford Avenue Collection</a>, Georgetown Collection, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/79" target="_blank">Goldsboro Collection</a>, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/116" target="_blank">Henry L. DeForest Collection</a>, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/12" target="_blank">Hotel Forrest Lake Collection</a>, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/14" target="_blank">Ice Houses of Sanford Collection</a>, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/42" target="_blank">Milane Theatre Collection</a>, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/13" target="_blank">Naval Air Station Sanford Collection</a>, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/15" target="_blank">Sanford Baseball Collection</a>, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/61" target="_blank">Sanford Cigar Collection</a>, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/10" target="_blank">Sanford Riverfront Collection</a>, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/11" target="_blank">Sanford State Farmers' Market Collection</a>, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/30" target="_blank">Seminole County Centennial Celebration Collection</a>, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/31" target="_blank">Student Museum and UCF Public History Center Collection</a>, Sanford Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/32" target="_blank">General Photographic Collection</a>, Student Museum and UCF Public History Center Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/73" target="_blank">Seminole County Public Schools Collection</a>, Student Museum and UCF Public History Center Collection, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/125" target="_blank">Winter Springs Collection</a>, Seminole County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Coverage
Seminole County, Florida
Altamonte Springs, Florida
Casselberry, Florida
Goldenrod, Florida
Heathrow, Florida
Lake Mary, Florida
Longwood , Florida
Oviedo, Florida
Sanford, Florida
Winter Springs, Florida
Contributing Project
<a href="http://www.cfmemory.org/" target="_blank">Central Florida Memory</a>
Curator
Cepero, Laura
External Reference
Bentley, Altermese Smith. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/45705201" target="_blank"><em>Seminole County</em></a>. Charleston, SC: Arcadia, 2000.
"<a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/index.aspx" target="_blank">Seminole County Government </a>." Seminole County Government. http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/index.aspx.
<a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/52607030" target="_blank"><em>Early Days of Seminole County, Florida: Where Central Florida History Began</em></a>. [Sanford, Fla.]: Seminole County Historical Commission, 2002.
Oral History
A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge.
Interviewer
Youngers, Stephanie
Interviewee
Tucker, Cecil A. II
Bit Rate/Frequency
1411kbps
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Oral History of Cecil A. Tucker II
Alternative Title
Oral History, Tucker
Subject
Christmas (Fla.)
Gainesville (Fla.)
Ocala (Fla.)
4-H clubs--Florida
Sanford (Fla.)
Oviedo (Fla.)
Description
An oral history of Cecil A. Tucker II, conducted by Stephanie Youngers on September 23, 2010. Tucker served as a County Agent for the Extensions Office in various counties in Florida. In the interview, he discusses growing up in Christmas, Cracker Christmas and Fort Christmas Historical Park, his educational history, the 4-H (head, heart, hands, and health) program, working for the Extensions Office in Marion County and Seminole County, agriculture in Seminole County, opening Tucker's Farm and Garden Center, and his wife and children.
Table Of Contents
0:00:00 Introduction <br />0:01:50 Growing up in Christmas<br />0:05:38 Schools in Christmas<br />0:08:40 College education and 4-H <br />0:13:27 Working for the Marion County Extension Office<br />0:17:39 Working for the Seminole County Extension Office<br />0:22:41 Agriculture in Seminole County<br />0:33:54 Growing watercress and managing dairy<br />0:38:20 Tucker's wife<br />0:39:15 RECORDING CUTS OFF<br />0:39:15 Tucker's wife<br />0:42:55 Tucker's family and cattle<br />0:43:47 Challenges while working at the Extension Office<br />0:51:17 Closing remarks
Abstract
Oral history interview of Cecil A. Tucker II. Interview conducted by Stephanie Youngers at the <a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a>, Sanford, Florida.
Type
Sound
Source
Tucker, Cecil A. II. Interviewed by Stephanie Youngers. September 23, 2010. <a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a>, Sanford, Florida.
Requires
Multimedia software, such as <a href="http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/" target="_blank"> QuickTime</a>.
<a href="https://get.adobe.com/reader/" target="_blank">Adobe Acrobat Reader</a>
Is Part Of
<a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a>, Sanford, Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/44" target="_blank">Seminole County Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Coverage
Christmas, Florida
Fort Christmas Historical Park, Christmas, Florida
University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida
Ocala, Florida
Citrus Heights, Sanford, Florida
Agricultural Center, Sanford, Florida
Tucker's Farm and Garden Center, Sanford, Florida
Creator
Youngers, Stephanie
Tucker, Cecil A. II
Date Created
2010-09-23
Date Modified
2014-10-09
Date Copyrighted
2010-09-23
Format
audio/mp3
application/pdf
Extent
543 MB
177 KB
Medium
53-minute and 48-second audio recording
19-page digital transcript
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Provenance
Originally created by Stephanie Youngers and Cecil A. Tucker II.
Rights Holder
Copyright to this resource is held by the <a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a> and is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only.
Accrual Method
Donation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
<a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/" target="_blank">Museum of Seminole County History</a>
External Reference
Sanford Historical Society (Fla.). <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/783150094" target="_blank"><em>Sanford</em></a>. Charleston, SC: Arcadia, 2003.
Edwards, Wynette. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/53015288" target="_blank"><em>Orlando and Orange County</em></a>. Charleston, SC: Arcadia, 2001.
"<a href="http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/about-the-museum-of-seminole-county-hi/" target="_blank">About the Museum of Seminole County History</a>." Parks and Preservation, Seminole County Government. http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/departments-services/leisure-services/parks-recreation/museum-of-seminole-county-history/about-the-museum-of-seminole-county-hi/.
Transcript
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>My name is Stephanie Youngers. Today is September 23<sup>rd</sup>, 2010. And I am interviewing Mr. Cecil [A.] Tucker [II], here at the Museum of Seminole County History. Mr. Tucker, how are you?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>I’m doing great.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Good. We’ll start with where and when you were born, if you’re willing to give us that information.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yes. I was born actually in Brevard County in Rockledge. May 26<sup>th</sup>, 1931. And we lived in Rockledge—my mother and dad and I—for just a few weeks. My dad was working for the state and the tick eradication and his job as a range rider was over in east Orange County. So he moved us to Bithlo. And so, I was in—actually, he was already working for the state and headquartered out of Bithlo when I was born. My mother went over to Cocoa, to where there was some of the family, to help when I was being born.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Oh.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>We lived in Bithlo for about six months. And then we moved to Christmas.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Okay.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>And that’s another story.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And is that where you live now, is in Christmas?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yes. Yes.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Okay. How—how was it growing up there? Obviously different from today, but…</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>You know, Christmas is a kind of unique community. In a lot of respects, there’s some areas of it—we live a lot different today than it was when I was growing up, primarily because the people worked real hard to keep it that way and not let influence come in.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>That’s good.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>But the community is—always had a—it’s a real close-knit community. And people pretty much look after each other, and help each other out. And the [Fort Christmas] Historical Park in Christmas is helping to preserve some of this kind of history.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And like, we talked about the Cracker Christmas, and that’s one of the main events out there.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yes.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And I know a lot of people don’t hardly go to Christmas, but during that time of year, you’ll find a lot more people out there.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Cracker Christmas is always the first weekend in December. That also is the time that we have the tree-lighting and carol singing. We have decorated a Christmas tree. A large, living Florida red cedar. We’ve decorated it every year since 1952.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Wow.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>And we have the carol singing and tree-lighting. Tree-lighting and carol singing, always the first Sunday in December every year. So Cracker Christmas—that weekend involves usually the tree-lighting and carol singing, as well as what’s going on at the fort.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And is it like crafts and things at the fort?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yes, at the fort. Crafts and—it’s a real nice festival. It really is.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>I know most people that go to Christmas during Christmastime want to get their letters stamped from Christmas.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yes. That’s an interesting situation. When Mother became Postmaster in 1932, she found out how much people were interested to get their cards postmarked at Christmas time. So she created a Christmas tree cachet that could be put on the extra onto the cards.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>The envelope?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yes. Yeah. And so, she started doing that. And that was in 1934.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And everything is by hand too?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker <br /></strong>Everything was by hand. Yeah.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Wow. So how many people do you think, on average, would come through there?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Well, it started out, you know—it’d be 30 or 40 thousand a year. Now, we’re probably somewhere between 300 and 500 thousand a year that have this done. But it’s just for those extra, little special things. We don’t get a whole lot of cooperation out of the Post Office Department. Because they consider this an extraneous thing. It creates more problems for them.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Right. But you all still do it out there.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Still do it. Yeah [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>That’s crazy. Wow. Was there any other kind of events and things that you can remember, growing up?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>As I was growing up, the school—the activities at the school pretty much centered—it was the activities in the community. We’d have school plays, and get-togethers at school, a covered dish dinner, and this sort of thing. All those kind of things going on all the time in Christmas.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Right. And the school is located not in Christmas?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yep. Well, in those days, until 1969, there was a school in Christmas. It started out in the 19—in 18—probably the 1880s. It could have been a little before that. The post office—the church in Christmas was started in 1871, and shortly after that, the school was created in the church, in the building. But we’ve had a school in Christmas ever since, until 1969, when it ended up getting moved to Bithlo.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And that was all the grades throughout?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>We had a, it was eight grades. My first eight years of school was in that building. First four grades—we called “The Little Room,” and that was in the small room. That building has been moved to the fort, and is one of the preserved buildings at the fort. The larger room was grades four—five through eight.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And the high school?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Well, in those days, they didn’t—we had a junior high, but it went from ninth grade on. And now they call it, well…</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Now they have elementary school, middle school, and high school.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Middle school. Yeah. They call it middle school. So…</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And which high school did you go to?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>And then I rode a bus to Orlando and went to Memorial Junior High [School] in Orlando, and then I transferred in the tenth grade. I transferred to Orlando High School—OHS.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Okay. And after that, you went to the University of Florida?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Well, I went to Orlando Junior College, which was there in Orlando. It was in the early stages of junior colleges getting started. But I only went one year, because I had in my 4-H work. I had won a scholarship to the University of Florida. And that scholarship was fixing to expire on me, so I had to transfer out of junior college up to the university so I could get my scholarship.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>We’ll come back to your schooling. How long were you into the 4-H? I mean, what did you do while you were in there?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /> </strong>I was always very active in 4-H. In fact, when I got on up to—I stayed active in 4-H even when I was in high school. I drove my dad’s cattle truck, and I would haul our dairy heifers to the various shows around. I carried Orange County heifers to Tampa—to the show.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So you showed dairy cows?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Showed dairy cows and beef cattle. Yeah.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Alright. And did you show any hog, or anything like that?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>No. Never was very intrigued by hogs.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>I can understand. So you won a scholarship through doing your shows and things?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Through the 4-H. yeah.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Well, good. Okay.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Wasn’t a very big scholarship, but in those days, every penny counted.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Exactly.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>I think it was $100, or something like that.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Well, good. And that helped you get into the University of Florida?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Well, no, it just helped to pay some of the expenses when I did get in.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>When you went there, did they have, like—was it still an all-male college, or…</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>You know, I need to do a little research on that. It was close. We did have—when I was attending there, it was co-ed. But it was pretty close to the time that it became co-ed, because I went there when—as I was active in 4-H, we used to go to what they called “Short Course.” And we spent a week at the university in the summertime every year. If you won that position in 4-H, you could go to Short Course. So I had been to Short Course, I guess, every year for five, six, seven years. And so I was involved there at the university as a 4-Her long before I got there as a student, so I knew some of the things that was going on.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And they already knew you. They were expecting you.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yeah.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So is that what you went to college for was for the agriculture?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker <br /></strong>Yes.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Did they have a specific program?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>I was going to major in animal husbandry. And did.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Okay. And you went for four years at the university?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Well, I actually went for four years, and I was thinking about going to vet school. And at that time, the only vet school was in Auburn, Alabama. And I applied, and the earliest I could get in, I would be already out of college. You had to wait two or three years to get in. So I decided I would back up and look at the feasibility of going into—I was interested in either extension agriculture, extension work, or in research. So, I ended up going toward a Master’s degree. So I got my Master’s degree, and had an opportunity to go into extension down in Marion County, in Ocala. And that’s what got me into County Agent.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So after you graduated, you went right into the [Marion County] Extensions Office? Wow. And you were the youngest, one of the youngest in the state?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Well, there were a lot of young assistant county agents my age. But when I became the full agent, I was the youngest at that time of that.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And had you—when you first started out with the Extensions Office, did you work there for a while, or did you just go right into the position that you were in?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>I went right in. When I graduated from university, in Marion County, Assistant Agent position opened up. I applied for it, and received it, and went right into it. And so I was very fortunate, because Marion County was one of the most active 4-H counties in the state. They had numerous state titles, teams, judging teams that won. And then 4-Hers that won positions and went to Chicago[, Illinois], or the national deal. And so it was a great county to go into for training.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>What did you do at the Extension Office when you first started out there?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Well, I—my job was two-fold. As a—see, at that time, I had a Master’s degree in Animal Husbandry and Nutrition. So, I had a job in Marion County working with the cattle people. And then I had the job of being 4-H Agent. And so, as leader of the 4-Hers, I ended up training judging teams. We had judging teams in dairy, and judging teams in beef, and judging teams in poultry.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And you taught them, like, what to look for in the animal…</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Right. In the area of poultry—I didn’t know that much about it, but I found somebody that did.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>That seems like it would a little bit more in-depth.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yep. But we had some good teams. Some great 4-Hers there.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So, when you say, working with the cattle there, like what types of cattle? What types of things did you do with them?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Well, it had to do with the cattlemen on their pastureland, and any problems they had with pastureland. And, of course, we had a number of purebred ranches in the area. Some of them were Brahman, some of them were Shorthorn, some of them were Hereford. And Angus. So it was a good training area for me.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>It sounds like it. And how long were you with the Marion County office?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>I was with Marion County for two years, and the, just before I left Marion County, the county agent of Marion County—he’d always been quite interested in the Sheriff’s Department, and in fact, he periodically would go on with the Sheriff’s Department on activities, and it became available to him to be able to get appointed as Sheriff. And so he took it. So I was appointed for a brief time as acting county agent in Marion County—big county.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>But at the time, I had already applied for the job of County Agent here in Sanford, Seminole County, because it had became available.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And it was closer to home.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>And it was the closest one home.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Now, when you were up in Marion County, did you live up there?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yes.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Okay. Good to know you didn’t try to commute every day.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>No, no. I lived there.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So once he took the position as Sheriff, how long until you got to come down here? I mean, did they find someone else?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yeah. They found someone right away. In fact, I was just Acting Agent to take care of some things at the school. I wasn’t in the county, just for—goodness, it probably wasn’t for more than six or seven months.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Then you come down here.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yep.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Okay. You want to talk about what you did down here, which was a lot?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>The county agent that was here at the time—it was an interesting situation. He had—he had almost retired before his retirement. And some of it’s understandable. During the [Great] Depression, they cut back drastically on salaries. In fact, one of the stories told is: one of the farmers said to him, “Charlie, I heard they cut back your salary. Cut back 25 percent.” [<em>laughs</em>] He says, “Doesn’t that bother you?” Charlie says, “Well, yeah. But no, I just set the lever back 25%percent.” Well, he had done that. And he was fortunate that he was—had been in place for a long time. And the farmers were a little unhappy that when he first came in to the county, he did a tremendous job as county agent. I went through his files and things, and letters and all that he sent out, and he did a remarkable job. But after the episode with the salary and all of that, I think he was fortunate that he was real close friends with the director of Extension.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Goodness. So you came in about mid-1950s, into Seminole County?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>In 1956, I came here. The joke in the community was that, well, if you want to look for the county agent, just go down to Roumillat and Anderson’s Drug Store. He’ll be down there in the coffee shop.” So I says, “I tell you what. You won’t find me in Roumillat and Anderson’s. I’m going to go down to the other drug store.”</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Oh, goodness.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>But Charlie had—Charlie had a good job. It was just there towards the end.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>He was ready to go.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yeah. And some of the old time farmers here, they pretty well understood. And so—but he was—the day came time for him to retire. It was pretty well fixed.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So when you came in, what types of things did you do down here?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Well, one of the first things I did was to begin to get the 4-H going. Because there wasn’t much going in that area. And then I started working on the—bringing all of the mailing lists of the various farms—the citrus growers, the vegetable growers, the cattlemen—bringing those up to date. Charlie pretty well had a list, but he wasn’t keeping all of it up-to-date. And that was one of the things I worked on.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So there was quite a bit of agriculture planting?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yes. There was. In those days, we still was one of the more active vegetable producing areas in the state. And we had quite a bit of citrus here. We had probably 15 to 18 thousand acres of citrus.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And that was in the Sanford area?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>In the Sanford area—Seminole County area. Now, the unique thing about that is, Seminole County is the fourth smallest county in the state in land area. So to have much acreage of anything is a little unique, because of the size of it.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>I know the big thing that I’ve heard is, like celery and citrus.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yes.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>But I know there was maybe some other things in there, as well.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Well, in the—in those days, the nursery part of it was not—it was just beginning to come on. And in the ‘70s, we predicted that the nursery part—ornamental, horticultural, nursery—was probably going to outstrip the rest of it. And it has. But that’s just one of those things of how an area changes to meet the needs of the community.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Wow. And what about like agriculture—beef and things? I know there’s still quite a bit of it here, but not as much as it was.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>No. In fact, the only thing that is as much as it was is ornamental horticulture. The vegetables has dropped way down. Almost nil right now. Beef cattle is still, over in the eastern part of the county is where most of the traditional pastureland was. And it’s still a lot of it over there.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So that’s like, Geneva?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker <br /></strong>Geneva. Yep.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Oviedo kind of area.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Chuluota. Yep. Kind of area. Osceola.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Chuluota. Osceola. Okay. Back in those days, was it more prominent? Did it come further into Seminole County, or is it just kind of always in that general area?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>It’s always been out in that area, although every area in the county had some cattle scattered in it. Not today, but back in those days.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong></p>
<p>No. Definitely not today. Now, when you were with the exchange office, you were telling me earlier about getting the new buildings, and even using this building, the county home building,<a title="">[1]</a> as an agricultural office. Could you tell me a little bit more about that?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Alright. Let me back up before that. I probably developed more offices for the county than any other department head. When I became county agent in 1956, we were in the bottom floor of the courthouse. I called it the Salt Mine Section of the courthouse. And it was just basically one big room, which housed my office, the home economics agent’s office, and we had Agriculture Stabilization and Conservation [Service (ASCS)], the old AAA. That office was also in that area. And so, basically, and I was trying to develop part of the program that we provide in extension to farmers is information about agriculture. And some of the best information that Extension has available are the bulletins that they print on the various topics. So, I determined that we were going to have a—when I was working my way through college at the university, one of my jobs, I worked in the bulletin room. And we sent out to county agents all over the state. They would send in an order for so many bulletins of this, so many bulletins of that. And so I was involved in shipping those out to the various agents. So I was pretty well familiar with the—what was available in bulletins. And I determined, in Seminole County, we was[sic] going to have the best supply of bulletins south of Gainesville. And we did.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Wow. What kind of things did the put out for bulletins? Was it like that tell of, like maybe a pest type thing for plants, or…</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Right. They would have a bulletin out on chinch-bug control. And a bulletin out on varieties of grasses. You name the topic, and they had it. In vegetables, there was a general vegetable production guide that gave how many pounds of seed, and how you would do for all the vegetables for growing a garden.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So being down here in Seminole County and making more offices, and making more of this information available, you were very helpful to more of the general population here, to help them with their agriculture.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yeah. And that was part of the making information available. So when I came in to the—to the Salt Mine Section of the courthouse, it was a little bit difficult to do what I wanted to do with the—just that one big room. So, I showed—in those days, the [Seminole County] Clerk of the Court pretty much ran the county. And so, I was to see Mr. Herndon, and I said, “Mr. Herndon, I know we really need a little bit more office space. And the other day, I was downstairs here, on the other side our office in this big storage area down here, and I could regroup a lot of stuff that’s in there, and make an office right there.” He says, “Son, let’s go down there and see what you talking about.” So I went down there and showed him, and he says, “We’ll think about that.” And he agreed, as I recall. I don’t think I even had to restore the stuff. They moved it around. And so we put an office in, and it was an all-inside deal. I didn’t have any—if I’d had claustrophobia, I would have been in trouble, because there wouldn’t have been any windows.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>No windows. Wow.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>But it provided more wall space to do what I wanted to do. And that was to put these bulletins available for people to see and pick up.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Right. And then did you all stay in that office, or did you eventually move out into the new one?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Well, we were there until the early ‘60s. The judges needed more room. And we had made our space into a pretty nice office area, over the course of time. And so they wanted that space. So again, I says, “Mr. Herndon, there is an abandoned county building. It’s a good building. It has a potential. And what I’d like to do is for us to create a[sic] ag[ricultural] center and move all the agriculture people we’ve got—we’ve got soil conservation, plant inspector, we’ve got ASC here, and put all of us in one area for the farmers just to come into one spot. To see all these things.” And so, he says, “Well, we’ll think about that.” Well they appointed a committee, and I was on the committee, and we created the Ag Center at the Stockade building down here.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And that’s where everybody moved with you.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>They all moved with me.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Wow.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yeah. So then they wanted more space for the road department. And that was shortly about the same time that the county home had moved out of here. And so I said again, “I know where there’s a place that would really work out better for us, because we’re a little bit crowded here for all the people for the Ag Center.” And they agreed to it.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So you made this entire area here?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>This entire building became the Ag Center.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Wow. And how long was that office here?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>From the middle ‘60s until 19—I think Frank [Jazzen] moved over into the new Ag Center in the mid-70s.<a title="">[2]</a> I had already left as county agent at that time.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And how long were you County Agent?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Thirteen and a half years.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Wow. So what did you do when you were done being the county agent?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>I had an opportunity to go into a farming operation growing watercress down in Oviedo. Went into a watercress-growing enterprise, another young fellow and I. And after a couple of years, well, we ended up merging with Don Weaver and his brother-in-law, and created B&W Quality Growers. That grew into a pretty sizeable watercress-growing operation. We were the largest in the eastern part of the United States. And we had farms in Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Florida. Later on, I got out of that.</p>
<p>And Joe Baker, who had Baker’s Dairy over here, was interested in my coming to work for him. In fact, when he found out I had gone into the watercress, he says, “Cecil, you, uh, I didn’t know you was[sic] available.” I said, “Joe, I probably wasn’t available for anything except what I did.” Because it was a good opportunity that I got into. Anyway, when I got out of the watercress deal, I went to see Joe. He says, “Yeah. I’m still interested in you.” And he says, “When can you start?” I says, “Well, I got a couple of things I got to finish at home. I’ll need a couple of weeks.” He says, “No. I need you to start Monday.”</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Alright then.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>So, I managed Baker’s Dairy here for a couple of years. And then, well, let’s see. I got out of Extensions in 1969. And then I was in the watercress business for a couple of years. And then I managed Baker’s Dairy for I guess it was about a year and a half on each one of them. In 1972, I opened my own farm and garden supply store in Sanford. Tucker’s Farm and Garden Center. And we ran that as a family operation for the next 30 years.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And it’s Myer’s now?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yeah. Horstmeyer [Farm and Garden]. Horstmeyer. Yeah.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And when did you sell that there?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Well, I sold it to my son in 198—1983. That’s when I moved to Christmas. Let’s see, ’83-’84 —somewhere along in there. And he sold it to his friend, Horstmeyers[sic], in—about 15 years later.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So during the time that you lived—or that you worked—out here in Seminole County, did you still live in Christmas?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>No. I’ve always lived in—from the time I came here as County Agent, I’ve lived here in Seminole County. I didn’t move back to Christmas until I sold the store and moved back to Christmas in the mid-80s.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So you lived in the Oviedo-Chuluota area?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>No. Always right here in Sanford. Actually, over here is what’s called Citrus Heights. That’s where we lived.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>The whole time?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>The whole time. Yeah. Well, I shouldn’t say the whole time, because I bought a house on Rosalia Drive, and we lived there a few years, and then I lived out her. [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Now, during all this time you met a lovely lady?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Actually, I met her and courted her while we were in college at the university.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So she went to University of Florida too?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker</strong>She went to the university for a while. Her mother had to have an operation, and that was money sending her to college had to be used. And so by that time, she and I had gotten pretty serious, and she got a job working for an orange packing company in Orlando. And after—I don’t know—a little over a year we ended up getting married. And then she came back to the university.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>How’d you win her over? Did you do anything special? Or did you just say, “Alright, woman...”</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>We need to make that a continued story. I’ll be right back.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Now then, you was[sic] wanting to know about my wife.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Yes, sir.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Well, during the year that she was—I knew her—knew of her—before we got to university. I doubt if she knew too much about me beforehand, but we—I was a member of the Alpha Gamma Rho fraternity, agricultural fraternity there, and I would invite her every guest night to come over to the fraternity house and eat with us. And so they got to be pretty—and by the way, you’ll want to put Ms. [Mart Albritton] Tucker on your list as one to do an oral interview.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>I will do that.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Because she is an old-time—as an Albritton, old-time Florida family. But she’s been active here in Seminole County. She helped me in to get the store going. She’s active in the cattle operation. In fact, when I was running the store, she did as much of the cattle work as I did. We had a—a pet at the store. It was a wild pig that became pretty well-known in the community. She used to take it on a leash downtown when she went to make the deposit at the bank. She’d carry the pig with her.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>What was his name?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Pete. Streaky Pete. Pete the Pig. And he grew to be about 700 pounds. But anyway, that’s another story. But she was active in the [Seminole County] Farm Bureau—in the women’s deal at the Farm Bureau. She was active in 4-H, doing some of the judging, and some of the 4-H activities here. And of course, when we were opening the store, she was part of that. So she’d be another one.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And she—so you all married before you graduated?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Right.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>So she went to Marion County with you?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yes. In fact—well, let’s see. Before I got my Master’s, she was expecting my daughter. And she typed my thesis. And then when we moved to Ocala, uh—trying to remember at what point—my daughter was born before then.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And you have one daughter?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>I’ve got one daughter and two sons—twins. They were born on my daughter’s second birthday. And then, we have an adopted daughter, as well.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And you all have always had cattle in your family?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yes.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Put your boys to work?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>We’ve had cattle in our family since as far as we can tell, going back into the 1700s. And that’s another thing I’m researching, because one of these days, that’s going to be a part of my book too.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Wow. That’s a long time. Okay. As far as the cattle in your family—the history—that’ll be good?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yeah.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Do you have anything else that you want to add to our…</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Well, let’s see. Well, there’s a lot of things we could go into and talk about [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>We could always come back and talk about different things, if you wanted to.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>The problem of being able to have—to build a program when the county didn’t have any funds, it was a problem. I needed—and of course, I was always on the low-end of the pay scale. If it wasn’t for the fact that this is where I wanted to be, I’d have gone somewhere else. In fact, when I left to go into the watercress, I was offered a job paying me twice as much I was in extension. And he couldn’t understand why I wouldn’t take it. Because my opportunity that I was going into was better [<em>laughs</em>].</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Right.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Well, let me look here. See if there’s anything—this is interesting. When I came to the county, the phone number for the county agent’s office was 470.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>470? That’s it? [<em>laughs</em>]</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>[<em>laughs</em>] 470. That’s it. But we went through the medfly infestation, we went through the fire burning the [Sanford State] Farmers’ Market down, and having to help get things going for it to build back up. We had, in ’57—late ’57, early ’58 —a severe freeze deal that actually we had cattle dying, because there wasn’t enough hay, and we brought in hay for that. We had—one of the projects that I worked on was the eradication of screwworms. And my dad was involved in that. That was one of the miracles of using atomic energy to eradicate the screwworm fly. The female fly mates only once. And so they found that if they would raise screwworm flies and eradiate them with atomic energy deal, it sterilized the males, and they put these male flies out in the area, and they mate with the wild females, and the eggs wouldn’t hatch. And by continually doing that, they lowered the population of the screwworm fly to completely eradicate it.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Really? So it’s gone for good?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yes. Yes. it’s gone.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Wow. That’s amazing.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>And my dad was involved in that. He was an inspector. And in fact, some of the first pastures that they put the medfly—I mean the screwworm fly—out in was his pasture. So, when I was County Agent, of course I would make contact with the cattle people, and pass along the information to him about what was going on, and if there was an outbreak somewhere, they’d get on top of it.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Did they still have the technique of doing the cow dipping?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Yes. Now, the cow dipping—this was to eliminate the cattle tick—the fever tick. And in the early ‘50s, they was[sic] still—in fact, my dad worked with that. There’s still a lot of the, uh, dipping going on. Getting rid of the fever tick. And that lasted until, I guess, the early ‘60s.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Right. Is that something that they were able to just control?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>They were able to control it by dipping continually. They were able to eliminate the fever tick. After they wiped out a bunch of the deer who was perpetuating it. And some of your family was involved in that.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Yes, sir.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Oh, let’s see. We had a fire ant infestation that came into the county and we almost got it eliminated by flying [Boeing] B-17s [Flying Fortress], and putting out Myrex, until the do-gooders got involved and killed the program.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>And we still have fire ants.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>And we still have fire ants, and we’ll always have fire ants. But we came about within two flights of eliminating them.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Wow. Now, did that have any—the chemicals used, did it have any effect on people? Is that why people got involved?</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>The problem is it could create some problem in the water and affect fish, and that sort of thing. But we could have eliminated that. You know, by staying away from those areas. Anyway. Well, let’s see. Any other questions?</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>No. Not if there’s anything. I mean, I have lots of questions. I know you’re big into the rodeo, and you’ve done a lot for 4-H, and different things like that, but we can come back maybe and talk about that another other time.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Well, what do—yeah. Make a list. And we’ll do it. And like I said, I think you need to interview my wife, because I think you’ll find that to be interesting, as well.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers <br /></strong>Absolutely.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>There’s a lot of little ins and outs of what went on here in the county.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Well, I’ll definitely schedule a day with her, so she can come in and talk to me.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Good deal.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Well, I appreciate it very much.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>And I appreciate your being on board to help do these things.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Absolutely.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>We want to look through the list of people and be sure that we get some—thing of it is, we’re five years late on a lot of people that passed on. Joe Baker, he—would have been great to be able get his. And I want to set up Don Weaver.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Okay.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Don Weaver and his family was—they came here from Pennsylvania. But they are pioneers in the watercress industry in the United States. And he lives down in Chuluota, on the south side of Lake Mills. And we’ll work out getting that set up. Anything else?</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>No, sir.</p>
<p><strong>Tucker<br /></strong>Okay.</p>
<p><strong>Youngers<br /></strong>Thank you.</p>
<div><br /><div>
<p> </p>
<div>
<p><a title="">[1]</a> Old Folks’ Home.<br /><br /><a title="">[2]</a> Correction: November 1980.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
4-H
Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service
agriculture
Alpha Gamma Rho
Angus
animal husbandry
ASCS
B&W Quality Growers
Baker's Dairy
beef
Bithlo
Brahman
cattle
cattleman
cattlemen
Cecil A. Tucker II
Christmas
Christmas trees
citrus
Citrus Heights
Cocoa
cow dipping
cows
Cracker Christmas
dairy
Don Weaver
extension agriculture
extension offices
Fort Christmas Historical Park
Frank Jazzen
Gainesville
Hereford
Herndon
horticulture
Joe Baker
Marion County
Marion County Extension Office
Mart Albritton
Marty Tucker
Memorial Junior High School
Museum of Seminole County History
Ocala
Old Folks Home
orlando
Orlando High School
Orlando Junior College
ornamental horticulture
Oviedo
poultry
Rockledge
Rosalia Drive
Roumillat and Anderson's Drug Store
Sanford
screwworm flies
Seminole County
Seminole County Extension Office
Short Course
Shorthorn
Stephanie Youngers
Tucker's Farm and Garden Center
UF
University of Florida
vegetables
watercress
-
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A History of Central Florida Collection
Alternative Title
History of Central Florida Collection
Subject
Podcasts
Documentaries
Description
A History of Central Florida Podcast series explores Central Florida's history through the artifacts found in local area museums and historical societies.
Contributor
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php" target="_blank">RICHES Podcast Documentaries</a>
Cassanello, Robert
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/70" target="_blank">RICHES Podcast Documentaries Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Altoona, Florida
Astor, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Bushnell, Florida
Clermont, Florida
Cocoa Beach, Florida
Daytona Beach, Florida
DeLand, Florida
Disston City, Florida
Fort King, Florida
Geneva, Florida
Goldenrod, Florida
Groveland, Florida
Holly Hill, Florida
Hontoon Island, DeLand, Florida
Jacksonville, Florida
Kissimmee, Florida
Lake Apopka, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Lake Mary, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Merritt Island, Florida
Miami, Florida
Mims, Florida
Mount Dora, Florida
Newnans Lake, Gainesville, Florida
New Smyrna, Florida
New Smyrna Beach, Florida
Ocala, Florida
Ocklawaha River, Florida
Orlando, Florida
Ormond Beach, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Sanford, Florida
Silver Springs, Florida
St. Augustine, Florida
St. Cloud, Florida
St. Johns River, Florida
St. Petersburg, Florida
Tampa, Florida
Tavares, Florida
Weirsdale, Florida
Winter Garden, Florida
Winter Park, Florida
Ybor City, Tampa, Florida
Rights Holder
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES</a>
Contributing Project
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php" target="_blank">RICHES Podcast Documentaries</a>
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php" target="_blank">RICHES Podcast Documentaries</a>
External Reference
"<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php" target="_blank">RICHES Podcast Documentaries</a>." RICHES of Central Florida. http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php.
Moving Image
A series of visual representations that, when shown in succession, impart an impression of motion.
Producer
Cassanello, Robert
Director
Kelley, Katie
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A History of Central Florida, Episode 26: Fishing Boats
Alternative Title
Fishing Boats Podcast
Subject
St. Johns River (Fla.)
Sanford (Fla.)
Lake Apopka (Fla.)
Fishing--Florida
Description
Episode 26 of A History of Central Florida podcasts: Fishing Boats. A History of Central Florida Podcast series explores Central Florida's history through the artifacts found in local area museums and historical societies. These podcasts can involve the participation or cooperation of local area partners.<br /><br />Episode 26 features a discussion of fishing boats and other artifacts located at the Winter Garden Heritage Foundation and the Museum of Geneva History. This podcast also includes interviews with Dr. Mark Howard Long of the University of Central Florida and Doug Kelly, author of <em>Florida's Fishing Legends and Pioneers</em>.
Type
Moving Image
Source
Original 10-minute and 50-second podcast by Katie Kelley, 2014: "A History of Central Florida, Episode 26: Fishing Boats." <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php" target="_blank">A History of Central Florida</a>, Orlando, Florida.
Requires
<a href="http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/" target="_blank">Adobe Flash Player</a>
<a href="http://java.com/en/download/index.jsp" target="_blank">Java</a>
Is Part Of
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php" target="_blank">A History of Central Florida</a>, Orlando, Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/137" target="_blank">A History of Central Florida Collection</a>, RICHES Podcast Documentaries Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
Coverage
Lake Apopka, Florida
Sanford, Florida
Winter Garden Heritage Museum, Winter Garden, Florida
Museum of Geneva History, Geneva, Florida
Creator
Kelley, Katie
Publisher
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES</a>
Contributor
Long, Mark Howard
Kelley, Doug
Cassanello, Robert
Clarke, Bob
Ford, Chip
Gibson, Ella
Hazen, Kendra
Velásquez, Daniel
<a href="http://www.wghf.org/" target="_blank">Winter Garden Heritage Foundation</a>
<a href="http://www.usgennet.org/usa/fl/county/seminole/Geneva/museum.htm" target="_blank">Museum of Geneva History</a>
<a href="http://www.loc.gov/" target="_blank">Library of Congress</a>
<a href="http://www.floridamemory.com/" target="_blank">Florida Memory Project</a>
<a href="https://archive.org/details/prelinger" target="_blank">Rick Prelinger Archives</a>
Date Created
ca. 2014-09-26
Date Issued
2014-09-26
Date Copyrighted
2014-09-26
Format
video/mp4
Medium
10-minute and 50-second podcast
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally created by Katie Kelley and published by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES</a>.
Rights Holder
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES</a>
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Contributing Project
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php" target="_blank">A History of Central Florida</a>
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/items/show/4566" target="_blank">A History of Central Florida, Episode 26: Fishing Boats</a>." RICHES of Central Florida. https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/items/show/4566.
Kelly, Doug. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/666240027" target="_blank"><em>Florida's Fishing Legends and Pioneers</em></a>. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2011.
Click to View (Movie, Podcast, or Website)
<a href="http://youtu.be/vDbJ4lkE2G4">A History of Central Florida, Episode 26: Fishing Boats</a>
Is Referenced By
"<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/items/show/2504" target="_blank">RICHES Podcast Documentaries, New Podcast Preview: A History of Central Florida</a>." RICHES of Central Florida. https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/items/show/2504.
1st Street
A History of Central Florida
Anastasia Island
Arlington
Baldwin
Black Creek
Black Point
Bob Clarke
canoes
Chip Ford
Clark's Creek
Clay County
Clayton's Park
Dancy's
Daniel Velásquez
Doug Kelly
Durbin Creek
Ella Gibson
Eustis
Federal Point
First Street
fish
fish camp
fishermen
fishing
fishing boats
Florida's Fishing Legends and Pioneers
Fort Marion
Fruit Cove
Geneva
Green Cove Springs
Hart's Orange Grove
Hibernia
Hogarth's Landing
Jacksonville, Pensacola and Mobile Railroad
Julington Creek
Katie Kelley
Kendra Hazen
Lady Lake
Lake Apopka
Lake County
Lake Dora
Lake Eustis
Lake Griffin
Lake Harris
Lake Jesup
Lake Monroe
Lake Weir
Lake Yale
lakes
Leesburg
Magnolia
Main Street
Mandarin
maps
Margaret
Marion County
Matanzas Inlet
Mayport
McGirts Creek
Middleburg
Moccasin Creek
Moses Creek
Moultrie Creek
Mount Dora
Museum of Geneva History
Native Americans
New Switzerland
North River
Ocklawaha River
OCRHC
Old Fort
orange county
Orange County Regional History Center
Orange Dale
Orange Mills
Pabloc Creek
Palatka
Phelan
Picolata
Putnam County
Read's Landing
Remmington Park
River of Lakes
rivers
Riverside
Robert Cassanello
Roce Creek
rowboats
Russell's Landing
Sanford
Sinies Creek
Six Mile Creek
St. Augustine
St. Augustine Inlet
St. Johns Bar
St. Johns Company
St. Johns Railroad
St. Johns River
St. Nicholas
T. Pulot
Tocoi
tourism
Umatilla
Vincent Fish Market
wet wells
WGHF
Whitestone
Whitney
Winter Garden
Winter Garden Heritage Foundation
Yellow Bluff
-
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A History of Central Florida Collection
Alternative Title
History of Central Florida Collection
Subject
Podcasts
Documentaries
Description
A History of Central Florida Podcast series explores Central Florida's history through the artifacts found in local area museums and historical societies.
Contributor
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php" target="_blank">RICHES Podcast Documentaries</a>
Cassanello, Robert
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/70" target="_blank">RICHES Podcast Documentaries Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Altoona, Florida
Astor, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Bushnell, Florida
Clermont, Florida
Cocoa Beach, Florida
Daytona Beach, Florida
DeLand, Florida
Disston City, Florida
Fort King, Florida
Geneva, Florida
Goldenrod, Florida
Groveland, Florida
Holly Hill, Florida
Hontoon Island, DeLand, Florida
Jacksonville, Florida
Kissimmee, Florida
Lake Apopka, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Lake Mary, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Merritt Island, Florida
Miami, Florida
Mims, Florida
Mount Dora, Florida
Newnans Lake, Gainesville, Florida
New Smyrna, Florida
New Smyrna Beach, Florida
Ocala, Florida
Ocklawaha River, Florida
Orlando, Florida
Ormond Beach, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Sanford, Florida
Silver Springs, Florida
St. Augustine, Florida
St. Cloud, Florida
St. Johns River, Florida
St. Petersburg, Florida
Tampa, Florida
Tavares, Florida
Weirsdale, Florida
Winter Garden, Florida
Winter Park, Florida
Ybor City, Tampa, Florida
Rights Holder
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES</a>
Contributing Project
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php" target="_blank">RICHES Podcast Documentaries</a>
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php" target="_blank">RICHES Podcast Documentaries</a>
External Reference
"<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php" target="_blank">RICHES Podcast Documentaries</a>." RICHES of Central Florida. http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php.
Moving Image
A series of visual representations that, when shown in succession, impart an impression of motion.
Producer
Cassanello, Robert A.
Director
Hazen, Kendra
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A History of Central Florida, Episode 13: Buck and Ball
Alternative Title
Buck and Ball Podcast
Subject
Seminole War, 1st, 1817-1818
Seminole War, 2nd, 1835-1842
Native Americans
Marion County (Fla.)
Fort King (Fla.)
Description
Episode 13 of A History of Central Florida podcasts: Buck and Ball. <span><span>A History of Central Florida Podcast series explores Central Florida's history through the artifacts found in local area museums and historical societies.</span></span> These podcasts can involve the participation or cooperation of local area partners.<br /><br />Episode 13 features a discussion of war artifacts from the Seminole Wars. This podcast also includes interviews with Dr. Andrew K. Frank of Florida State University, author John Missal, and Gary D. Ellis of the Gulf Archaeology Research Institute.
Type
Moving Image
Source
Original 12-minute and 40-second podcast by Kendra Hazen, 2014: "A History of Central Florida, Episode 13: Buck and Ball." <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php" target="_blank">A History of Central Florida</a>, Orlando, Florida.
Requires
<a href="http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/" target="_blank">Adobe Flash Player</a>
<a href="http://java.com/en/download/index.jsp" target="_blank">Java</a>
Is Part Of
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php" target="_blank">A History of Central Florida</a>, Orlando, Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/137" target="_blank">A History of Central Florida Collection</a>, RICHES Podcast Documentaries Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
Coverage
Fort King, Ocala, Florida
Silver River Museum and Environmental Education Center, Ocala, Florida
Creator
Hazen, Kendra
Publisher
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php" target="_blank">A History of Central Florida</a>
Contributor
Frank, Andrew K.
Missal, John
Ellis, Gary D.
Cassanello, Robert
Clarke, Bob
Ford, Chip
Gibson, Ella
Kelley, Katie
Velásquez, Daniel
Cassanello, Kathleen<a href="http://www.marion.k12.fl.us/district/srm//" target="_blank"><br /></a>
<a href="http://www.marion.k12.fl.us/district/srm//" target="_blank">Silver River Museum and Environmental Education Center</a>
<a href="http://www.floridamemory.com/" target="_blank">Florida Memory Project</a>
Date Created
ca. 2014-04-24
Format
video/mp4
Medium
12-minute and 40-second podcast
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Civics/Government Teacher
Economics Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally created by Kendra Hazen and published by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Rights Holder
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Contributing Project
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/podcastsblog.php" target="_blank">A History of Central Florida</a>
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/items/show/4553" target="_blank">A History of Central Florida, Episode 13: Buck and Ball</a>." RICHES of Central Florida. https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/items/show/4553.
Frank, Andrew K. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/60712324" target="_blank"><em>Creeks & Southerners Biculturalism on the Early American Frontier</em></a>. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2005.
Missall, John, and Mary Lou Missall. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/54005595" target="_blank"><em>The Seminole Wars: America's Longest Indian Conflict</em></a>. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2004.
Click to View (Movie, Podcast, or Website)
<a href="http://youtu.be/7uV9t9VAXxA2" target="_blank">A History of Central Florida, Episode 13: Buck and Ball</a>
Date Copyrighted
2014-04-24
Date Issued
2014-04-24
Extent
72.8 MB
A History of Central Florida
Andrew K. Frank
Billy Bolek
Billy Bowlegs
Bob Clarke
cattle
Chip Ford
Creeks
Daniel Velásquez
Ella Gibson
First Seminole War
Florida Memory Project
Fort King
Gary D. Ellis
Gulf Archaeology Research Institute
Halbutta Micco
Halpatter-Micco
Halpuda Mikko
Holata Micco
iron
John Missal
Kathleen Cassanello
Katie Kelley
Kendra Hazen
lead
Marion County
Muscogee Indians
Muscogees
musketballs
Native Americans
OCRHC
Orange County Regional History Center
Robert Cassanello
Second Seminole War
Seminole Wars
Seminoles
shots
Silver River Museum and Environmental Education Center
slavery
slaves
spalding stores
The Seminole Wars: America's Longest Indian Conflict
trading posts
U.S. Army
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/94f82fd1208fdb49680f3c145a6d1b12.jpg
930ebb38dec6e74c1db4463236a936bd
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/fa516133e05f91e51de88a445a69c8e3.jpg
a416cd59db02cb3a959d3171a34e8c75
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Silver Springs Collection
Description
Collection of digital images, documents, and other records depicting the history of Silver Springs, Florida. Series descriptions are based on special topics, the majority of which students focused their metadata entries around.
Silver Springs was originally settled by the Timucuans in the early 1500s. Although they were able to reclaim their territory after Spanish invasion, the Timucuans were ultimately succeeded by other tribes, such as the Seminoles.
In the 1860s, Samuel O. Howse purchased 242 acres of land in the area around Silver River. Silver Springs became known as Florida's first tourist attraction beginning with glass-bottom boat (invented by Hullam Jones and Phillip Morrell) tours in the late 1870s. W. Carl Ray and W.M. "Shorty" Davidson of Ocala further developed the land surround the springs into what is now know as Silver Springs Nature Theme Park.
Alternative Title
Silver Springs Collection
Subject
Silver Springs (Fla.)
Contributor
Cepero, Nancy Lynn
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/50" target="_blank">Marion County Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Silver Springs, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
External Reference
Martin, Richard A. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/952964" target="_blank"><em>Eternal Spring; Man's 10,000 Years of History at Florida's Silver Springs</em></a>. St. Petersburg, Fla: Great Outdoors Pub. Co, 1966.
Rockwell, Lilly. "<a href="http://www.floridatrend.com/article/15745/spring-woes-in-florida" target="_blank">Spring woes in Florida</a>." <em>Florida Trend</em>, June 20, 2013. http://www.floridatrend.com/article/15745/spring-woes-in-florida.
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Juniper Springs Recreation Area, 1997
Alternative Title
Juniper Springs
Subject
Silver Springs (Fla.)
Springs--Florida
Parks--Florida
Description
The Juniper Springs Recreation Area, located at 26701 Florida State Road 40 in the Ocala National Forest in Silver Springs, Florida, in 1997. In the first photograph, Dennis Cepero (b. 1986) can be seen on the far right. In the second photograph, the siblings swimming in the center of the springs are, from left to right, Alicia Lynn Cepero (b. 1975), Dennis Cepero, and Laura Lynn Cepero (b. 1987). In the 1930s, the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) constructed the complex with picnic areas, a campground, and various trails.
Type
Still Image
Source
Original color photograph, 1997: Private Collection of Nancy Lynn Cepero.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/38" target="_blank"><span>Silver Springs Collection</span></a>, Marion County Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original color photograph, 1997.
Coverage
Juniper Springs Recreation Area, Silver Springs, Florida
Contributor
Cepero, Nancy Lynn
Date Created
ca. 1997-08
Format
image/jpg
Extent
202 KB
185 KB
Medium
2 color photographs
Mediator
History Teacher
Geography Teacher
Rights Holder
Copyright to this resource is held by Nancy Lynn Cepero and is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only.
Accrual Method
Donation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
External Reference
"<a href="http://www.juniper-springs.com/juniper-springs-recreation-area/" target="_blank">JUNIPER SPRINGS RECREATION AREA</a>." Juniper Springs Recreation Area. http://www.juniper-springs.com/juniper-springs-recreation-area/.
"<a href="http://www.fs.usda.gov/recarea/ocala/recarea/?recid=34064" target="_blank">Juniper Springs</a>." Forest Service, United States Department of Agriculture. http://www.fs.usda.gov/recarea/ocala/recarea/?recid=34064.
"<a href="http://www.floridasprings.org/visit/map/juniper-spring/" target="_blank">Juniper Springs</a>." Florida's Springs. http://www.floridasprings.org/visit/map/juniper-spring/.
Alicia Lynn Cepero
Dennis Cepero
Juniper Springs
Juniper Springs Recreation Area
Laura Lynn Cepero
Marion County
parks
Silver Springs
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/c15371e0c6ae5885bc6f64ccd636cea1.tif
61de1989e782d8c8396d65702b9fa1dc
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census Collection
Alternative Title
Census Collection
Subject
Census--United States
Population--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Description
Collection of United States Census population records for various counties in Central Florida from 1840 to 2000.
The Census Act of 1840 was signed into law on March 3, 1839 and later amended on February 26, 1840. This piece of legislation established a centralized census office during each enumeration. Congress designated the census questionnaire designs to the Secretary of State. However, each household received inquiries regarding "the pursuits, industry, education, and resources of the country" and included questions related to school attendance, literacy, and vocation.
In March of 1849, Congress pass legislation that established a census board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Postmaster General. The board was responsible for preparing and printing forms and schedules for enumeration related to population, mining, agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, education, etc. The 1850 Census also increased population inquiries to include every free person's name (as opposed to just the head of the household), as well as information on taxes, schools, crime, wages, estate values, etc.
The Census Act of 1850 authorized the U.S. Census of 1860 and stipulated that its provisions be adhered to for all future decennial censuses should no new legislation be passed by the first of the year of said census. In May of 1865, the U.S. Census Office was abolished and many superintending clerks were transferred to the General Land Office.
Although the 1870 Census was conducted under the provisions of the Census Act of 1850, a new act was passed on May 6, 1870. The new census legislation required two changes in procedures related to questionnaire return submission dates. Moreover, penalties for refusing to reply to inquires were expanded to apply to all questions and questionnaires. The questionnaires themselves had to be redesigned due to the end of the "slave questionnaire", as slavery had been formally abolished slavery nationwide via the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This left five schedules for the census: General Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Products of Industry, and Social Statistics. In addition, the use of a Charles W. Seaton, a U.S. Census Office chief clerk and later superintendent, invited a rudimentary tallying machine that partially alleviated the difficulties of tallying and tabulating questionnaire responses. Finally, the new superintendent for the Ninth Census, General Francis A. Walker, introduced employment examinations to test the qualifications of applicants to the Census Office, allowing for increased efficiency in the process of collecting census data.
The newest act authorizing the Census of 1880 provided for supervision of enumeration by "supervisors of the census", selected exclusively for the collection of census data. All supervisors, as well as the superintendent, were to appointed by the U.S. President and approved by the Senate. Census enumerators were required to personally visit each household and family within his subdivision. The new census act also allowed for the collection of data related to the condition and operation of railroad corporations, incorporated express companies, and telegraph companies, as well as data related to the condition and operation of life, fire, and marine insurance companies. Corporations who refused to provide the census with "true and complete" answers were subject to fines. In addition, the census superintendent was required to collect and publish data on the population, industries and resources of the District of Alaska. Finally, the 1880 Census consisted of five schedules: Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Social Statistics, and Manufacturing.
The Census of 1890 was authorized by an act modeled after the 1880 enumeration and signed into law on March 1, 1889. The 1890 Census was supervised by 175 employees and enumerators were required to collect all information by personally visiting each household. The 1890 Census included essentially the same inquires from the 1880 Census, with some notable additions, such as questions about home and farm ownership and indebtedness; and the names, units, length of service, and residences of former Union soldiers and sailors, as well as the names of the widows of those who were no longer alive. Racial categorization was expanded to include "Japanese", along with "Chinese", "Negro", "mulatto", "quadroon", "octoroon", and "White". Herman Hollerith, a former employee of the U.S. Census Office, invited the electric tabulating system, which was widely used in the 1890 Census, allowing data to be processed faster and more efficiently. On October 3, 1893, Congress passed a law that transferred census-related work to the direction of the commissioner of labor. Congress passed another act on March 2, 1895, effectively abolishing the U.S. Census Office and transferring the remaining responsibilities to the Office of the Secretary of the Interior.
Congress limited the Census of 1900 to content related to population, mortality, agriculture, and manufacturing. Special census agents were authorized to collect statistics related to incidents of deafness, blindness, insanity, and juvenile delinquency; as well as data on religious bodies, utilities, mining, and transportation. The act authorizing the 1900 Census designated the enumeration of military personally to the U.S. Department of War and the U.S. Department of the Navy, while Indiana Territory was to be enumerated by the commissioner of Indian Affairs. Annexed in 1898, Hawaii was included in the census for the first time. In 1902, the U.S. Census Office was officially established as a permanent organization within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The office became the U.S. Census Bureau in 1903 and was transferred to the Department of Commerce and Labor.
The Census of 1910 was approved by legislation introduced in December of 1907 and enacted in July of 1909. The delay was the result of a disagreement over the appointment of enumerators. President Theodore Roosevelt supported the hiring of enumerators via the civil service system, while Congress supported enumerators as positions of patronage. President Roosevelt successfully won the debate. This census act also changed Census Day from the traditional date of June 1st to April 15th. Additional questions regarding the nationality and native language of foreign-born persons and their parents. Funds for the U.S. Census Bureau were also increased to expand the Census' permanent workforce and created several new full-time positions, including a geographer, a chief statistician, and an assistant director. The assistant director was to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, while all other census employees were hired on the basis of open, competitive examinations administered by the Civil Service Commission. Despite the use of automatic counting machinery, issues with the tabulation process persisted. Finally, with the United States' entrance into World War I in 1917, the U.S. Census Bureau became a source of even more valuable purpose: the Census was able to use population and economic data to report on the populations of draft-age men, as well as information regarding each state's industrial capabilities.
The Census of 1920 changed the date of Census Day from April 15th to January 1st, as requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which argued that farmers' memories and harvest information would be more accurate on this day. The U.S. Census Bureau was also authorized to hire additional employees at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and to create a special field force to collect census data. The legislation authorizing the 1920 Census also allowed for a census of manufacturing to be conducted in 1921, and for such a census to be repeated every two years thereafter, as opposed to the traditional five-year census cycle. Furthermore, a census of agriculture and livestock was to be conducted in 1925 and to be repeated every ten years thereafter. In addition, penalties for those who refused to supply information or those who supplied false information were strengthened. As a result of these changes, census of population, manufacturing, and agriculture and livestock became increasingly independent of one another.
The "usual place of abode", the location where residents regularly slept, instead of where they worked or were visiting, became the new basis for enumeration in the 1920 Census. Those with no permanent or regular residence were listed as residents of the location that they were enumerated at. Enumeration related to institutional inmates and dependent, defective, and delinquent classes were also modified. Unlike the previous census, the 1920 Census did not have inquires related to unemployment, to Union or Confederate Army or Navy service, to the number of children born, or to the length of time that a couple had been married. The Census of 1920, however, did include four additional questions: one regarding year of naturalization and three regarding native languages. Issues also arose as a result of changes in international boundaries following World War I, particularly for persons declaring birth or parental birth in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, or Turkey. In response, enumerators were required to ask said persons for their province, state, or region of birth. Enumerators were not required to ask individuals how to spell their names, nor were respondents required to provide proof of various pieces of information. Race was determined by the enumerator's impressions.
The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for a census of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their territory. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demands and the bureau was accused of present unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.
Congress authorized the 1940 Census in August 1939, providing the Director of the Census the additional authority to conduct a national census of housing in each state, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Alaska. The housing census was conducted separately, though enumerators often collection housing information at the same time that they collected population information. The Census of 1940 was the first time that the U.S. Census Bureau used advanced statistical techniques. In particular, the census used probably sampling, which had only previously been tested in a trial census of unemployment conducted the Civil Works Administration during 1933-1934, in surveys of retail stores in the 1930s, and in an official sample survey of unemployment conducted amongst two percent of American households in 1937. Probability sampling allowed for the inclusion of additional demographic questions without increasing the burden on the collection process or on data processing. Moreover, sampling the U.S. Census Bureau was able to publish preliminary returns eight months before tabulations were completed. Likewise, the census increased its number of published tables, and also was able to complete data processing with higher quality and more efficiency. New census questions focused on employment, unemployment, internal migration, and incomes—reflecting on the concerns of the Great Depression, the country's housing stock, and the need for public housing programs.
The Census of 1950 encompassed every state, Alaska, Hawaii, American Samoa, the Panama Canal Zone, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other small American territories. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau enumerate American living abroad to account for members of the U.S. Armed Forces, vessel crew members, and government employees residing in foreign countries. The U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Maritime Administration, and several other federal agencies were responsible for distributing and collecting census questionnaires in a cooperative effort. Persons living abroad for reasons other than what is listed above had their census information reported by families or neighbors residing in the United States, but such data was criticized as unreliable and were not published in official statistics. The 1950 Census also included a new survey on residential financing collected separately on a sample basis from owners of owner-occupied properties, rental properties, and mortgage lenders. The accuracy of the new census was increased by improved enumerator training, the use of detailed street maps for enumerators, the publication of "Missed Person" forms in local newspapers, and the designation of a specific night to conduct a special enumeration of transient individuals. Moreover, a post-enumeration survey was conducted to further verify the accuracy of the original enumeration. A sample of approximately 3,500 small areas was compared to the original census data to identify households that may have been omitted initially. Likewise, a sample of approximately 22,000 households were re-interviewed to identify persons omitted in the original enumeration count. Though not used for the 1950 Census, the UNIVersal Automatic Computer I (UNIVAC I), the first non-military computer, was used to tabulate some of the statistics for the 1954 census of economy. In August of 1954, Congress codified various census statutes, such as the Fifteenth Census Act of 1929, authorizing the decennial census and other census.
The Census of 1960 was the first to be mailed to respondents. The U.S. Postal Service delivered census questionnaires to households, the head of household was required to complete the questionnaire, and an enumerator was to pick it up. The enumeration process was divided into two stages: first, select data for each person and dwelling unit was collected; and second, more detailed economic and social data was collected from a sample of households and dwelling units. The census questionnaires for the second stage were hand-delivered by enumerators as they were collecting data from the first stage. Households receiving the second census questionnaire were to complete the form and mail it to their local census office. Twenty-five percent of the population was giving additional sample questions. Because of the increased use of sampling, less populated areas were prone to sampling variation; however, this did not significantly decrease the usefulness of census statistics gathered. Moreover, increased use of sampling reduced data processing costs. Additional questions included in the 1960 Census were related to places of works and means of transportation to work. By 1960, nearly all census data was processed using computers. The U.S. Census Bureau used a Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer (FOSDIC) for the first time, thus decreasing the amount of time and money required for data input.
In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.
Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, were an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and used for a 17 percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.
Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in 6 languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100 percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process by instead following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census. Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Mosquito County, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Rights Holder
<span>This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:</span>
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul><span>This resources is provided here by </span><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a><span> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a><span> of </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a><span>.</span>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
<span>United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.</span>
<span>United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.</span>
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/" target="_blank">Through the Decades</a>." United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/.
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
1 table
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census for Central Florida, 2000
Alternative Title
Census, 2000
Subject
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Population--United States
Description
The Twenty-Second United States Census records for Brevard County, Flagler County, Lake County, Marion County, Orange County, Osceola County, Seminole County, and Volusia County, Florida, for 2000. The census divides the population by gender, race ("white alone," "black," "American Indian and Alaska Native," "Asian," Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander," "other race," "two or moreraces," "Hispanic," "Mexican," "Puerto Rican," "Cuban," "Dominican," "Central American," "Costa Rican," "Guatemalan," "Honduran," "Nicaraguan," "Panamanian," "Salvadoran," "Other Central American," "South American," "Argentinean," "Bolivian," "Chilean," "Columbian," "Ecuadorian," "Paraguayan," "Peruvian," "Uruguayan," "Venezuelan," "Other South American," "Spaniard," "Asian Indian," "Bangladeshi," "Cambodian," "Chinese," "Filipino," "Hmong," "Indonesian," "Japanese," "Korean," "Laotian," "Malaysian," "Pakistani,""Sri Lankan," "Taiwanese," "Vietnamese," and "other Asian"), and native-born vs. foreign-born. Those who are foreign born are further divided by country of origin. The census then lists the population categorized by marital status, type of residence, military service, primary and secondary school attendance, and college attendance. The census also collected information on labor, on unemployment, on energy usage, and on transportation.<br /><br />For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and was used for a 17-percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.<br /><br />Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in six languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100-percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process instead by following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census.<br /><br />Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the <em>U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives</em>, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
Type
Dataset
Source
Original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 2000.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/104" target="_blank">U.S. Census Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 2000.
Coverage
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Creator
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>
Publisher
<a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Date Created
ca. 2000-04-01
Format
image/jpg
Extent
3.12 MB
Medium
1 table
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Civics/Government Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a> and published by the <a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>.
Rights Holder
This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul>
This resources is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a> of <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a>.
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/2000.html" target="_blank">2000 Overview</a>." U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/2000.html.
United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. <em><a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/Census2000v1.pdf" target="_blank"><em>History: 2000 Census of Population and Housing</em></a></em><a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/Census2000v1.pdf" target="_blank">, Volume 1</a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/Census2000v1.pdf.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/Census2000v2.pdf" target="_blank"><em>History: 2000 Census of Population and Housing</em>, Volume 2</a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/Census2000v2.pdf.
Transcript
U.S. Census of 2000
Population
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population Total 476,230 49,832 210,528 258,916 896,344 172,493 365,196 443,343
Males 233,186 23,887 101,866 124,945 443,716 85,022 178,776 215,361
Females 243,044 25,945 108,662 133,971 452,628 87,471 186,420 227,982
Population by Race White Alone 413,411 43,490 184,138 217,909 614,830 133,169 300,948 381,760
Black 40,000 4,401 17,503 29,900 162,899 12,702 34,764 41,198
American Indian and Alaska Native 1,765 133 701 1,158 3,079 790 1,087 1,373
Asian 7,152 583 1,667 1,806 30,033 3,802 9,115 4,430
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 305 12 76 57 843 142 163 164
Other Race 5,168 480 3,966 4,363 53,889 15,631 11,175 8,071
Two or More Races 8,429 733 2,477 3,723 30,771 6,257 7,944 6,347
Population by Descent or Origin Hispanic 21,970 2,537 11,808 15,616 168,361 50,727 40,731 29,111
Mexican 3,281 237 5,638 3,350 19,755 3,400 3,871 7,733
Puerto Rican 9,111 1,031 2,978 6,997 86,583 30,728 19,609 13,546
Cuban 2,161 292 638 1,049 12,371 2,178 3,610 1,570
Dominican 458 37 102 257 6,358 2,313 1,223 452
Central American 1,296 101 372 561 5,703 1,870 1,595 789
Costa Rican 150 5 39 45 600 188 233 122
Guatemalan 323 23 75 122 949 241 165 83
Honduran 210 15 71 87 1,223 266 212 138
Nicaraguan 93 6 34 78 716 315 220 100
Panamanian 392 34 75 152 1,037 251 402 173
Salvadorian 91 11 58 62 883 521 265 134
Other Central American 37 7 20 15 295 88 98 39
South American 1,690 340 559 1,013 15,436 4,254 4,690 1,541
Argentinean 136 26 32 29 794 217 370 132
Bolivian 26 7 2 1 191 34 83 22
Chilean 116 7 24 33 451 130 114 101
Colombian 661 149 235 520 7,676 2,071 2,182 592
Ecuadorian 156 28 60 181 1,687 474 484 210
Paraguayan 15 0 1 1 25 4 8 7
Peruvian 217 54 114 96 1,629 470 648 141
Uruguayan 15 33 8 8 115 42 41 49
Venezuelan 256 21 60 95 2,315 686 587 190
Other South American 92 15 23 49 553 126 173 97
Other Hispanic 3,973 499 1,521 2,389 22,155 5,984 6,133 3,480
Spaniard 262 37 52 50 599 129 218 147
Spanish 784 88 267 333 1,968 415 759 556
Spanish American 90 4 36 69 329 78 104 63
Other Hispanic or Latino 2,837 370 1,166 1,937 19,259 5,362 5,052 2,714
Asian Indian 1,806 69 562 715 8,166 1,230 2,994 1,345
Bangladeshi 15 0 11 0 101 33 33 14
Cambodian 48 13 9 1 141 6 33 19
Chinese, Except Taiwanese 951 82 217 160 4,227 569 1,428 661
Filipino 1,577 292 332 313 5,066 951 1,281 798
Hmong 0 0 2 0 2 0 10 0
Indonesian 32 2 3 4 71 9 30 25
Japanese 531 16 84 129 1,193 92 307 256
Korean 631 37 153 209 1,950 141 1,094 445
Laotian 20 1 11 1 232 25 154 120
Malaysian 9 0 0 1 33 2 10 7
Pakistani 52 1 13 17 732 245 171 76
Sri Lankan 2 0 3 1 56 14 8 28
Taiwanese 72 11 2 13 226 45 65 21
Thai 351 10 47 26 436 85 123 79
Vietnamese 763 24 174 130 6,189 184 1,074 329
Other Asian 23 0 4 1 58 3 9 4
Other Asian, Not Specified 166 10 19 72 577 90 161 130
Households Total 198,195 21,294 88,413 106,755 336,286 60,977 139,572 184,723
Family Households 132,480 15,683 62,468 74,637 220,258 45,077 97,249 120,064
Married Couple Family 104,964 13,378 52,105 59,339 157,937 34,207 75,718 93,161
Other Family 27,516 2,305 10,363 15,298 62,321 10,870 21,531 26,903
Non- Family 65,715 5,611 25,945 32,118 116,028 15,900 42,323 64,659
Population by Marital Status Never Married 78,006 5,869 27,762 37,350 214,910 32,173 71,780 78,186
Married 224,987 28,530 110,140 127,501 355,270 75,570 162,707 205,036
Separated 7,403 553 2,689 4,160 19,485 3,577 5,162 6,690
Widowed 31,880 3,799 17,018 19,631 36,918 7,860 15,876 34,496
Divorced 47,747 3,707 17,129 24,635 79,329 14,725 32,730 45,397
Population in Group Quarters Total 9,695 462 3,767 6,881 18,831 2,400 3,606 14,737
Institutionalized 6,303 428 3,071 5,644 11,987 1,921 2,260 7,391
Correctional Institutions 2,431 55 1,522 3,780 6,307 903 1,216 2,616
Nursing Homes 2,543 342 1,425 1,579 3,684 862 994 3,931
Other Institutions 1,329 31 124 285 1,996 156 50 844
Non-Institutionalized 3,392 34 696 1,237 6,844 479 1,346 7,346
College Dormitories 1,088 0 0 231 3,402 155 12 4,530
Military Quarters 215 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
Other, Non-Institutionalized 2,089 34 696 1,006 3,442 324 1,334 2,811
Not in Group Quarters 466,535 49,370 206,761 252,035 877,513 170,093 361,590 428,606
Population by Military Service Active Armed Forces 2,318 19 129 113 413 76 198 255
Veterans 79,145 9,252 35,534 43,300 84,940 17,226 39,515 66,646
Non-Veterans 290,433 31,631 132,175 160,233 585,412 108,979 233,200 286,986
Veteran Population by War or Conflict Gulf War 6,733 444 1,748 2,324 11,262 1,975 4,764 4,137
Vietnam Era 19,233 1,769 6,720 8,584 23,668 4,829 12,294 15,369
Korean Conflict 10,541 1,739 6,225 7,318 8,673 1,903 4,025 10,017
World War II 15,312 2,797 10,930 12,695 11,921 2,722 5,281 18,058
Multiple Wars 7,086 469 2,240 2,301 4,506 595 2,142 3,455
Other Service 20,240 2,034 7,671 10,078 24,910 5,202 11,009 15,610
Native-Born Population Total 445,229 44,875 199,708 245,564 767,440 148,383 331,911 414,990
Foreign-Born Population Total 31,001 4,957 10,820 13,352 128,904 24,110 33,285 28,353
Naturalized 18,374 3,354 5,084 7,516 53,651 9,514 16,507 14,955
Non-Citizen 12,627 1,603 5,736 5,836 75,253 14,596 16,778 13,398
Foreign-Born Population by Region or Country of Origin Europe 9,881 2,267 2,779 3,458 13,547 3,790 6,769 9,808
Northern Europe 3,374 561 1,091 1,060 4,471 1,560 2,414 2,883
United Kingdom 2,595 413 820 875 3,519 1,388 1,891 2,217
Ireland 317 74 105 79 432 70 214 297
Sweden 172 31 59 26 135 34 115 151
Other Northern Europe 290 43 107 80 385 68 194 218
Western Europe 3,480 585 1,167 1,394 3,827 805 1,735 3,281
Austria 76 21 36 52 112 23 113 164
France 509 17 193 56 754 43 118 293
Germany 2,298 440 867 1,137 2,378 617 1,185 2,407
Netherlands 305 77 20 96 280 71 162 252
Other Western Europe 292 30 51 53 303 51 157 165
Southern Europe 1,616 523 205 477 2,044 457 1,218 1,603
Greece 239 16 21 52 255 25 144 379
Italy 961 230 143 329 1,080 207 706 975
Portugal 132 178 10 41 235 120 108 92
Spain 227 77 31 51 459 89 237 129
Other Southern Europe 57 22 0 4 15 16 23 28
Eastern Europe 1,400 598 316 527 3,195 959 1,402 2,031
Czechoslovakia, Including Czech Republic and Slovakia 128 29 48 48 208 275 129 242
Hungary 166 15 50 144 306 110 217 303
Poland 469 179 101 168 366 169 204 501
Romania 143 15 16 28 252 19 134 101
Belarus 2 0 0 0 16 0 8 18
Russia 166 148 42 10 430 298 116 180
Ukraine 50 187 19 23 259 50 26 147
Bosnia and Herzegovina 0 0 0 0 451 0 214 7
Yugoslavia 62 14 12 41 126 5 128 131
Other Eastern Europe 214 11 28 65 781 33 226 401
Europe, Not Elsewhere Classified 11 0 0 0 10 9 0 10
Asia 6,529 570 1,209 1,704 23,739 3,187 7,205 4,426
Eastern Asia 1,584 36 307 459 5,728 636 1,947 1,224
China 640 16 133 152 2,843 496 852 494
China, Excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan 361 9 75 99 1,635 218 589 267
Hong Kong 57 7 29 19 460 93 64 146
Taiwan 222 0 29 34 748 185 199 81
Japan 410 9 96 133 1,069 52 279 321
Korea 534 11 71 174 1,757 88 801 409
Other Eastern Asia 0 0 7 0 59 0 15 0
South Central Asia 1,558 108 336 501 5,754 1,270 2,060 1,179
Afghanistan 0 0 0 0 1 0 8 31
Bangladesh 12 0 0 8 361 120 15 90
India 1,261 43 273 392 3,298 424 1,268 735
Iran 151 38 39 52 562 25 429 202
Pakistan 126 26 16 18 1,426 574 299 58
Other South Central Asia 8 1 8 31 106 127 41 63
South Eastern Asia 2,426 380 479 581 10,114 1,063 2,339 1,347
Cambodia 54 37 0 9 146 12 13 13
Indonesia 129 19 18 83 88 13 57 57
Laos 0 0 52 5 77 102 194 37
Malaysia 52 6 13 24 140 16 29 58
Philippines 1,177 225 246 200 3,418 647 1,060 783
Thailand 398 18 28 30 452 63 151 128
Vietnam 616 75 121 195 5,730 203 814 271
Other South Eastern Asia 0 0 1 35 63 7 21 0
Western Asia 924 46 78 145 1,774 165 816 610
Iraq 39 0 0 0 61 0 58 12
Israel 29 0 31 12 238 49 163 64
Jordan 33 0 5 27 165 50 77 120
Lebanon 266 0 26 70 437 13 254 85
Syria 24 0 0 5 222 20 104 25
Turkey 122 46 16 7 170 6 87 109
Armenia 6 0 0 7 0 0 0 9
Other Western Asia 405 0 0 17 481 27 73 186
Asia, Not Elsewhere Classified 37 0 9 18 369 53 43 66
Africa 1,088 58 253 251 3,710 804 1,344 828
Eastern Africa 161 8 18 93 820 45 479 183
Ethiopia 14 8 0 11 123 0 0 20
Other Eastern Africa 147 0 18 82 697 45 479 163
Middle Africa 20 0 0 0 98 0 0 36
Northern Africa 474 50 122 9 1,338 519 409 353
Egypt 263 31 80 9 358 42 304 195
Other Northern Africa 211 19 42 0 980 477 105 158
Southern Africa 228 0 15 43 549 30 204 103
South Africa 200 0 15 43 549 30 204 103
Other Southern Africa 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Western Africa 163 0 28 91 561 185 225 108
Ghana 16 0 9 0 69 8 94 15
Nigeria 121 0 19 91 308 6 81 48
Sierra Leone 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 0
Other Western Africa 26 0 0 0 165 171 50 45
Africa, Not Elsewhere Classified 42 0 70 15 344 25 27 45
Oceania 140 78 36 95 313 38 129 138
Australia and New Zealand Subregion 104 78 36 73 188 23 108 124
Australia 78 21 36 64 142 13 70 109
Other Australian and New Zealand Subregion 26 57 0 9 46 10 38 15
Melanesia 0 0 0 16 17 15 0 0
Micronesia 16 0 0 6 59 0 0 14
Polynesia 20 0 0 0 49 0 15 0
Oceania, Not Elsewhere Classified 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0
Americas 13,363 1,984 6,543 7,827 87,595 16,291 17,838 13,153
Latin America 10,644 1,762 5,479 6,469 83,648 15,648 15,711 10,093
Caribbean 5,495 974 1,322 2,559 41,956 6,227 6,632 3,287
Barbados 153 33 19 62 589 141 88 28
Cuba 970 159 424 554 8,809 1,251 2,094 875
Dominican Republic 331 58 128 210 5,153 2,080 931 446
Haiti 213 33 167 143 13,227 569 718 268
Jamaica 2,414 437 375 1,198 8,756 1,248 1,684 790
Trinidad and Tobago 693 180 119 222 2,663 457 586 493
Other Caribbean 721 74 90 170 2,759 481 531 387
Central America 2,553 203 3,396 2,172 16,926 3,549 3,387 4,556
Mexico 1,028 34 2,846 1,597 11,100 1,626 1,364 3,663
Other Central America 1,525 169 550 575 5,826 1,923 2,023 893
Costa Rica 206 0 0 35 506 133 340 172
El Salvador 180 11 91 66 826 572 404 161
Guatemala 355 16 162 112 1,114 172 280 106
Honduras 236 18 116 151 1,457 290 336 141
Nicaragua 94 8 32 70 708 414 155 87
Panama 454 95 137 133 1,066 310 385 199
Other Central America 0 21 12 8 149 32 123 27
South America 2,596 585 761 1,738 24,766 5,872 5,692 2,250
Argentina 255 57 18 0 853 177 417 159
Bolivia 3 0 0 0 442 7 30 7
Brazil 352 25 39 98 4,765 835 435 307
Chile 144 40 30 13 562 184 178 93
Colombia 744 193 211 819 8,550 2,156 2,306 761
Ecuador 121 30 99 270 1,885 607 403 209
Guyana 397 102 113 282 2,741 291 538 185
Peru 226 20 102 142 1,707 574 725 163
Venezuela 299 20 119 80 2,826 878 518 259
Other South America 55 98 30 34 435 163 142 107
Northern America 2,719 222 1,064 1,358 3,947 643 2,127 3,060
Canada 2,682 220 1,055 1,338 3,900 643 2,085 3,030
Other Northern America 37 2 9 20 47 0 42 30
Born at Sea 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0
Housing Units Total 222,072 24,452 102,830 122,663 361,349 72,293 147,079 211,938
Occupied 198,195 21,294 88,413 106,755 336,286 60,977 139,572 184,723
Vacant 23,877 3,158 14,417 15,908 25,063 11,316 7,507 27,215
For Rent 5,970 358 2,158 2,341 10,116 2,429 2,819 4,039
For Sale 3,477 370 1,886 2,331 3,619 958 1,319 2,864
Households by Energy Usage for Heat Gas (Utility, Bottled, Tank, or LP Gas) 30,291 645 15,796 19,235 26,907 5,163 12,114 16,924
Electricity 163,791 20,322 70,732 83,373 299,899 54,547 124,260 159,179
Fuel Oil, Kerosene, Etc. 2,073 169 882 2,380 6,047 365 2,233 6,144
Coal, Coke, and Wood 336 36 387 843 506 101 203 660
Solar Energy 39 0 3 0 43 24 57 79
Other Fuel 105 33 130 112 243 33 50 256
No Fuel 1,560 89 483 812 2,641 744 655 1,481
Population by Work Transportation Method Car, Truck, or Van 192,896 17,168 76,050 90,409 404,604 73,183 174,772 171,448
Public Transportation 591 130 348 217 10,923 825 1,227 1,914
Motorcycles 765 76 217 159 853 281 534 981
Bicycles 1,278 78 248 313 2,038 386 660 1,033
Walking 2,653 221 1,129 1,369 6,085 1,054 1,898 3,531
Other Means 1,390 151 838 818 3,642 624 1,317 1,582
Working from Home 5,506 625 2,633 3,019 11,178 1,510 7,186 5,426
Education
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population by School Completion Completing Less Than High School 46,416 5,453 31,482 40,813 104,591 23,095 27,523 56,982
High School Completed 98,108 12,330 53,339 67,271 148,006 37,536 59,280 102,353
Some College Completed 115,194 12,642 44,940 53,477 171,495 32,560 80,922 101,929
Bachelor's Degree 51,616 5,170 17,509 16,126 104,818 12,052 51,235 36,646
Master's Degree 20,995 2,023 5,458 5,966 29,990 3,610 16,882 12,536
Professional School 4,889 722 2,056 2,638 10,945 1,393 5,472 4,785
Doctorate Degree 2,520 276 788 896 4,256 361 1,902 1,994
Male Population by School Completion Completing Less Than High School 21,055 2,682 15,185 20,255 50,528 11,453 12,856 27,650
High School Completed 42,196 5,366 23,137 29,860 67,485 17,246 25,644 46,259
Some College Completed 53,613 5,775 21,256 24,683 81,995 15,676 36,647 46,461
Bachelor's Degree 28,222 2,753 9,236 7,952 53,117 6,076 27,227 18,609
Master's Degree 12,251 997 2,942 2,950 15,844 1,661 8,764 6,326
Professional School 3,216 459 1,254 1,626 6,803 725 3,674 3,072
Doctorate Degree 1,751 189 579 674 2,822 204 1,369 1,385
Female Population by School Completion Completing Less Than High School 25,361 2,771 16,297 20,558 54,063 11,642 14,667 29,332
High School Completed 55,912 6,964 30,202 37,411 80,521 20,290 33,636 56,094
Some College Completed 61,581 6,867 23,684 28,794 89,500 16,884 44,275 55,468
Bachelor's Degree 23,394 2,417 8,273 8,174 51,701 5,976 24,008 18,037
Master's Degree 8,744 1,026 2,516 3,016 14,146 1,949 8,118 6,210
Professional School 1,673 263 802 1,012 4,142 668 1,798 1,713
Doctorate Degree 769 87 209 222 1,434 157 533 609
White Population by School Completion Completing Less Than High School 37,567 4,500 25,766 33,247 60,146 17,355 19,218 47,006
High School Completed 265,645 29,645 115,146 130,473 358,068 71,834 186,568 236,703
Some College Completed 177,263 18,296 66,168 70,187 250,401 40,341 136,300 143,048
Bachelor's Degree 73,746 7,262 24,294 22,835 121,362 14,077 66,382 50,651
Graduate or Professional School 26,151 2,599 7,793 8,503 36,549 4,353 20,807 17,596
Black Population by School Completion Completing Less Than High School 6,222 612 3,791 5,330 27,290 1,928 5,406 6,694
High School Completed 15,871 2,365 5,630 11,463 61,429 5,240 14,425 15,128
Some College Completed 9,416 1,661 2,351 6,135 36,623 2,845 9,327 9,047
Bachelor's Degree 2,667 564 692 1,768 13,058 828 3,660 3,207
Graduate or Professional School 747 259 267 638 3,681 272 1,397 1,049
American Indian and Alaska Native Population by School Completion Completing Less Than High School 314 12 154 201 461 109 164 191
High School Completed 1,160 87 317 612 1,503 193 842 871
Some College Completed 725 80 145 456 853 106 612 624
Bachelor's Degree 152 26 8 134 284 19 268 180
Graduate or Professional School 38 26 0 31 116 0 99 73
Asian Population by School Completion Completing Less Than High School 904 61 202 336 3,867 394 638 532
High School Completed 4,249 345 798 1,149 15,500 2,031 5,225 2,711
Some College Completed 3,235 267 649 808 12,144 1,610 4,258 2,044
Bachelor's Degree 1,946 151 338 513 7,945 997 2,838 1,190
Graduate or Professional School 947 58 80 190 2,684 256 1,189 408
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Population by School Completion Completing Less Than High School 24 0 9 10 84 34 0 23
High School Completed 134 0 0 28 327 46 101 57
Some College Completed 81 0 0 28 230 31 40 42
Bachelor's Degree 21 0 0 19 76 5 0 0
Graduate or Professional School 12 0 0 14 25 0 0 0
Some Other Race Population by School Completion Completing Less Than High School 500 143 1,091 1,177 8,193 2,388 1,318 1,630
High School Completed 2,225 258 978 1,147 19,255 5,492 4,552 2,055
Some College Completed 1,666 166 635 646 12,161 3,369 3,005 1,321
Bachelor's Degree 478 70 249 97 3,700 894 1,082 330
Graduate or Professional School 164 19 64 27 985 310 279 88
Hispanic or Latino Population by School Completion Aged 25+ 12,809 1,767 6,248 8,790 95,505 28,364 24,165 16,659
Completing Less Than High School 2,540 461 2,705 3,460 27,742 8,247 5,071 6,202
High School Completed 10,269 1,306 3,543 5,330 67,763 20,117 19,094 10,457
Some College Completed 7,396 741 2,326 3,228 44,475 11,928 13,519 6,860
Bachelor's Degree 2,935 302 907 831 16,194 3,552 5,625 1,954
Graduate or Professional School 972 163 277 374 5,099 939 1,915 658
Population by School Enrollment Enrolled 112,005 9,366 40,624 54,173 248,040 44,944 99,337 101,190
Not Enrolled 349,620 39,284 163,384 197,003 611,968 120,923 252,611 329,318
Public School 91,848 8,149 34,908 46,347 204,974 38,926 80,854 79,381
Public Pre-School 3,521 324 1,400 1,882 7,437 1,321 2,503 2,905
Public K-8 49,627 4,380 19,813 26,299 102,097 22,395 42,047 42,065
Public High School 21,896 2,024 9,201 11,584 45,485 10,211 18,665 19,215
Public College 16,804 1,421 4,494 6,582 49,955 4,999 17,639 15,196
Private School 20,157 1,217 5,716 7,826 43,066 6,018 18,483 21,809
Private Pre-School 3,885 376 1,353 1,592 9,371 1,284 4,830 3,730
Private K-8 7,203 360 2,720 3,620 15,393 2,146 7,126 5,258
Private High School 1,996 118 633 1,118 4,102 495 2,071 1,655
Private College 7,073 363 1,010 1,496 14,200 2,093 4,456 11,166
Labor
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population in Labor Force Total 220,413 19,670 86,307 104,422 471,974 84,142 198,464 201,913
Armed Forces 2,318 19 129 113 413 76 198 255
Civilian Labor Force 218,095 19,651 86,178 104,309 471,561 84,066 198,266 201,658
Employed 207,366 18,815 82,819 98,248 447,861 79,859 190,973 189,035
Unemployed 10,729 836 3,359 6,061 23,700 4,207 7,293 12,623
Not in Labor Force 163,663 22,200 85,967 105,310 221,452 47,135 84,636 162,621
Male Population in Labor Force Total 119,342 10,349 46,312 54,645 251,471 44,428 106,283 107,321
Armed Forces 2,048 10 109 109 375 58 178 206
Civilian Labor Force 117,294 10,339 46,203 54,536 251,096 44,370 106,105 107,115
Employed 111,595 9,889 44,453 51,569 239,431 42,204 102,411 100,145
Unemployed 5,699 450 1,750 2,967 11,665 2,166 3,694 6,970
Not in Labor Force 66,680 9,544 36,010 44,657 87,278 19,206 30,039 67,395
Female Population in Labor Force Total 101,071 9,321 39,995 49,777 220,503 39,714 92,181 94,592
Armed Forces 270 9 20 4 38 18 20 49
Civilian Labor Force 100,801 9,312 39,975 49,773 220,465 39,696 92,161 94,543
Employed 95,771 8,926 38,366 46,679 208,430 37,655 88,562 88,890
Unemployed 5,030 386 1,609 3,094 12,035 2,041 3,599 5,653
Not in Labor Force 96,983 12,656 49,957 60,653 134,174 27,929 54,597 95,226
Employment and Unemployment by Race White Employed 182,829 16,701 72,821 84,361 324,773 63,838 161,737 164,827
White Unemployed 8,644 722 2,596 4,543 13,878 3,045 5,384 9,831
Black or African American Employed 14,154 1,364 5,894 9,629 67,034 5,376 14,393 15,240
Black or African American Unemployed 1,445 92 520 1,155 5,956 454 1,089 2,144
American Indian and Alaska Native Employed 1,044 60 356 496 1,478 222 826 765
American Indian and Alaska Native Unemployed 81 0 29 62 119 30 46 77
Asian Employed 3,329 220 728 962 14,961 1,702 4,757 2,131
Asian Unemployed 205 14 25 16 675 107 169 88
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Employed 142 0 12 14 355 63 68 97
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Unemployed 9 0 0 0 22 0 0 8
Some Other Race Employed 2,289 267 1,901 1,694 24,246 5,983 5,163 3,364
Some Other Race Unemployed 152 6 126 171 1,939 465 289 228
Hispanic or Latino Employed 9,415 873 5,232 5,816 73,233 20,739 19,335 11,101
Hispanic or Latino Unemployed 622 29 334 590 5,428 1,477 1,123 1,797
Employment by Industry Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 1,042 241 2,311 3,432 2,369 482 621 2,075
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing and Hunting 887 223 2,132 3,266 2,257 434 584 2,058
Mining 155 18 179 166 112 48 37 17
Construction 16,424 1,873 8,556 8,803 33,618 7,030 15,439 16,827
Manufacturing 28,223 1,875 5,264 10,416 28,548 4,325 15,131 16,297
Wholesale Trade 5,177 439 3,399 3,117 17,584 2,559 8,255 5,606
Retail Trade 27,766 3,046 11,145 15,499 54,069 10,596 26,089 26,243
Transportation, Warehousing, and Utilities 8,434 813 4,043 4,789 24,799 4,689 8,412 8,310
Transportation and Warehousing 7,176 611 3,229 3,714 21,872 4,084 7,030 6,655
Utilities 1,258 202 814 1,075 2,927 605 1,382 1,655
Information 6,541 412 2,347 1,892 17,174 1,229 8,357 5,339
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, and Rental and Leasing 10,828 1,151 4,901 5,100 34,668 4,409 18,231 11,886
Finance and Insurance 5,875 579 2,982 2,896 20,344 1,720 12,994 6,701
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 4,953 572 1,919 2,204 14,324 2,689 5,237 5,185
Professional, Scientific, Management, Administrative, and Waste Management Services 21,876 1,633 6,716 7,712 51,511 5,497 25,213 17,342
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 13,377 823 2,754 3,488 29,078 2,113 16,195 8,448
Management of Companies and Enterprise 57 0 5 24 210 7 80 18
Administrative, Support, and Waste Management Services 8,442 810 3,957 4,200 22,223 3,377 8,938 8,876
Educational, Health, and Social Services 36,027 3,497 14,135 19,167 64,356 9,802 32,953 37,004
Educational Services 13,513 1,634 5,099 7,275 27,559 4,522 14,673 15,296
Health Care and Social Assistance 22,514 1,863 9,036 11,892 36,797 5,280 18,280 21,708
Arts, Entertainment, Recreation, Accommodation, and Food Services 20,476 2,124 11,273 8,440 82,026 23,687 16,862 22,680
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 4,542 466 5,154 1,940 31,553 8,907 4,969 4,891
Accommodation and Food Services 15,934 1,658 6,119 6,500 50,473 14,780 11,893 17,789
Other Services, Except Public Administration 9,517 836 4,416 5,305 21,953 3,088 8,218 10,088
Public Administration 15,035 875 4,313 4,576 15,186 2,466 7,192 9,338
Employment by Occupation Management, Business, and Financial Operations Employees 25,257 2,385 10,256 10,089 63,728 8,262 31,322 21,985
Professional and Related Employees 47,217 3,121 13,456 15,821 81,543 10,119 42,507 32,511
Health Care Support Employees 4,085 407 1,996 2,333 5,904 1,160 2,658 4,085
Protective Service Employees 4,921 494 2,225 2,313 8,794 1,852 3,507 4,497
Food Preparation and Serving Related Employees 11,930 1,272 4,274 5,089 30,987 7,844 8,461 12,263
Building, Grounds Cleaning, and Maintenance Employees 7,971 914 4,061 3,995 18,641 5,343 5,128 8,353
Personal Care and Service Employees 5,303 501 2,649 3,458 15,855 2,814 4,895 4,980
Sales and Related Employees 25,845 2,447 10,301 13,270 58,829 10,614 29,534 24,853
Office and Administrative Support Employees 29,940 2,962 12,118 14,457 74,240 12,573 30,850 29,414
Farming, Fishing, and Forestry Employees 642 65 1,540 1,297 1,808 239 314 1,562
Construction, Extraction, and Maintenance Employees 21,793 2,175 10,229 11,851 40,021 9,616 16,353 22,216
Production Employees 12,388 1,242 3,985 7,344 20,704 3,753 7,463 11,721
Transportation and Material Moving Employees 10,074 830 5,729 6,931 26,807 5,670 7,981 10,595
Male Employment by Occupation Management, Business, and Financial Operations Employees 14,925 1,448 6,088 5,838 35,997 4,460 18,881 12,645
Professional and Related Employees 24,396 1,279 5,224 5,957 38,302 4,211 20,386 13,322
Health Care Support Employees 456 51 192 297 843 109 284 453
Protective Service Employees 3,998 414 1,895 1,818 6,603 1,454 2,818 3,558
Food Preparation and Serving Related Employees 4,759 516 1,686 1,611 16,146 3,765 4,144 5,303
Building, Grounds Cleaning, and Maintenance Employees 4,818 633 2,734 2,432 10,339 2,741 3,417 5,346
Personal Care and Service Employees 1,197 147 738 1,088 5,860 975 1,418 1,306
Sales and Related Employees 11,874 1,099 5,047 6,147 29,017 4,668 16,138 11,841
Office and Administrative Support Employees 7,137 672 2,652 3,079 20,733 3,287 7,376 7,067
Farming, Fishing, and Forestry Employees 544 38 999 1,012 1,083 160 212 1,017
Construction, Extraction, and Maintenance Employees 20,941 2,043 9,759 11,359 38,404 9,055 15,590 21,334
Production Employees 7,991 878 2,776 5,006 13,455 2,513 4,841 7,752
Transportation and Material Moving Employees 8,559 671 4,663 5,925 22,649 4,806 6,906 9,201
Female Employment by Occupation Management, Business, and Financial Operations Employees 10,332 937 4,168 4,251 27,731 3,802 12,441 9,340
Professional and Related Employees 22,821 1,842 8,232 9,864 43,241 5,908 22,121 19,189
Health Care Support Employees 3,629 356 1,804 2,036 5,061 1,051 2,374 3,632
Protective Service Employees 923 80 330 495 2,191 398 689 939
Food Preparation and Serving Related Employees 7,171 756 2,588 3,478 14,841 4,079 4,317 6,960
Building, Grounds Cleaning, and Maintenance Employees 3,153 281 1,327 1,563 8,302 2,602 1,711 3,007
Personal Care and Service Employees 4,106 354 1,911 2,370 9,995 1,839 3,477 3,674
Sales and Related Employees 13,971 1,348 5,254 7,123 29,812 5,946 13,396 13,012
Office and Administrative Support Employees 22,803 2,290 9,466 11,378 53,507 9,286 23,474 22,347
Farming, Fishing, and Forestry Employees 98 27 541 285 725 79 102 545
Construction, Extraction, and Maintenance Employees 852 132 470 492 1,617 561 763 882
Production Employees 4,397 364 1,209 2,338 7,249 1,240 2,622 3,969
Transportation and Material Moving Employees 1,515 159 1,066 1,006 4,158 864 1,075 1,394
Employment by Sector Private Sector Employees 140,975 12,217 57,209 67,011 336,958 62,521 135,938 127,632
Public Sector Employees 31,971 2,806 10,183 13,194 47,342 7,878 21,726 25,132
Self-Employed Employees 21,305 2,634 10,119 12,153 37,746 6,330 21,673 22,679
Non-Profit Employees 12,549 1,098 4,964 5,510 24,923 2,983 11,169 13,052
Unpaid Family Workers 566 60 344 380 892 147 467 540
Male Employment by Sector Private Sector Employees 77,045 6,502 31,252 36,394 184,769 33,504 74,886 68,711
Public Sector Employees 16,669 1,214 4,841 5,436 20,573 3,474 9,221 11,784
Self-Employed Employees 13,933 1,867 6,565 7,979 25,601 4,277 14,931 14,977
Non-Profit Employees 3,748 277 1,621 1,605 8,051 898 3,160 4,432
Unpaid Family Workers 200 29 174 155 437 51 213 241
Female Employment by Sector Private Sector Employees 63,930 5,715 25,957 30,617 152,189 29,017 61,052 58,921
Public Sector Employees 15,302 1,592 5,342 7,758 26,769 4,404 12,505 13,348
Self-Employed Employees 7,372 767 3,554 4,174 12,145 2,053 6,742 7,702
Non-Profit Employees 8,801 821 3,343 3,905 16,872 2,085 8,009 8,620
Unpaid Family Workers 366 31 170 225 455 96 254 299
accommodation
administrative
administrative support
administrators
Afghan Americans
African Americans
agriculture
Alaska Natives
American Indians
American War
Amerindians
Arab Americans
Argentinian Americans
Armed Forces
Armenian Americans
arts
Asian Americans
Australian Americans
Austrian Americans
automobiles
bachelor's degree
Bangladeshi Americans
Barbadian Americans
Belorussian Americans
bicycles
bikers
Bolivian Americans
Bosnian Americans
bottled gas
Brazilian Americans
Brevard County
British Americans
building
business
Cambodian Americans
Canadian Americans
car
Caribbean Americans
cars
Caucasian Americans
census
Census of 2000
Central Americans
Chilean Americans
Chinese Americans
citizens
civilian labor
coal
Coke
college dormitories
college education
Colombian Americans
construction
correctional institutions
Costa Rican Americans
Cuban Americans
Czech Americans
Czechoslovakian Americans
divorced
divorcees
doctorate degree
Dominican Americans
dorms
Dutch Americans
Ecuadorian Americans
education
educational
educators
Egyptian Americans
electric heat
electricity
employees
employment
energy usage
English Americans
enterprise
entertainment
Ethiopian Americans
European Americans
extraction
families
family
farmers
farming
females
Filipino Americans
finance
financial operators
First Gulf War
First Iraq War
fishing
Flagler County
food preparation
food services
food serving
forestry
French Americans
fuel oil
gas heat
German Americans
Ghanaian Americans
Greek Americans
grounds cleaning
group quarters
Guatemalan Americans
Gulf War
Gulf War I
Haitian Americans
Hawaiian Natives
health care
heat
Herzegovinian Americans
high school education
higher education
Hispanic Americans
Hmong Americans
Honduran Americans
Hong Kongese Americans
households
housing units
Hungarian Americans
hunting
Indian Americans
Indonesian Americans
information
institutionalized
insurance
Iranian Americans
Iraq War
Iraqi Americans
Irish Americans
Israeli Americans
Italian Americans
Jamaican Americans
Japanese Americans
Jordanian Americans
kerosene
Korean Americans
Korean War
Kuwait War
labor
labor force
laborers
Lake County
Laotian Americans
Latin Americans
Latinas
Latinos
leasing
Lebanese Americans
LP gas
maintenance
Malay Americans
Malaysian Americans
males
management
managers
manufacturing
Marion County
marital status
married
master's degree
material moving
medical care
Melanesian Americans
Mexican Americans
Micronesian Americans
Middle Eastern Americans
military service
mining
motor vehicles
motorcycles
Native Americans
naturalized
New Zealander Americans
Nicaraguan Americans
Nigerian Americans
non-citizens
non-profit
nursing homes
Oceanic Americans
office
Operation Desert Shield
Operation Desert Storm
orange county
Osceola County
Pacific Islander Americans
Pakistani Americans
Panamanian Americans
Paraguayan Americans
pedestrians
Persian Americans
Persian Gulf War
personal care
Peruvian Americans
PhD
Polish Americans
Polynesian Americans
population
Portuguese Americans
preschool education
primary education
private education
private schools
private sector
production
professional
professional school
professionals
protective services
public administration
public education
public schools
public sector
public transportation
Puerto Rican Americans
Puerto Ricans
real estate
recreation
rental
Resistance War Against America
retail
Romanian Americans
Russian Americans
sales
Salvadorian Americans
Scandinavian Americans
schools
scientific
scientists
Scotch Americans
Scottish Americans
Second Indochina War
Second World War
secondary education
self-employed
Seminole County
separated
Sierra Leonean Americans
single
Slovakian Americans
social assistance
social services
solar energy
South Americans
Spaniards
Spanish Americans
Sri Lankan Americans
Swedish Americans
Syrian Americans
Taiwanese Americans
tank gas
teachers
technical
Thai Americans
Tobagonian Americans
trade
transportation
Trinidadian Americans
truck
trucks
Turkish Americans
U.S. Census
Ukrainian Americans
unemployment
Uruguayan Americans
utilities
utility gas
van
vans
Venezuelan Americans
veterans
Vietnam War
Vietnamese Americans
Volusia County
walking
warehousing
waste management
Welsh Americans
wholesale
widowed
widowers
widows
wood
workers
World War II
WWII
Yugoslavian Americans
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/b7fe9b73a3d3dc95e3d2c4ff36030f1b.jpg
d192eb411d8345af9e2318eda47216c1
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census Collection
Alternative Title
Census Collection
Subject
Census--United States
Population--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Description
Collection of United States Census population records for various counties in Central Florida from 1840 to 2000.
The Census Act of 1840 was signed into law on March 3, 1839 and later amended on February 26, 1840. This piece of legislation established a centralized census office during each enumeration. Congress designated the census questionnaire designs to the Secretary of State. However, each household received inquiries regarding "the pursuits, industry, education, and resources of the country" and included questions related to school attendance, literacy, and vocation.
In March of 1849, Congress pass legislation that established a census board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Postmaster General. The board was responsible for preparing and printing forms and schedules for enumeration related to population, mining, agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, education, etc. The 1850 Census also increased population inquiries to include every free person's name (as opposed to just the head of the household), as well as information on taxes, schools, crime, wages, estate values, etc.
The Census Act of 1850 authorized the U.S. Census of 1860 and stipulated that its provisions be adhered to for all future decennial censuses should no new legislation be passed by the first of the year of said census. In May of 1865, the U.S. Census Office was abolished and many superintending clerks were transferred to the General Land Office.
Although the 1870 Census was conducted under the provisions of the Census Act of 1850, a new act was passed on May 6, 1870. The new census legislation required two changes in procedures related to questionnaire return submission dates. Moreover, penalties for refusing to reply to inquires were expanded to apply to all questions and questionnaires. The questionnaires themselves had to be redesigned due to the end of the "slave questionnaire", as slavery had been formally abolished slavery nationwide via the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This left five schedules for the census: General Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Products of Industry, and Social Statistics. In addition, the use of a Charles W. Seaton, a U.S. Census Office chief clerk and later superintendent, invited a rudimentary tallying machine that partially alleviated the difficulties of tallying and tabulating questionnaire responses. Finally, the new superintendent for the Ninth Census, General Francis A. Walker, introduced employment examinations to test the qualifications of applicants to the Census Office, allowing for increased efficiency in the process of collecting census data.
The newest act authorizing the Census of 1880 provided for supervision of enumeration by "supervisors of the census", selected exclusively for the collection of census data. All supervisors, as well as the superintendent, were to appointed by the U.S. President and approved by the Senate. Census enumerators were required to personally visit each household and family within his subdivision. The new census act also allowed for the collection of data related to the condition and operation of railroad corporations, incorporated express companies, and telegraph companies, as well as data related to the condition and operation of life, fire, and marine insurance companies. Corporations who refused to provide the census with "true and complete" answers were subject to fines. In addition, the census superintendent was required to collect and publish data on the population, industries and resources of the District of Alaska. Finally, the 1880 Census consisted of five schedules: Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Social Statistics, and Manufacturing.
The Census of 1890 was authorized by an act modeled after the 1880 enumeration and signed into law on March 1, 1889. The 1890 Census was supervised by 175 employees and enumerators were required to collect all information by personally visiting each household. The 1890 Census included essentially the same inquires from the 1880 Census, with some notable additions, such as questions about home and farm ownership and indebtedness; and the names, units, length of service, and residences of former Union soldiers and sailors, as well as the names of the widows of those who were no longer alive. Racial categorization was expanded to include "Japanese", along with "Chinese", "Negro", "mulatto", "quadroon", "octoroon", and "White". Herman Hollerith, a former employee of the U.S. Census Office, invited the electric tabulating system, which was widely used in the 1890 Census, allowing data to be processed faster and more efficiently. On October 3, 1893, Congress passed a law that transferred census-related work to the direction of the commissioner of labor. Congress passed another act on March 2, 1895, effectively abolishing the U.S. Census Office and transferring the remaining responsibilities to the Office of the Secretary of the Interior.
Congress limited the Census of 1900 to content related to population, mortality, agriculture, and manufacturing. Special census agents were authorized to collect statistics related to incidents of deafness, blindness, insanity, and juvenile delinquency; as well as data on religious bodies, utilities, mining, and transportation. The act authorizing the 1900 Census designated the enumeration of military personally to the U.S. Department of War and the U.S. Department of the Navy, while Indiana Territory was to be enumerated by the commissioner of Indian Affairs. Annexed in 1898, Hawaii was included in the census for the first time. In 1902, the U.S. Census Office was officially established as a permanent organization within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The office became the U.S. Census Bureau in 1903 and was transferred to the Department of Commerce and Labor.
The Census of 1910 was approved by legislation introduced in December of 1907 and enacted in July of 1909. The delay was the result of a disagreement over the appointment of enumerators. President Theodore Roosevelt supported the hiring of enumerators via the civil service system, while Congress supported enumerators as positions of patronage. President Roosevelt successfully won the debate. This census act also changed Census Day from the traditional date of June 1st to April 15th. Additional questions regarding the nationality and native language of foreign-born persons and their parents. Funds for the U.S. Census Bureau were also increased to expand the Census' permanent workforce and created several new full-time positions, including a geographer, a chief statistician, and an assistant director. The assistant director was to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, while all other census employees were hired on the basis of open, competitive examinations administered by the Civil Service Commission. Despite the use of automatic counting machinery, issues with the tabulation process persisted. Finally, with the United States' entrance into World War I in 1917, the U.S. Census Bureau became a source of even more valuable purpose: the Census was able to use population and economic data to report on the populations of draft-age men, as well as information regarding each state's industrial capabilities.
The Census of 1920 changed the date of Census Day from April 15th to January 1st, as requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which argued that farmers' memories and harvest information would be more accurate on this day. The U.S. Census Bureau was also authorized to hire additional employees at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and to create a special field force to collect census data. The legislation authorizing the 1920 Census also allowed for a census of manufacturing to be conducted in 1921, and for such a census to be repeated every two years thereafter, as opposed to the traditional five-year census cycle. Furthermore, a census of agriculture and livestock was to be conducted in 1925 and to be repeated every ten years thereafter. In addition, penalties for those who refused to supply information or those who supplied false information were strengthened. As a result of these changes, census of population, manufacturing, and agriculture and livestock became increasingly independent of one another.
The "usual place of abode", the location where residents regularly slept, instead of where they worked or were visiting, became the new basis for enumeration in the 1920 Census. Those with no permanent or regular residence were listed as residents of the location that they were enumerated at. Enumeration related to institutional inmates and dependent, defective, and delinquent classes were also modified. Unlike the previous census, the 1920 Census did not have inquires related to unemployment, to Union or Confederate Army or Navy service, to the number of children born, or to the length of time that a couple had been married. The Census of 1920, however, did include four additional questions: one regarding year of naturalization and three regarding native languages. Issues also arose as a result of changes in international boundaries following World War I, particularly for persons declaring birth or parental birth in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, or Turkey. In response, enumerators were required to ask said persons for their province, state, or region of birth. Enumerators were not required to ask individuals how to spell their names, nor were respondents required to provide proof of various pieces of information. Race was determined by the enumerator's impressions.
The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for a census of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their territory. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demands and the bureau was accused of present unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.
Congress authorized the 1940 Census in August 1939, providing the Director of the Census the additional authority to conduct a national census of housing in each state, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Alaska. The housing census was conducted separately, though enumerators often collection housing information at the same time that they collected population information. The Census of 1940 was the first time that the U.S. Census Bureau used advanced statistical techniques. In particular, the census used probably sampling, which had only previously been tested in a trial census of unemployment conducted the Civil Works Administration during 1933-1934, in surveys of retail stores in the 1930s, and in an official sample survey of unemployment conducted amongst two percent of American households in 1937. Probability sampling allowed for the inclusion of additional demographic questions without increasing the burden on the collection process or on data processing. Moreover, sampling the U.S. Census Bureau was able to publish preliminary returns eight months before tabulations were completed. Likewise, the census increased its number of published tables, and also was able to complete data processing with higher quality and more efficiency. New census questions focused on employment, unemployment, internal migration, and incomes—reflecting on the concerns of the Great Depression, the country's housing stock, and the need for public housing programs.
The Census of 1950 encompassed every state, Alaska, Hawaii, American Samoa, the Panama Canal Zone, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other small American territories. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau enumerate American living abroad to account for members of the U.S. Armed Forces, vessel crew members, and government employees residing in foreign countries. The U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Maritime Administration, and several other federal agencies were responsible for distributing and collecting census questionnaires in a cooperative effort. Persons living abroad for reasons other than what is listed above had their census information reported by families or neighbors residing in the United States, but such data was criticized as unreliable and were not published in official statistics. The 1950 Census also included a new survey on residential financing collected separately on a sample basis from owners of owner-occupied properties, rental properties, and mortgage lenders. The accuracy of the new census was increased by improved enumerator training, the use of detailed street maps for enumerators, the publication of "Missed Person" forms in local newspapers, and the designation of a specific night to conduct a special enumeration of transient individuals. Moreover, a post-enumeration survey was conducted to further verify the accuracy of the original enumeration. A sample of approximately 3,500 small areas was compared to the original census data to identify households that may have been omitted initially. Likewise, a sample of approximately 22,000 households were re-interviewed to identify persons omitted in the original enumeration count. Though not used for the 1950 Census, the UNIVersal Automatic Computer I (UNIVAC I), the first non-military computer, was used to tabulate some of the statistics for the 1954 census of economy. In August of 1954, Congress codified various census statutes, such as the Fifteenth Census Act of 1929, authorizing the decennial census and other census.
The Census of 1960 was the first to be mailed to respondents. The U.S. Postal Service delivered census questionnaires to households, the head of household was required to complete the questionnaire, and an enumerator was to pick it up. The enumeration process was divided into two stages: first, select data for each person and dwelling unit was collected; and second, more detailed economic and social data was collected from a sample of households and dwelling units. The census questionnaires for the second stage were hand-delivered by enumerators as they were collecting data from the first stage. Households receiving the second census questionnaire were to complete the form and mail it to their local census office. Twenty-five percent of the population was giving additional sample questions. Because of the increased use of sampling, less populated areas were prone to sampling variation; however, this did not significantly decrease the usefulness of census statistics gathered. Moreover, increased use of sampling reduced data processing costs. Additional questions included in the 1960 Census were related to places of works and means of transportation to work. By 1960, nearly all census data was processed using computers. The U.S. Census Bureau used a Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer (FOSDIC) for the first time, thus decreasing the amount of time and money required for data input.
In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.
Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, were an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and used for a 17 percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.
Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in 6 languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100 percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process by instead following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census. Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Mosquito County, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Rights Holder
<span>This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:</span>
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul><span>This resources is provided here by </span><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a><span> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a><span> of </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a><span>.</span>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
<span>United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.</span>
<span>United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.</span>
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/" target="_blank">Through the Decades</a>." United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/.
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
1 table
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census for Central Florida, 1990
Alternative Title
Census, 1990
Subject
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Population--United States
Description
The Twenty-First United States Census records for Brevard County, Flagler County, Lake County, Marion County, Orange County, Osceola County, Seminole County, and Volusia County, Florida, for 1990. The census divides the population by gender, race ("white," "black," "American Indian, Eskimo, or Aleut," "Asian or Pacific Islander," "other," "Hispanic," "Mexican," "Puerto Rican," "Cuban," "Other Hispanic," "Dominican," "Central American Hispanic," "Guatemalan," "Honduran," "Nicaraguan," "Panamanian," "Salvadorian," "Other Central American Hispanic," "South American Hispanic," "Columbian," "Ecuadorian," "Peruvian," "Other South American Hispanic," "Chinese," "Japanese," "Filipino," "Korean," "Asian Indian," "Vietnamese," "Cambodian," "Laotian," "Thai," and "Other Asian"), and native-born vs. foreign-born. Those who are foreign born are further divided by country of origin. The census then lists the population categorized by marital status and military service. The census also collected information on labor, on unemployment, on energy usage, and on transportation.<br /><br />For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20-percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compared to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).<br /><br />The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.<br /><br />As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Commerce. A federal district court ruleded in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
Type
Dataset
Source
Original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1990.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/104" target="_blank">U.S. Census Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1990.
Coverage
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Creator
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>
Publisher
<a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Date Created
ca. 1990-04-01
Format
image/jpg
Extent
1.65 MB
Medium
1 table
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Civics/Government Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a> and published by the <a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>.
Rights Holder
This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul>
This resources is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a> of <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a>.
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1990.html" target="_blank">1990 Overview</a>." U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1990.html.
United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. <a href="http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/1990/history/Chapter1-14.zip" target="_blank"><em>Procedural History: 1990 Census of Population and Housing</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966.
Transcript
U.S. Census of 1990
Population
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population Total 398,978 28,701 152,104 194,833 677,491 107,728 287,529 370,712
Males 197,163 13,756 72,929 93,813 336,061 52,716 140,587 179,481
Females 201,815 14,945 79,175 101,020 341,430 55,012 146,952 191,231
Population by Race White 358,391 25,831 135,619 167,094 539,061 96,231 253,621 328,530
Black 31,417 2,366 14,191 24,844 103,092 5,902 24,314 33,455
American Indian, Eskimo, and Aleut 1,369 52 384 638 2,036 360 803 915
Asian and Pacific Islander 5,379 283 566 945 13,994 1,637 4,843 2,739
Other 2,422 169 1,344 1,312 19,308 3,598 3,948 5,073
Population by Descent or Origin Hispanic 12,279 1,280 4,154 5,705 63,087 12,813 18,758 14,668
Mexican 1,724 82 2,358 685 7,439 1,161 1,801 4,652
Puerto Rican 4,785 418 595 2,535 34,091 8,091 9,521 5,832
Cuban 1,248 240 366 648 7,056 943 2,091 1,257
Other Hispanic 4,522 540 835 1,837 14,501 2,618 5,345 2,927
Dominican 181 38 58 109 1,785 411 484 45
Central American Hispanic 879 34 279 152 2,552 518 667 429
Guatemalan 114 0 50 37 476 165 51 23
Honduran 190 27 27 71 513 56 72 52
Nicaraguan 50 0 0 0 374 42 101 50
Panamanian 248 7 179 44 640 109 274 117
Salvadorian 85 0 15 0 266 96 127 154
Other Central American Hispanic 192 0 8 0 283 50 42 33
South American Hispanic 1,229 222 122 586 5,386 827 2,325 1,047
Colombian 507 90 84 312 3,081 438 1,188 383
Ecuadorian 136 0 0 76 493 120 298 198
Peruvian 213 0 16 37 602 99 161 54
Other South American Hispanic 373 132 22 161 1,210 170 678 412
Other Hispanic American 2,233 246 376 990 4,778 862 1,869 1,406
Chinese 828 47 79 127 2,133 339 873 489
Filipino 1,058 147 114 136 2,450 392 760 435
Japanese 493 11 43 60 697 65 235 198
Asian Indian 1,059 29 114 318 3,244 427 1,235 669
Korean 601 12 66 149 1,046 73 582 273
Vietnamese 474 8 70 71 2,686 87 551 264
Cambodian 33 8 2 0 77 8 21 11
Laotian 11 0 0 0 186 7 103 66
Thai 272 4 21 20 233 61 109 67
Other Asian 358 12 28 38 717 112 277 161
Population by Marital Status Never Married 66,486 3,592 18,793 27,666 154,225 17,676 54,036 65,316
Married 194,871 16,588 82,858 97,858 281,616 51,243 131,451 176,551
Separated 6,527 379 2,236 3,635 14,056 1,690 4,765 6,040
Widowed 24,229 1,873 13,044 14,375 32,388 5,945 13,294 31,185
Divorced 32,790 1,687 10,150 15,039 58,114 8,245 23,290 30,347
Veteran Population Veterans 70,358 5,665 26,923 32,473 83,928 14,560 37,374 60,087
Non-Veterans 246,413 18,064 98,512 123,910 436,056 68,764 185,243 245,155
Veteran Population by War or Conflict Veterans from May 1975 or Later 10,467 326 1,961 3,386 15,270 2,049 5,129 6,322
Vietnam Era 16,445 800 4,821 6,262 23,690 4,279 12,158 12,431
Korean Conflict 8,301 758 2,888 3,887 9,453 1,783 4,041 6,856
World War II 20,618 2,816 12,720 14,030 19,755 4,059 8,087 24,826
World War I 137 0 112 41 98 58 48 306
Multiple Wars 8,515 523 2,162 2,130 7,587 879 3,298 4,103
Other Service 5,875 442 2,259 2,737 8,075 1,453 4,613 5,243
Native-Born Population Total 378,016 26,326 146,809 187,848 626,436 100,071 269,494 349,372
Foreign-Born Population Total 20,962 2,375 5,295 6,985 51,055 7,657 18,035 21,340
Naturalized 11,803 1,577 3,119 4,185 22,480 3,554 8,779 12,076
Non-Citizen 9,159 798 2,176 2,800 28,575 4,103 9,256 9,262
Households by Energy Usage for Heat Gas (Utility, Bottled, Tank, or LP Gas) 28,232 1,127 17,521 23,407 30,664 6,505 12,834 22,707
Electricity 123,633 10,080 42,252 47,220 203,089 30,855 88,181 113,935
Fuel Oil, Kerosene, Etc. 7,230 476 2,713 5,270 18,190 1,165 5,736 14,278
Coal, Coke, and Wood 791 114 846 1,883 1,047 333 491 1,287
Solar Energy 89 17 17 72 60 28 40 102
Other Fuel 159 29 30 91 290 36 40 337
No Fuel 1,231 37 237 234 1,512 228 335 730
Population by Work Transportation Method Car, Truck, or Van 171,569 9,578 52,519 68,824 319,961 48,215 141,039 139,505
Public Transportation 505 25 181 125 7,671 206 740 1,648
Motorcycles 1,309 92 299 331 1,641 235 500 1,373
Bicycles 1,616 79 255 185 2,345 387 709 1,507
Walking 3,564 210 1,662 1,614 15,755 1,043 2,472 4,145
Other Means 931 107 619 618 2,475 503 668 1,282
Working from Home 3,775 293 1,399 1,825 6,423 655 3,805 3,604
Labor
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population in Labor Force Total 198,490 11,280 61,591 80,415 381,101 55,154 159,464 165,864
Armed Forces 3,773 20 106 107 12,529 39 717 430
Civilian Work Force 194,717 11,260 61,485 80,308 368,572 55,115 158,747 165,434
Employed 183,692 10,542 57,965 74,958 350,953 52,455 151,377 155,529
Unemployed 11,025 718 3,520 5,350 17,619 2,660 7,370 9,905
Not in Work Force 122,054 12,469 63,950 76,075 151,412 28,209 63,870 139,808
Male Population in Labor Force Total 110,881 6,106 33,653 43,092 209,060 29,754 86,497 89,643
Armed Forces 3,395 9 81 100 10,247 34 594 405
Civilian Work Force 107,486 6,097 33,572 42,992 198,813 29,720 85,903 89,238
Employed 101,530 5,786 31,679 40,226 189,907 28,281 82,157 83,833
Unemployed 5,956 311 1,893 2,766 8,906 1,439 3,746 5,405
Not in Work Force 46,033 5,175 25,774 30,815 52,562 10,539 21,026 56,768
Female Population in Labor Force Total 87,609 5,174 27,938 37,323 172,041 25,400 72,967 76,221
Armed Forces 378 11 25 7 2,282 5 123 25
Civilian Work Force 87,231 5,163 27,913 37,316 169,759 25,395 72,844 76,196
Employed 82,162 4,756 26,286 34,732 161,046 24,174 69,220 71,696
Unemployed 5,069 407 1,627 2,584 8,713 1,221 3,624 4,500
Not in Work Force 76,021 7,294 38,176 45,260 98,850 17,670 42,844 83,040
Employment and Unemployment by Race White Employed 167,811 9,574 51,334 65,887 290,042 47,449 136,251 139,601
White Unemployed 9,129 577 2,680 4,180 12,253 2,174 6,220 7,921
Black Employed 11,740 682 5,499 7,647 42,870 2,487 9,920 11,720
Black Unemployed 1,456 98 738 1,144 4,110 255 783 1,681
American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut Employed 816 72 226 405 1,267 202 569 592
American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut Unemployed 82 0 0 36 103 0 51 40
Asian and Pacific Islander Employed 2,266 131 316 469 7,243 814 2,348 1,103
Asian and Pacific Islander Unemployed 268 21 30 37 323 32 153 81
Other Race Employed 1,059 83 590 550 9,531 1,503 2,019 2,513
Other Race Unemployed 90 22 72 15 830 199 163 182
Hispanic Employed 5,533 433 2,020 2,003 30,876 5,588 8,768 6,479
Hispanic Unemployed 412 63 110 139 2,336 521 761 634
Employment by Industry Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishery 3,437 395 4,054 4,030 7,682 1,252 3,095 5,468
Mining 148 8 170 213 215 24 46 138
Construction 14,823 13,559 5,058 5,691 26,863 4,679 11,660 13,254
Manufacturing Non-Durable Goods 3,381 205 2,581 2,884 10,562 1,139 4,434 4,724
Manufacturing Durable Goods 32,952 1,022 3,392 7,910 24,101 2,703 13,580 12,075
Transportation 6,688 396 2,137 2,172 17,333 2,387 5,398 5,128
Communications and Other Public Utility 3,942 314 2,201 1,883 10,585 1,382 4,897 4,189
Wholesale Trade 5,836 357 2,534 3,894 17,169 1,770 8,848 5,477
Retail Trade 34,686 2,006 11,698 15,125 65,210 11,627 29,513 34,590
Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate 10,033 750 3,403 4,856 25,976 2,581 13,789 10,693
Business and Repair Services 11,175 504 2,313 3,543 22,772 2,346 9,592 7,598
Personal Services 5,918 558 2,831 2,582 22,404 6,111 4,903 7,697
Entertainment and Recreation Services 3,144 261 1,885 1,342 24,292 5,037 4,149 3,213
Professional and Related Services 35,933 2,043 11,256 15,291 63,103 7,482 31,675 33,496
Health Services 12,933 697 4,637 6,160 22,052 2,794 11,317 13,573
Educational Services 10,952 777 3,480 5,230 20,327 2,660 9,709 11,197
Other Professional and Related Services 12,048 569 3,139 3,901 20,724 2,028 10,649 8,726
Public Administration 11,596 364 2,452 3,542 12,686 1,935 5,798 7,789
Employment by Occupation Managerial and Professional Employees 53,807 2,301 11,327 15,627 89,965 10,112 47,570 37,311
Executive, Administrative and Managerial Employees 23,616 1,482 5,606 7,511 46,089 5,418 24,616 18,905
Professional Specialty Employees 30,191 1,119 5,721 8,116 43,876 4,694 22,954 18,405
Technical, Sales, and Administrative Employees 59,003 3,409 18,080 24,321 118,893 16,312 55,707 50,263
Technicians and Related Support Employees 9,879 278 1,705 2,193 11,892 1,283 5,883 5,296
Sales Employees 22,290 1,551 8,259 11,631 47,443 6,841 25,621 21,931
Administrative Support, Including Clerical, Employees 26,834 1,580 8,116 10,497 59,558 8,188 24,203 23,036
Service Employees 25,352 1,478 9,047 10,595 57,969 11,489 17,124 25,978
Private Household Employees 430 55 336 199 1,305 128 406 527
Protective Service Employees 4,209 176 1,170 1,756 6,467 1,193 2,565 3,744
Service, Except Protective and Household, Employees 20,713 1,247 7,541 8,640 50,197 10,168 14,153 21,707
Farming, Forestry, and Fishing Employees 3,369 408 3,534 3,545 6,923 1,348 2,468 4,917
Precision Production, Craft, and Repair Employees 23,485 1,345 7,571 9,686 37,308 6,760 14,791 19,699
Operators, Fabricators, and Laborers 18,676 1,301 8,406 11,184 39,895 6,434 13,717 17,361
Machine Operators, Assemblers, and Inspectors 7,021 519 2,981 4,668 12,224 1,862 4,815 8,428
Transportation and Material Moving Employees 5,735 303 2,945 3,349 14,839 2,524 4,438 5,572
Handlers, Equipment Cleaners, Helpers, and Laborers 5,920 479 2,480 3,167 12,832 2,048 4,464 5,361
Employment by Sector Private Sector, Wage and Salary Workers 135,001 7,742 42,595 54,435 274,595 42,410 116,103 112,473
Public Sector, Wage and Salary Workers 27,172 1,217 6,734 10,447 39,665 5,418 16,738 20,540
Self-Employed Workers 10,897 878 4,636 6,246 18,937 2,679 9,759 12,661
Private Sector, Not-For-Profit, Wage and Salary Workers 9,992 618 3,525 3,430 16,556 1,805 8,077 9,125
Unpaid Family Workers 630 87 474 400 1,200 143 700 730
administrative
administrative support
administrators
African Americans
agriculture
Aleuts
American Indians
Amerindians
Armed Forces
Asian Americans
assemblers
automobiles
bicycles
bikes
bottled gas
Brevard County
business
Cambodian Americans
Caribbean Americans
cars
Caucasian Americans
census
Census of 1990
Central Americans
Chinese Americans
citizens
civilian work
clerical
coal
Coke
Colombian Americans
communications
construction
craft
Cuban Americans
divorced
divorcees
domestic services
durable goods
Ecuadorian Americans
education
educators
electric heat
electricity
employees
employment
energy usage
entertainment
equipment cleaners
Eskimos
executives
fabricators
farmers
farming
females
Filipino Americans
finance
fishery
Flagler County
forestry
fuel oil
gas
Guatemalan Americans
handlers
health car
heat
helpers
Hispanic Americans
Honduran Americans
Indian Americans
inspectors
insurance
Japanese Americans
kerosene
Korean Americans
Korean War
labor
labor force
laborers
Lake County
Laotian Americans
Latin Americans
Latinas
Latinos
LP gas
machine operators
males
managerial
managers
manufacturing
Marion County
marital status
married
material moving
medical
Mexican Americans
mining
motor vehicles
motorcycles
Native Americans
naturalized
Nicaraguan Americans
non-citizens
non-durable goods
operators
orange county
Osceola County
Pacific Islander Americans
Panamanian Americans
pedestrians
personal services
Peruvian Americans
population
precision production
private sector
professionals
protective services
public administration
public sector
public transportation
public utility
Puerto Rican Americans
Puerto Ricans
real estate
recreation
repair
retail
salaried
salary
sales
Salvadorian Americans
self-employeed
Seminole County
separated
service industry
servicemen
servicewomen
single
solar energy
specialty
tank gas
teachers
technical
technicians
Thai Americans
trade
transportation
trucks
U.S. Census
unemployment
utility
vans
veterans
Vietnam War
Vietnamese Americans
Volusia County
wages
walkers
walking
wholesale
widowed
widowers
widows
wood
workers
World War I
World War II
WWI
WWII
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/8b547d3a5224a9bfe187723655b82ccf.jpg
3dee748e21788c4592f42ef2eacfc09f
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census Collection
Alternative Title
Census Collection
Subject
Census--United States
Population--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Description
Collection of United States Census population records for various counties in Central Florida from 1840 to 2000.
The Census Act of 1840 was signed into law on March 3, 1839 and later amended on February 26, 1840. This piece of legislation established a centralized census office during each enumeration. Congress designated the census questionnaire designs to the Secretary of State. However, each household received inquiries regarding "the pursuits, industry, education, and resources of the country" and included questions related to school attendance, literacy, and vocation.
In March of 1849, Congress pass legislation that established a census board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Postmaster General. The board was responsible for preparing and printing forms and schedules for enumeration related to population, mining, agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, education, etc. The 1850 Census also increased population inquiries to include every free person's name (as opposed to just the head of the household), as well as information on taxes, schools, crime, wages, estate values, etc.
The Census Act of 1850 authorized the U.S. Census of 1860 and stipulated that its provisions be adhered to for all future decennial censuses should no new legislation be passed by the first of the year of said census. In May of 1865, the U.S. Census Office was abolished and many superintending clerks were transferred to the General Land Office.
Although the 1870 Census was conducted under the provisions of the Census Act of 1850, a new act was passed on May 6, 1870. The new census legislation required two changes in procedures related to questionnaire return submission dates. Moreover, penalties for refusing to reply to inquires were expanded to apply to all questions and questionnaires. The questionnaires themselves had to be redesigned due to the end of the "slave questionnaire", as slavery had been formally abolished slavery nationwide via the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This left five schedules for the census: General Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Products of Industry, and Social Statistics. In addition, the use of a Charles W. Seaton, a U.S. Census Office chief clerk and later superintendent, invited a rudimentary tallying machine that partially alleviated the difficulties of tallying and tabulating questionnaire responses. Finally, the new superintendent for the Ninth Census, General Francis A. Walker, introduced employment examinations to test the qualifications of applicants to the Census Office, allowing for increased efficiency in the process of collecting census data.
The newest act authorizing the Census of 1880 provided for supervision of enumeration by "supervisors of the census", selected exclusively for the collection of census data. All supervisors, as well as the superintendent, were to appointed by the U.S. President and approved by the Senate. Census enumerators were required to personally visit each household and family within his subdivision. The new census act also allowed for the collection of data related to the condition and operation of railroad corporations, incorporated express companies, and telegraph companies, as well as data related to the condition and operation of life, fire, and marine insurance companies. Corporations who refused to provide the census with "true and complete" answers were subject to fines. In addition, the census superintendent was required to collect and publish data on the population, industries and resources of the District of Alaska. Finally, the 1880 Census consisted of five schedules: Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Social Statistics, and Manufacturing.
The Census of 1890 was authorized by an act modeled after the 1880 enumeration and signed into law on March 1, 1889. The 1890 Census was supervised by 175 employees and enumerators were required to collect all information by personally visiting each household. The 1890 Census included essentially the same inquires from the 1880 Census, with some notable additions, such as questions about home and farm ownership and indebtedness; and the names, units, length of service, and residences of former Union soldiers and sailors, as well as the names of the widows of those who were no longer alive. Racial categorization was expanded to include "Japanese", along with "Chinese", "Negro", "mulatto", "quadroon", "octoroon", and "White". Herman Hollerith, a former employee of the U.S. Census Office, invited the electric tabulating system, which was widely used in the 1890 Census, allowing data to be processed faster and more efficiently. On October 3, 1893, Congress passed a law that transferred census-related work to the direction of the commissioner of labor. Congress passed another act on March 2, 1895, effectively abolishing the U.S. Census Office and transferring the remaining responsibilities to the Office of the Secretary of the Interior.
Congress limited the Census of 1900 to content related to population, mortality, agriculture, and manufacturing. Special census agents were authorized to collect statistics related to incidents of deafness, blindness, insanity, and juvenile delinquency; as well as data on religious bodies, utilities, mining, and transportation. The act authorizing the 1900 Census designated the enumeration of military personally to the U.S. Department of War and the U.S. Department of the Navy, while Indiana Territory was to be enumerated by the commissioner of Indian Affairs. Annexed in 1898, Hawaii was included in the census for the first time. In 1902, the U.S. Census Office was officially established as a permanent organization within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The office became the U.S. Census Bureau in 1903 and was transferred to the Department of Commerce and Labor.
The Census of 1910 was approved by legislation introduced in December of 1907 and enacted in July of 1909. The delay was the result of a disagreement over the appointment of enumerators. President Theodore Roosevelt supported the hiring of enumerators via the civil service system, while Congress supported enumerators as positions of patronage. President Roosevelt successfully won the debate. This census act also changed Census Day from the traditional date of June 1st to April 15th. Additional questions regarding the nationality and native language of foreign-born persons and their parents. Funds for the U.S. Census Bureau were also increased to expand the Census' permanent workforce and created several new full-time positions, including a geographer, a chief statistician, and an assistant director. The assistant director was to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, while all other census employees were hired on the basis of open, competitive examinations administered by the Civil Service Commission. Despite the use of automatic counting machinery, issues with the tabulation process persisted. Finally, with the United States' entrance into World War I in 1917, the U.S. Census Bureau became a source of even more valuable purpose: the Census was able to use population and economic data to report on the populations of draft-age men, as well as information regarding each state's industrial capabilities.
The Census of 1920 changed the date of Census Day from April 15th to January 1st, as requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which argued that farmers' memories and harvest information would be more accurate on this day. The U.S. Census Bureau was also authorized to hire additional employees at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and to create a special field force to collect census data. The legislation authorizing the 1920 Census also allowed for a census of manufacturing to be conducted in 1921, and for such a census to be repeated every two years thereafter, as opposed to the traditional five-year census cycle. Furthermore, a census of agriculture and livestock was to be conducted in 1925 and to be repeated every ten years thereafter. In addition, penalties for those who refused to supply information or those who supplied false information were strengthened. As a result of these changes, census of population, manufacturing, and agriculture and livestock became increasingly independent of one another.
The "usual place of abode", the location where residents regularly slept, instead of where they worked or were visiting, became the new basis for enumeration in the 1920 Census. Those with no permanent or regular residence were listed as residents of the location that they were enumerated at. Enumeration related to institutional inmates and dependent, defective, and delinquent classes were also modified. Unlike the previous census, the 1920 Census did not have inquires related to unemployment, to Union or Confederate Army or Navy service, to the number of children born, or to the length of time that a couple had been married. The Census of 1920, however, did include four additional questions: one regarding year of naturalization and three regarding native languages. Issues also arose as a result of changes in international boundaries following World War I, particularly for persons declaring birth or parental birth in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, or Turkey. In response, enumerators were required to ask said persons for their province, state, or region of birth. Enumerators were not required to ask individuals how to spell their names, nor were respondents required to provide proof of various pieces of information. Race was determined by the enumerator's impressions.
The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for a census of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their territory. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demands and the bureau was accused of present unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.
Congress authorized the 1940 Census in August 1939, providing the Director of the Census the additional authority to conduct a national census of housing in each state, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Alaska. The housing census was conducted separately, though enumerators often collection housing information at the same time that they collected population information. The Census of 1940 was the first time that the U.S. Census Bureau used advanced statistical techniques. In particular, the census used probably sampling, which had only previously been tested in a trial census of unemployment conducted the Civil Works Administration during 1933-1934, in surveys of retail stores in the 1930s, and in an official sample survey of unemployment conducted amongst two percent of American households in 1937. Probability sampling allowed for the inclusion of additional demographic questions without increasing the burden on the collection process or on data processing. Moreover, sampling the U.S. Census Bureau was able to publish preliminary returns eight months before tabulations were completed. Likewise, the census increased its number of published tables, and also was able to complete data processing with higher quality and more efficiency. New census questions focused on employment, unemployment, internal migration, and incomes—reflecting on the concerns of the Great Depression, the country's housing stock, and the need for public housing programs.
The Census of 1950 encompassed every state, Alaska, Hawaii, American Samoa, the Panama Canal Zone, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other small American territories. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau enumerate American living abroad to account for members of the U.S. Armed Forces, vessel crew members, and government employees residing in foreign countries. The U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Maritime Administration, and several other federal agencies were responsible for distributing and collecting census questionnaires in a cooperative effort. Persons living abroad for reasons other than what is listed above had their census information reported by families or neighbors residing in the United States, but such data was criticized as unreliable and were not published in official statistics. The 1950 Census also included a new survey on residential financing collected separately on a sample basis from owners of owner-occupied properties, rental properties, and mortgage lenders. The accuracy of the new census was increased by improved enumerator training, the use of detailed street maps for enumerators, the publication of "Missed Person" forms in local newspapers, and the designation of a specific night to conduct a special enumeration of transient individuals. Moreover, a post-enumeration survey was conducted to further verify the accuracy of the original enumeration. A sample of approximately 3,500 small areas was compared to the original census data to identify households that may have been omitted initially. Likewise, a sample of approximately 22,000 households were re-interviewed to identify persons omitted in the original enumeration count. Though not used for the 1950 Census, the UNIVersal Automatic Computer I (UNIVAC I), the first non-military computer, was used to tabulate some of the statistics for the 1954 census of economy. In August of 1954, Congress codified various census statutes, such as the Fifteenth Census Act of 1929, authorizing the decennial census and other census.
The Census of 1960 was the first to be mailed to respondents. The U.S. Postal Service delivered census questionnaires to households, the head of household was required to complete the questionnaire, and an enumerator was to pick it up. The enumeration process was divided into two stages: first, select data for each person and dwelling unit was collected; and second, more detailed economic and social data was collected from a sample of households and dwelling units. The census questionnaires for the second stage were hand-delivered by enumerators as they were collecting data from the first stage. Households receiving the second census questionnaire were to complete the form and mail it to their local census office. Twenty-five percent of the population was giving additional sample questions. Because of the increased use of sampling, less populated areas were prone to sampling variation; however, this did not significantly decrease the usefulness of census statistics gathered. Moreover, increased use of sampling reduced data processing costs. Additional questions included in the 1960 Census were related to places of works and means of transportation to work. By 1960, nearly all census data was processed using computers. The U.S. Census Bureau used a Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer (FOSDIC) for the first time, thus decreasing the amount of time and money required for data input.
In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.
Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, were an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and used for a 17 percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.
Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in 6 languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100 percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process by instead following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census. Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Mosquito County, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Rights Holder
<span>This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:</span>
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul><span>This resources is provided here by </span><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a><span> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a><span> of </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a><span>.</span>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
<span>United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.</span>
<span>United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.</span>
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/" target="_blank">Through the Decades</a>." United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/.
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
1 table
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census for Central Florida, 1980
Alternative Title
Census, 1980
Subject
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Population--United States
Description
The Twentieth United States Census records for Brevard County, Flagler County, Lake County, Marion County, Orange County, Osceola County, Seminole County, and Volusia County, Florida for 1980. The census divides the population by gender, race ("white," "black," "American Indian, Eskimo, and Aleut," "Asian and Pacific Islander," "Spanish," "Mexican American," "Puerto Rican American," "Cuban American," "Other Spanish American," "Chinese American," "Japanese American," "Filipino American," "Korean American," "Asian Indian American," "Vietnamese American," "Hawaiian American," "Guamanian American," and "Samoan American"), and native-born vs. foreign-born. Those who are foreign born are further divided by country of origin. The census then lists the population categorized by marital status, type of residence, military service, primary and secondary school attendance, and college attendance. The census also collected information on labor, on unemployment, and on transportation.
Due to the success of the 1970 Census' mail-out/mail-back questionnaire, the program was expanded for the Census of 1980 to include approximately 95 percent of the population. The short-form questionnaire for this census contained seven questions related to population and 11 questions related to housing; whereas the long-form questionnaire included 26 questions on population and 10 questions on housing. A question regarding Spanish or Hispanic origin, separate from race inquires, was used in all questionnaires due to its success in a five-percent sample for the 1970 Census. Two surveys were included in the new census: the Components of Inventory Change Survey, making inquiries regarding the number and characteristics of housing units that either changed or remained the same between 1973 and 1980; and the Residential Finance Survey, which collected information on mortgages, shelter costs, housing characteristics, and owner characteristics. The U.S. Census Bureau's Census Publicity Office, established in 1978, directed an extensive public service advertising campaign focusing on public awareness of the census and encouraging individuals to participate. A special effort was made to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses: "M-Night" focused on counting individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories; "T-Night" focused on the enumeration of hotels and motels with permanent residents.
The State Data Center Program was established to simplify public access to census data via computer tapes. The Census Bureau was to provide free copies of electronic and printed census information and products to each state; in return, the state agreed to develop a network of affiliated organizations, such as state executive departments, chambers of commerce, councils of government, university research departments, and libraries, by which census information would be housed for public access. All states had joined the program by the middle of the decade.
Despite various technological and procedural advances, the U.S. Census undercounted the national population, as it typically did in previous censuses. The African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was 3.7 percentage points higher than the rate for all other races combined. Various cities and states, beginning with the City of Detroit, filed suit against the U.S. Census Bureau, demanding that statistical adjustment be used to compensate for census estimates that had been omitted or improperly counted. In the Fall of 1980, the Bureau announced that it would not adjust its population totals because it was unable to determine the number and distribution of illegal aliens and other undercounted groups. A federal district court ruled in favor of the City of New York and the State of New York that same year, ordering the Census Bureau to correct its numbers. The U.S. Supreme Court stayed this ruling, as well as other similar rulings, in December of 1980, which allowed the Bureau to report its figures to the President unadjusted. In 1987, a federal appeals court ruled that the census figures should not be adjusted because the Census Bureau's decision not to adjust the figures was not arbitrary nor capricious.
Type
Dataset
Source
Original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1980.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/104" target="_blank">U.S. Census Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1980.
Coverage
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Creator
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>
Publisher
<a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Date Created
ca. 1980-04-01
Format
image/jpg
Extent
2.26 MB
Medium
1 table
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Civics/Government Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a> and published by the <a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>.
Rights Holder
This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form;</li>
<li>create derivative works;</li>
<li>perform the work publicly;</li>
<li>display the work;</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul>
This resources is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a> of <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a>.
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1980.html" target="_blank">1980 Overview</a>." U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1980.html.
United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. <a href="http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/1980/proceduralHistory/1980proceduralhistory.zip" target="_blank"><em>Procedural History: 1980 Census of Population and Housing</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966.
Transcript
U.S. Census of 1980
Population
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population Total 272,959 10,913 104,870 122,488 471,016 49,287 179,752 258,762
Males 134,937 5,297 49,999 58,908 229,001 23,573 86,869 122,668
Females 138,022 5,616 54,871 63,850 242,015 25,714 92,883 136,094
Population by Race White 245,223 9,552 90,196 101,336 390,383 45,468 159,067 227,324
Black 23,832 1,303 13,240 20,276 69,557 3,012 18,026 28,883
American Indian, Eskimo, and Aleut 588 6 191 259 1,351 119 316 427
Asian and Pacific Islander 1,739 29 259 250 3,712 284 1,294 1,046
Other 1,577 23 984 367 6,013 404 1,049 1,082
Population by Descent or Origin Not Spanish Descent or Origin 267,623 10,725 102,615 120,476 451,290 48,198 174,595 254,638
Total 5,336 188 2,255 2,012 19,726 1,089 5,157 4,124
Mexican American 964 38 1,497 451 3,959 258 583 835
Puerto Rican American 1,239 30 170 586 6,662 417 2,079 1,242
Cuban American 760 32 83 218 4,099 148 851 349
Other Spanish American 2,373 88 505 757 5,006 266 1,644 1,698
Japanese American 286 3 27 40 349 23 116 125
Chinese American 333 4 26 74 599 32 281 276
Filipino American 351 14 53 22 918 66 240 143
Korean American 215 4 25 28 314 59 191 96
Asian Indian American 323 4 34 34 418 52 214 232
Vietnamese American 157 0 79 32 923 36 210 113
Hawaiian American 53 0 13 15 115 8 31 37
Guamanian American 16 0 1 4 45 1 6 10
Samoan American 5 0 1 1 31 7 5 14
Households by Race White 93,614 3,971 37,344 39,065 147,099 17,490 56,977 96,107
Black 7,094 369 3,993 6,146 20,699 918 5,518 8,873
American Indian, Eskimo, and Aleut 218 2 71 84 444 41 107 176
Asian and Pacific Islander 403 9 65 54 901 73 330 299
Other 454 8 177 109 1,611 93 315 318
Population by Marital Status Single 49,790 1,474 13,935 18,016 98,234 7,283 29,725 44,851
Married 136,618 5,956 56,658 61,718 204,810 24,636 86,312 127,066
Separated 4,085 174 1,705 2,130 9,805 774 2,618 4,378
Widowed 14,781 750 9,103 8,508 26,475 3,607 8,740 23,400
Divorced 15,655 556 4,846 6,703 32,299 2,891 10,146 15,694
Population in Group Quarters Total 3,787 66 1,856 2,359 15,496 780 1,065 6,031
Institutionalized 1,772 0 1,081 1,929 3,065 522 803 2,468
Inmates of Mental Hospitals 58 0 0 16 52 0 29 42
Inmates of Homes for the Aged 682 0 534 375 1,395 412 551 1,450
Inmates of Other Institutions 1,032 0 547 1,538 1,618 110 223 976
Population Not Institutionalized 215 66 775 430 12,431 258 262 3,563
College Dormitories 1,146 0 206 15 1,340 237 0 3,072
Other Group Quarters 869 66 569 415 11,091 21 262 491
Not in Group Quarters 269,172 108,477 103,014 120,129 455,520 48,507 178,687 252,731
Veteran Population Veterans 48,557 1,962 15,611 18,260 68,100 7,156 28,670 41,139
Non-Veterans 163,042 6,794 68,894 76,268 283,154 31,121 105,124 170,179
Male Veterans 46,069 1,860 14,889 17,456 64,590 6,823 27,126 39,012
Male Non-Veterans 55,977 2,347 24,724 27,362 100,641 11,022 36,005 5,902
Female Veterans 2,488 102 722 804 3,510 333 1,544 2,127
Female Non-Veterans 107,065 4,447 44,170 49,266 182,513 20,099 69,119 111,159
Veteran Population by War or Conflict Veterans from May 1975 or Later 1,657 23 448 535 2,734 173 847 1,345
Vietnam Era 14,973 496 3,492 4,308 23,837 2,205 10,351 9,349
Korean Conflict 9,599 216 2,405 2,504 11,891 1,064 4,882 5,856
World War II 16,684 1,035 7,006 8,424 20,913 2,518 8,578 18,820
World War I 646 17 764 285 1,179 275 318 1,617
Other Engagements 4,998 175 1,496 2,204 7,546 921 3,694 4,152
Native-Born Population Total 258,528 10,351 101,031 118,567 447,689 47,619 181,319 243,731
Born in Florida 65,987 2,804 33,817 49,553 148,940 13,564 50,386 68,762
Born in Different State 188,506 7,493 66,600 68,120 290,061 33,497 118,029 172,711
Born Abroad 435 54 614 894 8,688 558 2,904 2,258
Foreign-Born Population Total 14,431 562 3,839 3,921 23,327 1,668 8,433 15,031
Households by Energy Usage Using Utility Gas for Heat 17,729 141 8,249 6,414 17,954 664 7,657 13,854
Using Bottled, Tank or LP Gas for Heat 9,703 689 8,024 12,765 14,378 6,063 4,210 11,473
Using Electricity for Heat 57,725 2,723 18,616 16,529 97,398 9,877 40,506 51,722
Using Fuel Oil, Kerosene, Etc. for Heat 14,452 619 5,491 7,598 39,819 1,562 9,929 26,858
Using Coal and Coke for Heat 0 0 8 6 6 0 0 5
Using Wood for Heat 1,139 136 979 1,782 1,561 340 619 1,546
Using Other Fuel for Heat 90 8 18 22 92 6 11 37
Using No Fuel for Heat 945 43 265 312 1,546 103 315 548
Population by Work Transportation Method Cars 105,631 3,368 32,929 38,876 195,317 18,106 75,974 82,121
Driving Alone 76,581 2,584 25,033 30,618 151,238 13,316 60,762 64,044
Carpooling 29,050 784 7,896 8,258 44,079 4,790 15,212 18,077
Public Transportation 471 0 387 254 4,752 105 638 1,260
Walking 3,330 196 1,769 1,444 13,113 588 1,557 4,241
Other Means 4,443 144 1,031 8,789 7,073 470 1,722 3,874
Working from Home 1,420 78 675 953 2,652 287 1,167 1,962
Education
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population by School Completion Elementary School Completed 19,017 895 14,551 16,265 39,319 6,090 12,165 27,795
High School Completed 87,757 4,136 38,182 44,147 141,202 17,626 52,568 94,031
1-3 Years of High School 22,827 1,292 12,981 15,607 41,698 5,888 13,558 30,353
4 Years of High School 64,930 2,844 25,201 28,540 99,504 11,738 39,010 63,678
College Completed 63,518 2,455 19,401 18,205 93,290 7,342 43,339 51,988
1-3 Years of College 34,376 1,427 10,279 10,686 50,228 4,499 22,223 29,456
4+ Years of College 29,142 1,028 9,122 7,519 43,062 2,843 21,116 22,532
White Population by School Completion Elementary School Completed 15,391 619 11,323 12,428 28,406 5,592 8,242 23,155
High School Completed 81,569 3,876 34,898 39,129 122,450 16,651 48,146 86,944
1-3 Years of High School 20,549 1,122 11,425 13,330 33,986 5,434 11,510 27,148
4 Years of High School 61,020 2,754 23,473 25,799 88,464 11,217 36,636 59,796
College Completed 60,523 2,345 18,453 16,292 85,718 7,044 41,325 48,368
1-3 Years of College 32,596 1,343 9,764 9,593 45,750 4,316 21,126 27,358
4+ Years of College 27,927 1,002 8,689 6,699 39,368 2,728 20,199 21,010
Black Population by School Completion Elementary School Completed 3,269 270 2,877 3,631 9,750 386 3,675 4,267
High School Completed 5,234 260 2,964 4,833 16,519 734 3,797 6,417
1-3 Years of High School 2,083 170 1,396 2,228 7,072 365 1,881 3,008
4 Years of High School 3,151 90 1,568 2,605 9,447 369 1,916 3,409
College Completed 2,270 88 792 1,805 6,168 167 1,328 3,021
1-3 Years of College 1,534 70 421 1,011 3,710 112 788 1,812
4+ Years of College 736 18 371 794 2,458 55 540 1,209
Native American, Eskimo, Aleut Population by School Completion Elementary School Completed 70 0 38 52 125 35 46 110
High School Completed 214 0 93 106 475 112 107 215
1-3 Years of High School 60 0 63 35 240 55 63 53
4 Years of High School 154 0 30 71 235 57 44 162
College Completed 123 0 18 39 154 21 112 106
1-3 Years of College 74 0 18 39 112 21 67 78
4+ Years of College 49 0 0 0 42 0 45 28
Asian and Pacific Islander Population by School Completion Elementary School Completed 220 0 26 69 209 32 100 102
High School Completed 579 0 141 39 918 48 354 353
1-3 Years of High School 122 0 53 7 164 18 63 100
4 Years of High School 457 0 88 32 754 30 291 253
College Completed 436 0 65 33 750 66 403 352
1-3 Years of College 116 0 17 21 358 20 138 105
4+ Years of College 320 0 48 12 392 46 265 247
Other Population by School Completion Elementary School Completed 67 6 287 85 829 45 102 161
High School Completed 161 0 86 40 840 81 164 102
1-3 Years of High School 13 0 44 7 236 16 41 44
4 Years of High School 148 0 42 33 604 65 123 58
College Completed 166 22 73 36 500 44 171 141
1-3 Years of College 56 14 59 22 298 30 104 103
4+ Years of College 110 8 14 14 202 14 67 38
Spanish Population by School Completion Elementary School Completed 318 15 480 406 2,573 11 500 578
High School Completed 1,220 31 244 633 4,204 238 1,144 960
1-3 Years of High School 288 12 94 248 1,153 49 319 330
4 Years of High School 932 19 150 385 3,051 189 825 630
College Completed 1,274 17 167 349 3,036 135 1,155 707
1-3 Years of College 621 17 105 182 1,821 60 569 432
4+ Years of College 653 0 62 167 1,215 75 586 275
Labor
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population in Labor Force Armed Forces 4,022 9 123 93 12,487 23 418 239
Civilian Labor Force 121,034 4,148 39,585 46,567 225,975 21,311 86,174 102,437
Employed 113,941 3,861 37,625 43,511 215,888 20,262 82,316 96,113
Unemployed 7,093 287 1,960 3,056 10,087 1,049 3,858 6,324
Not in Labor Force 90,565 4,608 44,920 48,321 125,279 16,966 47,620 108,881
Male Population in Labor Force Total 73,284 2,415 22,599 26,504 134,581 11,812 49,306 57,030
Armed Forces 3,563 9 101 55 9,080 15 367 239
Civilian Labor Force 69,721 2,406 22,498 26,449 125,501 11,797 48,939 56,791
Employed 66,269 2,261 21,641 24,946 120,264 11,237 46,910 53,436
Unemployed 3,452 145 857 1,503 5,237 560 2,029 3,355
Not in Labor Force 32,325 1,801 17,115 18,369 39,730 6,048 14,192 41,241
Female Population in Labor Force Total 51,772 1,742 17,109 20,156 103,881 9,522 37,286 45,646
Armed Forces 459 0 22 38 3,407 8 51 0
Civilian Labor Force 51,313 1,742 17,087 20,118 100,474 9,514 37,235 45,646
Employed 47,672 1,600 15,984 18,565 95,624 9,025 35,406 42,677
Unemployed 3,641 142 1,103 1,553 4,850 489 1,829 2,969
Not in Labor Force 58,240 2,807 27,805 29,952 85,549 10,918 33,428 67,640
Employment and Unemployment by Race White Employed 104,353 3,404 32,066 36,975 184,092 18,727 74,817 84,965
White Unemployed 5,965 240 1,374 2,355 7,586 932 3,313 5,259
Black Employed 8,147 419 4,868 6,279 27,377 1,119 6,221 10,036
Black Unemployed 933 47 511 659 2,224 461 461 981
American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut Employed 325 0 96 121 653 150 181 318
American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut Unemployed 71 0 33 18 75 33 7 45
Asian and Pacific Islander Employed 750 0 106 41 1,536 106 699 471
Asian and Pacific Islander Unemployed 95 0 0 7 54 0 47 19
Other Employed 366 38 489 95 2,230 160 398 323
Other Unemployed 29 0 42 17 148 18 30 20
Spanish Employed 2,070 45 848 783 8,399 420 2,368 1,568
Spanish Unemployed 146 0 66 63 726 35 154 128
Employment by Industry Agriculture, Forestry, Fisheries, and Mining 2,279 298 5,604 3,493 10,157 1,083 2,315 3,407
Construction 9,660 560 2,794 3,997 15,594 1,594 6,706 8,800
Manufacturing 24,729 311 3,577 5,120 25,260 2,384 11,932 10,456
Non-Durable Goods 1,959 54 1,590 1,843 8,639 674 2,818 2,921
Durable Goods 22,770 257 1,987 3,277 16,621 1,710 9,114 7,535
Transportation 3,243 129 1,145 1,507 8,614 693 2,622 2,632
Communications and Other Public Utilities 3,151 86 1,567 1,306 7,095 431 3,325 2,866
Wholesale Trade 2,798 132 1,279 2,393 10,457 521 4,146 2,684
Retail Trade 20,979 523 6,755 8,373 40,454 4,131 15,856 22,590
Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate 5,863 449 2,037 2,551 14,953 1,092 7,167 6,399
Business and Repair Services 6,614 234 1,493 1,612 11,688 675 4,195 3,914
Personal, Entertainment, and Recreation Services 5,605 258 2,687 2,793 24,224 3,926 4,503 8,372
Professional and Related Services 21,398 679 7,242 8,060 37,987 2,720 15,476 18,898
Health Services 6,138 272 2,765 2,743 13,024 1,088 5,232 7,318
Educational Services 8,401 240 3,016 3,792 14,652 1,064 6,658 7,877
Other Professional and Related Services 6,859 167 1,461 1,525 10,311 568 3,586 3,703
Public Administration 7,622 202 1,445 2,306 9,405 1,012 4,073 5,095
Employment by Occupation Managerial and Professional Employees 30,782 1,047 7,424 8,492 48,352 3,451 22,954 21,782
Executive, Administrative and Managerial Employees 13,963 578 3,535 4,369 23,782 2,061 12,020 10,977
Professional Specialty Employees 16,819 469 3,889 4,123 24,750 1,390 10,934 10,805
Technical, Sales, and Administrative Employees 36,748 943 10,391 12,380 69,197 5,980 28,991 29,634
Technicians and Related Support Employees 5,757 63 892 813 6,162 399 2,857 2,798
Sales Employees 12,171 348 4,251 5,073 26,111 2,603 12,084 12,168
Administrative Support, Including Clerical Employees 18,820 532 5,248 6,494 36,924 2,978 14,050 14,668
Service Employees 14,689 579 5,364 6,462 34,770 4,003 9,384 17,248
Private Household Employees 581 43 432 409 1,715 96 375 828
Protective Service Employees 2,166 86 481 763 3,737 444 1,097 2,051
Service, Except Protective and Household Employees 11,942 450 4,451 5,290 29,318 3,463 7,912 14,369
Farming, Forestry, and Fishing Employees 1,772 314 4,018 2,729 7,760 1,071 1,736 3,150
Precision Production, Craft, and Repair Employees 16,292 501 4,806 6,268 25,789 2,731 9,974 12,978
Operators, Fabricators, and Laborers 13,658 477 5,622 7,180 29,840 3,026 9,277 11,321
Machine Operators, Assemblers, and Inspectors 6,205 112 1,848 2,476 10,498 1,026 3,709 4,336
Transportation and Material Moving Employees 3,173 248 1,800 2,223 9,533 1,124 2,221 3,197
Handlers, Equipment Cleaners, Helpers, and Laborers 4,280 117 1,974 2,481 9,809 876 3,347 3,788
Employment by Sector Private Wage and Salary Workers 85,872 2,694 28,084 30,835 172,595 16,228 64,582 72,551
Federal Government Workers 6,842 55 737 882 6,538 270 1,975 1,753
State Government Workers 2,934 134 1,234 2,236 6,410 501 2,598 2,859
Local Government Workers 10,681 358 3,741 4,852 17,411 1,748 7,119 9,605
Self-Employed Workers 6,894 544 3,497 4,278 12,127 1,427 5,582 8,652
Unpaid Family Workers 718 76 332 428 807 88 460 693
administrators
African Americans
agriculture
Aleuts
American Indians
Amerindians
Armed Forces
Asian Americans
Asian Indian Americans
assembles
assisted living facilities
automobiles
bottle gas
Brevard County
business
Caribbean Americans
carpooling
carpools
cars
Caucasian Americans
census
Census of 1980
Central Americans
Chinese Americans
civilian labor
clerical
coals
Coke
college dormitories
college dorms
college education
communications
construction
craft
Cuban Americans
divorced
divorcees
domestic service
durable goods
education
educators
electricity
elementary education
employees
employment
energy usage
entertainment
equipment cleaners
Eskimos
European Americans
executives
fabricators
farmers
farming
federal government
females
Filipino Americans
finance
fishery
Flagler County
forestry
fuel
fuel oil
gas heat
government
group quarters
Guamanian Americans
handlers
Hawaiian Americans
health care
health services
helpers
high school education
higher education
Hispanic Americans
homes for the aged
households
immigrants
immigration
Indian Americans
inmates
inspectors
institutionalized
insurance
Japanese Americans
kerosene
Korean Americans
Korean War
labor
labor force
laborers
Lake County
Latin Americans
Latinas
Latinos
local government
LP gas
machine operators
males
managers
manufacturing
Marion County
marital status
married
material movers
medical
mental hospitals
Mexican Americans
mining
motor vehicles
Native Americans
non-durable goods
nursing homes
old folks homes
operators
orange county
Osceola County
Pacific Islanders
pedestrians
personal services
population
precision production
primary education
professionals
protective services
public administration
public transportation
public utilities
Puerto Rican Americans
Puerto Ricans
real estate
recreation
repair
retail
salaried
salaries
sales
Samoan Americans
schools
secondary education
self-employed
Seminole County
separated
service industry
servicemen
servicewomen
single
Spanish Americans
state government
tank gas
teachers
technicians
trade
transportation
U.S. Census
unemployment
utility gas
veterans
Vietnam War
Vietnamese Americans
Volusia County
wages
walkers
walking
wholesale
widowed
widowers
widows
wood
workers
World War I
World War II
WWI
WWII
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/7d7e2487b93969a4abf35b4756c23383.jpg
88b5aabf531eb18928b6abbf7524e70b
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census Collection
Alternative Title
Census Collection
Subject
Census--United States
Population--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Description
Collection of United States Census population records for various counties in Central Florida from 1840 to 2000.
The Census Act of 1840 was signed into law on March 3, 1839 and later amended on February 26, 1840. This piece of legislation established a centralized census office during each enumeration. Congress designated the census questionnaire designs to the Secretary of State. However, each household received inquiries regarding "the pursuits, industry, education, and resources of the country" and included questions related to school attendance, literacy, and vocation.
In March of 1849, Congress pass legislation that established a census board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Postmaster General. The board was responsible for preparing and printing forms and schedules for enumeration related to population, mining, agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, education, etc. The 1850 Census also increased population inquiries to include every free person's name (as opposed to just the head of the household), as well as information on taxes, schools, crime, wages, estate values, etc.
The Census Act of 1850 authorized the U.S. Census of 1860 and stipulated that its provisions be adhered to for all future decennial censuses should no new legislation be passed by the first of the year of said census. In May of 1865, the U.S. Census Office was abolished and many superintending clerks were transferred to the General Land Office.
Although the 1870 Census was conducted under the provisions of the Census Act of 1850, a new act was passed on May 6, 1870. The new census legislation required two changes in procedures related to questionnaire return submission dates. Moreover, penalties for refusing to reply to inquires were expanded to apply to all questions and questionnaires. The questionnaires themselves had to be redesigned due to the end of the "slave questionnaire", as slavery had been formally abolished slavery nationwide via the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This left five schedules for the census: General Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Products of Industry, and Social Statistics. In addition, the use of a Charles W. Seaton, a U.S. Census Office chief clerk and later superintendent, invited a rudimentary tallying machine that partially alleviated the difficulties of tallying and tabulating questionnaire responses. Finally, the new superintendent for the Ninth Census, General Francis A. Walker, introduced employment examinations to test the qualifications of applicants to the Census Office, allowing for increased efficiency in the process of collecting census data.
The newest act authorizing the Census of 1880 provided for supervision of enumeration by "supervisors of the census", selected exclusively for the collection of census data. All supervisors, as well as the superintendent, were to appointed by the U.S. President and approved by the Senate. Census enumerators were required to personally visit each household and family within his subdivision. The new census act also allowed for the collection of data related to the condition and operation of railroad corporations, incorporated express companies, and telegraph companies, as well as data related to the condition and operation of life, fire, and marine insurance companies. Corporations who refused to provide the census with "true and complete" answers were subject to fines. In addition, the census superintendent was required to collect and publish data on the population, industries and resources of the District of Alaska. Finally, the 1880 Census consisted of five schedules: Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Social Statistics, and Manufacturing.
The Census of 1890 was authorized by an act modeled after the 1880 enumeration and signed into law on March 1, 1889. The 1890 Census was supervised by 175 employees and enumerators were required to collect all information by personally visiting each household. The 1890 Census included essentially the same inquires from the 1880 Census, with some notable additions, such as questions about home and farm ownership and indebtedness; and the names, units, length of service, and residences of former Union soldiers and sailors, as well as the names of the widows of those who were no longer alive. Racial categorization was expanded to include "Japanese", along with "Chinese", "Negro", "mulatto", "quadroon", "octoroon", and "White". Herman Hollerith, a former employee of the U.S. Census Office, invited the electric tabulating system, which was widely used in the 1890 Census, allowing data to be processed faster and more efficiently. On October 3, 1893, Congress passed a law that transferred census-related work to the direction of the commissioner of labor. Congress passed another act on March 2, 1895, effectively abolishing the U.S. Census Office and transferring the remaining responsibilities to the Office of the Secretary of the Interior.
Congress limited the Census of 1900 to content related to population, mortality, agriculture, and manufacturing. Special census agents were authorized to collect statistics related to incidents of deafness, blindness, insanity, and juvenile delinquency; as well as data on religious bodies, utilities, mining, and transportation. The act authorizing the 1900 Census designated the enumeration of military personally to the U.S. Department of War and the U.S. Department of the Navy, while Indiana Territory was to be enumerated by the commissioner of Indian Affairs. Annexed in 1898, Hawaii was included in the census for the first time. In 1902, the U.S. Census Office was officially established as a permanent organization within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The office became the U.S. Census Bureau in 1903 and was transferred to the Department of Commerce and Labor.
The Census of 1910 was approved by legislation introduced in December of 1907 and enacted in July of 1909. The delay was the result of a disagreement over the appointment of enumerators. President Theodore Roosevelt supported the hiring of enumerators via the civil service system, while Congress supported enumerators as positions of patronage. President Roosevelt successfully won the debate. This census act also changed Census Day from the traditional date of June 1st to April 15th. Additional questions regarding the nationality and native language of foreign-born persons and their parents. Funds for the U.S. Census Bureau were also increased to expand the Census' permanent workforce and created several new full-time positions, including a geographer, a chief statistician, and an assistant director. The assistant director was to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, while all other census employees were hired on the basis of open, competitive examinations administered by the Civil Service Commission. Despite the use of automatic counting machinery, issues with the tabulation process persisted. Finally, with the United States' entrance into World War I in 1917, the U.S. Census Bureau became a source of even more valuable purpose: the Census was able to use population and economic data to report on the populations of draft-age men, as well as information regarding each state's industrial capabilities.
The Census of 1920 changed the date of Census Day from April 15th to January 1st, as requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which argued that farmers' memories and harvest information would be more accurate on this day. The U.S. Census Bureau was also authorized to hire additional employees at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and to create a special field force to collect census data. The legislation authorizing the 1920 Census also allowed for a census of manufacturing to be conducted in 1921, and for such a census to be repeated every two years thereafter, as opposed to the traditional five-year census cycle. Furthermore, a census of agriculture and livestock was to be conducted in 1925 and to be repeated every ten years thereafter. In addition, penalties for those who refused to supply information or those who supplied false information were strengthened. As a result of these changes, census of population, manufacturing, and agriculture and livestock became increasingly independent of one another.
The "usual place of abode", the location where residents regularly slept, instead of where they worked or were visiting, became the new basis for enumeration in the 1920 Census. Those with no permanent or regular residence were listed as residents of the location that they were enumerated at. Enumeration related to institutional inmates and dependent, defective, and delinquent classes were also modified. Unlike the previous census, the 1920 Census did not have inquires related to unemployment, to Union or Confederate Army or Navy service, to the number of children born, or to the length of time that a couple had been married. The Census of 1920, however, did include four additional questions: one regarding year of naturalization and three regarding native languages. Issues also arose as a result of changes in international boundaries following World War I, particularly for persons declaring birth or parental birth in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, or Turkey. In response, enumerators were required to ask said persons for their province, state, or region of birth. Enumerators were not required to ask individuals how to spell their names, nor were respondents required to provide proof of various pieces of information. Race was determined by the enumerator's impressions.
The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for a census of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their territory. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demands and the bureau was accused of present unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.
Congress authorized the 1940 Census in August 1939, providing the Director of the Census the additional authority to conduct a national census of housing in each state, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Alaska. The housing census was conducted separately, though enumerators often collection housing information at the same time that they collected population information. The Census of 1940 was the first time that the U.S. Census Bureau used advanced statistical techniques. In particular, the census used probably sampling, which had only previously been tested in a trial census of unemployment conducted the Civil Works Administration during 1933-1934, in surveys of retail stores in the 1930s, and in an official sample survey of unemployment conducted amongst two percent of American households in 1937. Probability sampling allowed for the inclusion of additional demographic questions without increasing the burden on the collection process or on data processing. Moreover, sampling the U.S. Census Bureau was able to publish preliminary returns eight months before tabulations were completed. Likewise, the census increased its number of published tables, and also was able to complete data processing with higher quality and more efficiency. New census questions focused on employment, unemployment, internal migration, and incomes—reflecting on the concerns of the Great Depression, the country's housing stock, and the need for public housing programs.
The Census of 1950 encompassed every state, Alaska, Hawaii, American Samoa, the Panama Canal Zone, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other small American territories. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau enumerate American living abroad to account for members of the U.S. Armed Forces, vessel crew members, and government employees residing in foreign countries. The U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Maritime Administration, and several other federal agencies were responsible for distributing and collecting census questionnaires in a cooperative effort. Persons living abroad for reasons other than what is listed above had their census information reported by families or neighbors residing in the United States, but such data was criticized as unreliable and were not published in official statistics. The 1950 Census also included a new survey on residential financing collected separately on a sample basis from owners of owner-occupied properties, rental properties, and mortgage lenders. The accuracy of the new census was increased by improved enumerator training, the use of detailed street maps for enumerators, the publication of "Missed Person" forms in local newspapers, and the designation of a specific night to conduct a special enumeration of transient individuals. Moreover, a post-enumeration survey was conducted to further verify the accuracy of the original enumeration. A sample of approximately 3,500 small areas was compared to the original census data to identify households that may have been omitted initially. Likewise, a sample of approximately 22,000 households were re-interviewed to identify persons omitted in the original enumeration count. Though not used for the 1950 Census, the UNIVersal Automatic Computer I (UNIVAC I), the first non-military computer, was used to tabulate some of the statistics for the 1954 census of economy. In August of 1954, Congress codified various census statutes, such as the Fifteenth Census Act of 1929, authorizing the decennial census and other census.
The Census of 1960 was the first to be mailed to respondents. The U.S. Postal Service delivered census questionnaires to households, the head of household was required to complete the questionnaire, and an enumerator was to pick it up. The enumeration process was divided into two stages: first, select data for each person and dwelling unit was collected; and second, more detailed economic and social data was collected from a sample of households and dwelling units. The census questionnaires for the second stage were hand-delivered by enumerators as they were collecting data from the first stage. Households receiving the second census questionnaire were to complete the form and mail it to their local census office. Twenty-five percent of the population was giving additional sample questions. Because of the increased use of sampling, less populated areas were prone to sampling variation; however, this did not significantly decrease the usefulness of census statistics gathered. Moreover, increased use of sampling reduced data processing costs. Additional questions included in the 1960 Census were related to places of works and means of transportation to work. By 1960, nearly all census data was processed using computers. The U.S. Census Bureau used a Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer (FOSDIC) for the first time, thus decreasing the amount of time and money required for data input.
In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.
Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, were an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and used for a 17 percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.
Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in 6 languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100 percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process by instead following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census. Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Mosquito County, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Rights Holder
<span>This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:</span>
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul><span>This resources is provided here by </span><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a><span> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a><span> of </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a><span>.</span>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
<span>United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.</span>
<span>United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.</span>
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/" target="_blank">Through the Decades</a>." United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/.
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
1 table
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census for Central Florida, 1970
Alternative Title
Census, 1970
Subject
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Population--United States
Description
The Nineteenth United States Census records for Brevard County, Flagler County, Lake County, Marion County, Orange County, Osceola County, Seminole County, and Volusia County, Florida, for 1970. The census divides the population by gender, race ("white," "black," "Spanish," and "other"), and native-born vs. foreign-born. Those who are foreign born are further divided by country of origin. The census then lists the population categorized by marital status, type of residence, military service, primary and secondary school attendance, and college attendance. The census also collected information on labor, on unemployment, on transportation, and on ownership of various types of technology.<br /><br />In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.<br /><br />Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, was an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.
Type
Dataset
Source
Original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1970.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/104" target="_blank">U.S. Census Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1970.
Coverage
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Creator
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>
Publisher
<a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Date Created
ca. 1970-04-01
Format
image/jpg
Extent
2.23 MB
Medium
1 table
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Civics/Government Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a> and published by the <a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>.
Rights Holder
This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form;</li>
<li>create derivative works;</li>
<li>perform the work publicly;</li>
<li>display the work;</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul>
This resources is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a> of <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a>.
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1970.html" target="_blank">1970 Overview</a>." U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1970.html.
United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.
United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. <a href="http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/1970/proceduralHistory/1970proceduralhistory.zip" target="_blank"><em>Procedural History: 1970 Census of Population and Housing</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966.
Transcript
U.S. Census of 1970
Population
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population Total 230,006 4,454 69,305 69,030 344,311 25,267 83,692 169,487
Males 115,184 2,211 33,350 33,005 167,980 12,095 40,605 79,328
Females 114,822 2,243 35,955 36,025 176,331 13,172 43,087 90,159
Population by Race White 208,436 3,068 57,104 50,914 294,653 23,098 69,582 145,320
Black 20,664 1,365 12,056 18,060 48,593 2,148 13,977 23,984
Other Race 906 21 145 56 1,065 21 133 183
Population by Descent or Origin Spanish Descent or Origin 5,100 5 761 875 6,940 194 1,012 1,304
Not Spanish Descent or Origin 224,900 4,449 68,544 68,155 337,371 25,073 82,680 168,183
Households Occupied 68,560 1,488 24,621 22,317 108,645 9,092 25,757 62,747
Husband-Wife Families 51,151 949 16,866 15,104 75,525 6,055 19,194 39,510
Other Family Units 7,069 193 2,478 2,768 12,589 1,005 2,619 7,300
Family Units with Male Head 1,731 71 619 729 2,294 229 468 1,417
Family Units with Female Head 5,338 122 1,859 2,039 10,295 776 2,151 5,883
Male Primary Individual Household Units 5,028 168 1,862 1,676 7,213 677 1,420 5,035
Female Primary Individual Household Units 5,312 178 3,415 2,769 13,318 1,355 2,524 10,902
Population in Group Quarters Total 3,250 77 1,163 1,394 10,655 391 446 4,972
Institutionalized People 289 7 800 1,157 2,669 239 267 1,519
Inmates of Mental Hospitals 0 0 0 6 38 0 0 17
Inmates of Homes for the Aged and Dependent 231 0 582 147 1,063 119 245 957
Inmates of Other Institutions 58 7 218 1,004 1,568 120 22 545
Population Not Institutionalized 2,961 70 363 237 7,986 152 179 3,453
Rooming Houses 209 23 175 83 346 32 99 663
Military Barracks 1,824 0 0 0 5,534 0 4 7
College Dormitories 682 0 24 26 1,276 0 0 2,327
Other Group Quarters 246 47 164 128 830 90 76 456
Population by Marital Status Never Married 35,563 735 9,597 10,702 59,514 3,295 12,091 26,855
Married 108,282 2,018 35,798 32,303 158,034 12,957 39,775 83,513
Spouse Present 104,133 1,924 34,419 30,832 153,144 12,550 38,847 80,356
Spouse Absent 4,149 94 1,379 1,471 4,890 407 928 3,157
Separated 2,627 127 1,115 1,460 5,710 384 1,580 2,539
Widowed 7,930 328 5,694 4,822 19,390 2,226 4,149 16,508
Divorced 5,779 78 1,713 1,766 10,333 677 1,752 5,682
Veteran Population by War or Conflict Vietnam Conflict 5,998 16 1,020 1,470 10,602 470 2,556 3,358
Korean War 8,513 125 1,264 1,384 3,522 521 1,957 3,259
Korean War and World War II 2,589 11 278 335 3,764 186 1,083 960
World War II 13,782 334 4,177 4,181 20,725 1,354 4,576 10,861
World War I 984 45 1,623 793 2,873 583 691 4,307
Other Services 5,916 18 1,060 1,505 6,359 493 1,769 3,172
Non-Veterans 31,721 919 14,626 12,902 52,302 5,056 13,199 32,679
Native-Born Population Total 222,761 4,403 67,996 67,786 333,532 24,479 81,601 160,528
Foreign-Born Population Total 6,429 161 1,468 1,710 9,378 699 1,716 9,474
Foreign-Born Population by Country of Origin United Kingdom 1,084 60 188 208 1,705 157 199 1,954
Ireland 190 8 8 6 138 25 0 257
Norway 25 0 19 21 836 0 18 142
Sweden 110 0 44 7 173 39 6 244
Denmark 72 0 26 27 56 0 41 130
Netherlands 88 0 75 0 148 6 31 132
Switzerland 64 0 8 12 59 13 16 74
France 119 9 6 20 157 17 35 179
Germany 966 11 163 306 1,008 129 233 1,647
Poland 73 41 59 279 216 0 12 268
Czechoslovakia 97 0 36 15 160 0 128 70
Austria 62 0 38 38 142 64 44 359
Hungary 178 5 64 0 202 26 18 209
Yugoslavia 29 0 11 27 119 0 11 133
Russia 84 0 7 61 207 6 35 232
Lithuania 15 0 8 11 62 0 13 45
Finland 32 0 51 0 48 0 5 36
Romania 5 0 0 7 48 5 0 39
Greece 35 0 13 0 123 0 11 118
Italy 348 6 60 73 420 5 117 617
Portugal 8 0 0 0 40 0 0 16
Other Europe 177 9 33 26 84 23 77 150
Southwest Asia 125 0 13 6 114 0 77 148
China 35 0 0 0 77 0 0 33
Japan 104 0 0 0 126 17 20 35
Other Asia 252 0 8 24 171 4 26 93
Canada 1,045 12 385 362 1,465 124 275 1,550
Mexico 35 0 27 15 46 4 38 32
Cuba 273 0 7 50 788 0 85 152
Other America 379 0 54 95 660 18 81 195
Africa 44 0 9 7 134 0 0 24
All Other 151 0 39 7 111 10 19 78
Not Reported 125 0 9 0 285 7 45 83
Population by Work Transportation Method Private Automobile 77,928 1,170 18,827 20,689 114,255 7,113 26,710 46,121
Private Driver Automobile 67,363 921 16,021 17,708 98,709 6,038 23,245 39,700
Private Passenger Automobile 10,565 249 2,806 2,981 15,546 1,078 3,465 6,421
Bus or Streetcar 382 41 486 203 4,364 49 475 825
Subway or Elevated Transportation 5 0 15 0 8 0 8 0
Railroad 0 0 0 6 12 8 24 11
Taxicab 245 0 205 248 559 30 230 552
Walking 3,538 125 1,383 984 7,142 499 1,031 3,287
Multiple Means of Transportation 2,839 55 1,300 1,121 4,704 288 1,354 2,410
Work at Home 1,191 23 511 847 2,469 199 450 1,875
Population by Automobile Ownership None 4,227 304 3,398 3,509 13,081 1,433 2,548 9,174
1 30,228 654 13,914 11,530 51,115 5,223 11,884 35,319
1+ 64,333 1,184 21,223 18,808 95,564 7,659 23,209 53,573
2 29,003 447 6,103 6,002 37,100 2,046 9,343 15,419
3+ 5,102 83 1,206 1,276 7,349 390 1,982 2,835
Population by Television Ownership None 2,544 124 1,135 1,461 4,967 266 881 2,488
1 45,788 1,181 18,269 17,649 71,421 7,277 16,907 46,312
1+ 65,864 1,432 23,492 20,856 103,625 8,826 24,876 60,348
2+ 20,076 251 5,223 3,207 32,204 1,549 7,969 14,036
Population by Home Appliance Ownership Clothes Washing Machine 48,116 1,149 16,374 15,148 73,520 5,566 18,445 36,415
Automatic or Semi-Automatic Clothes Washing Machine 46,670 931 14,727 13,226 69,686 4,767 16,836 33,695
Wringer or Separate Clothes Washing Machine 1,446 218 1,647 1,922 3,834 769 1,609 2,720
No Clothes Washing Machine 20,292 407 8,253 7,169 35,072 3,526 7,312 26,421
Clothes Dryers 28,429 358 5,233 5,429 35,056 1,441 8,542 14,018
Electrically-Heated Clothes Dryers 25,214 339 4,867 5,314 33,661 1,247 8,169 13,378
Gas-Heated Clothes Dryers 3,215 19 366 115 1,395 194 373 640
No Clothes Dryers 39,979 1,198 19,394 16,888 73,536 7,651 17,215 48,818
Dishwashers 18,302 121 3,449 3,081 25,069 652 6,851 8,712
No Dishwashers 50,106 1,435 21,178 19,236 83,523 8,440 18,906 54,124
Education
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population by School Completion No School Completed 689 59 544 582 2,234 192 574 1,036
Elementary School Completed 15,957 876 13,005 11,913 41,362 5,010 10,838 25,266
1-4 Years of Elementary School 2,288 216 2,378 2,397 6,987 563 2,109 3,398
5-6 Years of Elementary School 3,252 222 2,864 2,687 9,767 978 2,389 5,179
7 Years of Elementary School 2,552 118 1,980 1,910 7,213 806 1,901 3,652
8 Years of Elementary School 7,865 320 5,783 4,919 17,395 2,663 4,439 13,037
High School Completed 64,037 1,264 21,359 19,580 96,067 8,354 23,695 55,823
1-3 Years of High School 18,199 501 9,032 8,146 36,723 3,621 8,999 20,155
4 Years of High School 45,838 763 12,327 11,534 59,344 4,733 14,696 35,668
College Completed 38,264 395 8,702 6,924 45,204 2,278 9,681 25,773
1-3 Years of College 20,287 272 4,715 4,043 23,709 1,219 5,467 14,225
4 Years of College 11,605 87 2,713 1,924 13,488 643 2,620 7,418
5+ Years of College 6,372 36 1,274 957 8,007 416 1,594 4,130
Male Population by School Completion No School Completed 374 44 372 360 1,132 116 305 592
Elementary School Completed 8,156 466 6,759 6,245 20,538 2,594 5,371 12,485
High School Completed 27,446 556 8,998 8,514 40,077 3,563 10,183 22,667
College Completed 22,576 194 4,273 3,324 24,310 1,124 5,334 12,547
Female Population by School Completion No School Completed 315 15 172 222 1,102 76 269 444
Elementary School Completed 7,801 410 6,246 5,668 20,824 2,416 5,467 12,781
High School Completed 36,591 708 12,361 11,166 55,990 4,791 13,512 33,156
College Completed 15,688 201 4,429 3,600 20,894 1,154 4,347 13,226
White Population by School Completion No School Completed 408 18 269 247 1,315 128 214 543
Elementary School Completed 12,362 516 10,019 7,779 31,235 4,452 7,168 20,503
1-4 Years of Elementary School 1,082 59 1,210 879 3,581 339 617 1,703
5-6 Years of Elementary School 2,256 117 2,082 1,453 6,801 781 1,365 3,756
7 Years of Elementary School 2,024 71 1,637 1,369 5,614 746 1,375 3,026
8 Years of Elementary School 7,000 269 5,090 4,078 15,239 2,586 3,811 12,018
High School Completed 59,985 1,072 19,070 16,359 87,158 8,014 21,558 51,512
1-3 Years of High School 16,017 406 7,659 6,080 31,501 3,416 7,620 17,807
4 Years of High School 43,968 666 11,411 10,279 55,657 4,598 13,938 33,705
College Completed 37,227 376 8,369 6,253 43,325 2,244 9,343 24,448
1-3 Years of College 19,754 260 4,578 3,730 22,871 1,200 5,274 13,519
4 Years of College 11,249 80 2,579 1,660 12,802 637 2,533 7,035
5+ Years of College 6,224 36 1,212 863 7,652 407 1,536 3,894
Black Population by School Completion No School Completed 277 41 270 335 905 64 360 493
Elementary School Completed 3,570 355 2,972 4,129 9,954 558 3,657 4,757
1-4 Years of Elementary School 1,206 152 1,168 1,518 3,358 224 1,492 1,691
5-6 Years of Elementary School 996 105 772 1,229 2,930 197 1,015 1,423
7 Years of Elementary School 521 47 339 541 1,567 60 522 626
8 Years of Elementary School 847 51 693 841 2,101 77 628 1,014
High School Completed 3,835 176 2,268 3,314 8,603 329 2,076 4,262
1-3 Years of High School 2,128 79 1,357 2,059 5,097 199 1,355 2,330
4 Years of High School 1,707 97 911 1,255 3,506 130 721 1,932
College Completed 841 19 328 659 1,763 34 321 1,294
1-3 Years of College 444 12 132 301 786 19 181 696
4 Years of College 275 4 0 264 657 6 87 366
5+ Years of College 122 0 62 94 320 9 53 232
Other Race Population by School Completion No School Completed 4 0 5 0 14 0 0 0
Elementary School Completed 25 5 14 5 173 0 13 9
1-4 Years of Elementary School 0 5 0 0 50 0 0 4
5-6 Years of Elementary School 0 0 10 5 36 0 9 0
7 Years of Elementary School 7 0 4 0 32 0 4 0
8 Years of Elementary School 18 0 0 0 55 0 0 5
High School Completed 217 16 21 7 306 1 61 49
1-3 Years of High School 54 16 16 7 125 6 24 18
4 Years of High School 163 0 5 0 181 5 37 31
College Completed 196 0 5 12 116 0 17 31
1-3 Years of College 89 0 5 12 52 0 12 10
4 Years of College 81 0 0 0 29 0 0 17
5+ Years of College 26 0 0 0 35 0 5 4
Spanish Population by School Completion No School Completed 7 0 18 0 8 0 5 0
Elementary School Completed 197 0 114 84 707 9 26 100
1-4 Years of Elementary School 21 0 27 20 157 0 5 0
5-6 Years of Elementary School 39 0 37 31 208 9 8 5
7 Years of Elementary School 26 0 5 13 73 0 6 15
8 Years of Elementary School 111 0 45 20 269 0 7 80
High School Completed 1,069 5 67 136 1,291 25 249 362
1-3 Years of High School 213 5 20 38 385 7 73 42
4 Years of High School 856 0 47 98 906 18 176 320
College Completed 1,008 0 117 153 948 44 202 282
1-3 Years of College 500 0 70 69 503 6 133 146
4 Years of College 279 0 27 32 235 20 34 58
5+ Years of College 229 0 20 52 210 18 35 78
Labor
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population in Labor Force Total 92,489 1,481 24,045 25,369 142,011 8,509 32,266 58,551
Armed Forces 4,502 23 68 62 8,953 28 461 157
Civilian Labor Force 87,987 1,458 23,977 25,307 133,058 8,481 31,805 58,394
Employed 83,051 1,437 22,830 24,428 126,731 8,233 30,242 56,054
Unemployed 4,936 21 1,147 879 6,327 248 1,563 2,340
Not in Labor Force 57,079 1,598 27,182 22,829 96,488 9,994 23,283 70,519
Male Population in Labor Force Total 61,033 951 14,804 15,420 89,238 5,316 20,195 33,902
Armed Forces 4,437 23 68 57 8,817 28 435 150
Civilian Labor Force 56,596 928 14,736 15,363 80,421 5,288 19,760 33,752
Employed 53,911 916 14,100 14,943 77,240 5,114 18,948 32,515
Unemployed 2,685 12 636 420 3,181 174 812 1,237
Not in Labor Force 12,743 542 9,344 7,201 24,663 3,383 6,040 24,880
Female Population in Labor Force Total 31,456 530 9,241 9,949 52,773 3,193 12,071 24,649
Armed Forces 65 0 0 5 136 0 26 7
Civilian Labor Force 31,391 530 9,241 9,944 52,637 3,193 12,045 24,642
Employed 29,140 521 8,730 9,485 49,491 3,119 11,294 23,539
Unemployed 2,251 9 511 459 3,146 74 751 1,103
Not in Labor Force 44,336 1,056 17,838 15,628 71,825 6,611 17,243 45,639
White Population in Labor Force Total 84,261 1,016 19,134 19,279 122,059 7,775 26,956 49,696
Armed Forces 4,121 14 62 50 7,774 28 441 157
Civilian Labor Force 80,140 1,002 19,072 19,229 114,735 7,747 26,515 49,539
Employed 75,669 988 18,219 18,614 109,551 7,508 25,348 47,647
Unemployed 4,471 14 853 615 5,184 239 1,167 1,892
Not in Labor Force 53,174 1,286 24,555 18,017 85,934 9,463 20,093 64,512
Black Population in Labor Force Total 7,870 454 4,850 6,083 19,054 723 5,279 8,786
Armed Forces 297 9 6 12 1,070 0 20 0
Civilian Labor Force 7,573 445 4,844 6,071 17,984 723 5,259 8,786
Employed 7,118 438 4,550 5,807 16,858 714 4,863 8,343
Unemployed 455 7 294 264 1,126 9 396 443
Not in Labor Force 3,688 302 2,613 4,795 10,214 521 3,118 5,928
Other Race Population in Labor Force Total 358 11 61 7 448 11 31 69
Armed Forces 84 0 0 0 109 0 0 0
Civilian Labor Force 274 11 61 7 339 11 31 69
Employed 264 11 61 7 322 11 31 64
Unemployed 10 0 0 0 17 0 0 5
Not in Labor Force 217 10 14 17 340 10 72 79
Spanish Population in Labor Force Total 1,919 5 260 349 2,741 42 355 511
Armed Forces 183 0 0 0 290 5 8 0
Civilian Labor Force 1,736 5 260 349 2,451 37 347 511
Employed 1,610 5 234 336 2,260 37 317 493
Unemployed 126 0 26 13 191 0 30 18
Not in Labor Force 119 0 171 144 1,467 77 291 421
Employment by Sector Private Sector 60,990 1,011 17,072 18,020 98,386 5,974 23,570 41,989
Private Company 59,979 983 16,609 17,744 95,860 5,852 23,034 40,937
Own Corporation 1,011 28 463 276 2,526 122 536 1,052
Public Sector 17,663 296 3,108 4,007 18,233 1,414 4,109 7,893
Federal Government Workers 8,404 32 366 500 4,992 227 1,139 1,189
State Government Workers 1,513 98 615 1,140 3,018 251 755 1,368
Local Government Workers 7,746 166 2,127 2,367 10,223 936 2,215 5,336
Self-Employed Workers 4,018 120 2,479 2,271 9,297 804 2,400 5,726
Unpaid Family Workers 380 10 171 130 815 41 163 446
Male Employment by Sector Private Company 39,740 623 10,193 11,091 57,829 3,563 14,444 23,051
Own Corporation 817 23 394 237 2,111 116 461 833
Federal Government Workers 6,291 27 226 355 3,677 162 835 868
State Government Workers 733 66 331 543 1,320 180 389 730
Local Government Workers 3,315 62 974 864 4,748 464 930 2,586
Self-Employed Workers 2,952 107 1,938 1,827 7,339 617 1,849 4,383
Unpaid Family Workers 63 5 44 26 216 12 40 64
Female Employment by Sector Private Company 20,239 360 6,416 6,653 38,031 2,289 8,590 17,886
Own Corporation 194 5 69 39 415 6 75 219
Federal Government Workers 2,113 5 140 145 1,315 65 304 321
State Government Workers 780 32 284 597 1,698 71 366 638
Local Government Workers 4,431 101 1,153 1,503 5,475 472 1,285 2,750
Self-Employed Workers 1,066 13 541 444 1,958 187 551 1,343
Unpaid Family Workers 317 5 127 104 599 29 123 382
Employment by Industry Agriculture, Forestry and Fishery 1,335 186 3,827 2,518 6,018 922 2,024 2,461
Mining 59 0 82 171 81 12 11 50
Construction 5,255 103 1,689 2,111 11,156 974 2,980 5,013
Furniture and Lumber 39 89 262 447 549 183 144 257
Primary Metal 6 0 62 22 158 6 83 56
Fabricated Metal 7,765 0 116 125 6,051 200 867 673
Machinery, Except Electrical 705 0 115 65 817 129 261 298
Electrical Machinery, Equipment, and Supply 7,959 38 118 36 1,830 94 1,053 1,665
Motor Vehicle 1,252 5 228 506 642 183 272 400
Other Durable Goods 1,004 8 430 347 1,540 134 434 994
Food and Kindred Products 234 0 680 516 2,563 95 359 388
Textile and Fabric 31 0 42 234 233 6 391 177
Printing and Publishing 770 17 164 176 1,731 160 358 698
Chemical 151 0 164 137 484 5 114 93
Other Non-Durable Goods 373 17 187 284 1,240 120 260 313
Railroad and Railways Services 28 7 84 183 222 11 338 231
Trucking Services and Warehousing 390 10 329 193 1,964 119 447 319
Other Transportation 1,547 35 193 171 1,400 90 347 698
Communication 1,187 16 324 422 2,696 104 555 883
Utilities and Sanitary 1,361 42 330 428 2,459 194 598 1,128
Wholesale Trade 1,617 35 1,547 1,100 7,977 268 1,525 1,358
Food and Bakery 2,238 26 710 624 3,203 266 951 1,578
Eating and Drinking Establishments 2,718 72 599 907 4,186 362 879 2,984
General Merchandise Retail 2,641 5 343 585 4,689 170 1,068 1,629
Motor Vehicle Retail 2,159 37 920 1,098 4,091 295 912 1,964
Other Retail Trade 4,141 79 1,577 1,723 8,146 404 1,658 4,488
Banking and Credit 1,033 0 321 316 2,282 136 534 1,108
Insurance, Real Estate, and Finance 2,024 24 550 768 6,109 202 1,369 2,174
Business Service 5,507 3 158 243 2,993 102 681 927
Repair Service 1,483 18 337 379 2,516 97 608 990
Private Household 1,069 48 777 815 2,874 133 606 1,578
Other Personal Services 3,233 147 908 1,129 4,538 304 940 4,205
Entertainment and Recreation Service 640 14 154 545 1,582 39 548 906
Hospital 1,760 67 563 586 3,887 254 828 2,210
Medical and Other Health Service 1,350 14 543 399 2,740 229 658 1,594
School-Related 6,544 114 1,723 1,920 8,361 542 2,024 4,420
Government 5,039 104 1,482 1,578 6,459 479 1,589 2,736
Private 1,505 10 241 342 1,902 63 435 1,684
Other Education and Kindred 283 0 110 61 488 22 66 235
Welfare, Religious, and Non-Profit 930 13 326 345 2,061 92 473 695
Legal, Engineering, and Miscellaneous Professional 1,995 22 467 553 3,629 139 571 1,578
Public Administration 8,235 126 771 1,240 6,545 436 1,447 2,638
Professional, Technical, and Kindred 22,143 200 2,624 2,634 18,976 874 4,281 7,756
Engineer and Technical 6,402 0 128 84 2,788 75 546 791
Physicians, Dentists, and Related Practitioners 395 9 126 104 808 22 134 386
Medical and Health Workers, Except Practitioners 1,059 14 364 344 1,896 87 454 1,103
Teachers, Elementary and Secondary Schools 3,243 75 853 852 4,346 331 975 1,682
Technicians, Except Health 3,835 7 207 181 1,350 69 502 645
Other Professional Workers 7,209 95 946 1,069 7,788 290 1,670 3,149
Managers and Administrators, Except Farms 7,693 162 2,119 2,324 11,907 701 3,270 6,149
Salaried Managers and Administrators 6,686 134 1,595 1,683 9,820 456 2,754 4,407
Salaried Manufacturing Managers and Administrators 1,239 11 179 158 1,281 45 370 436
Salaried Retail Managers and Administrators 1,694 34 434 474 2,533 113 743 1,355
Salaried Other Managers and Administrators 3,753 89 982 1,051 6,006 298 1,641 2,616
Self-Employed Workers 1,007 28 524 641 2,087 245 516 1,742
Self-Employed Retail Trade Workers 436 24 240 334 966 115 223 797
Self-Employed Other Industry Workers 571 4 284 307 1,121 130 293 945
Sales Workers 5,259 59 1,776 1,907 12,620 490 2,972 5,144
Manufacturing and Wholesale Trade Workers 629 10 203 277 2,777 56 728 656
Retail Sales Workers 3,353 38 1,128 1,085 6,413 300 1,445 2,975
Other Sales Workers 1,277 11 445 545 3,430 134 799 1,513
Clerical and Kindred Workers 15,177 145 2,747 3,558 24,021 1,041 4,747 8,942
Bookkeepers 1,495 25 435 618 2,907 154 589 1,141
Secretaries, Stenographers, and Typists 4,728 29 756 1,000 7,382 251 1,399 2,488
Other Clerical Workers 8,954 91 1,556 1,940 13,732 636 2,759 5,313
Craftsmen, Foremen, and Kindred Workers 12,101 172 2,836 3,251 17,269 1,382 4,609 7,896
Automobile Mechanics and Body Workers 1,072 11 365 372 1,980 149 462 881
Mechanics and Repair Men, Except Auto 2,633 22 385 477 2,589 131 748 1,145
Machinists 242 0 26 46 248 39 28 130
Metal Craftsmen, Except Mechanics and Machinists 169 5 29 67 451 46 107 199
Carpenters 962 14 312 438 1,628 196 505 686
Construction Craftsmen 2,526 33 651 792 4,161 383 1,139 2,063
Others Craftsmen 4,497 87 1,068 1,059 6,212 438 1,620 2,792
Operatives, Except Transport, Workers 4,832 128 2,150 2,180 9,301 837 2,674 3,442
Manufacturing Durable Goods Workers 2,137 36 556 492 2,608 386 946 1,235
Manufacturing Non-Durable Goods Workers 343 8 388 623 1,751 96 589 349
Non-Manufacturing Industry 2,352 84 1,206 1,065 4,942 355 1,139 1,858
Transport Equipment Operators 1,803 47 1,179 1,115 5,309 388 1,213 1,719
Truck Drivers 658 26 703 528 2,463 223 631 659
Other Transport Equipment Operatives 1,145 21 476 587 2,846 165 582 1,060
Laborers, Except Farms 2,947 126 1,138 1,445 6,263 417 1,440 2,925
Construction Laborers 767 37 269 299 1,578 116 457 639
Freight, Stock, and Material Handlers 949 23 298 473 2,076 123 395 612
Other Laborers, Except Farm 1,231 66 571 673 2,609 178 588 1,674
Farmers and Farm Managers 169 44 560 587 566 156 220 335
Farm Laborers and Farm Foremen 595 101 2,595 1,466 3,797 574 1,357 973
Farm Laborers, Unpaid Family Workers 12 0 26 13 49 6 9 14
Farm Laborers, Except Unpaid and Farm Foremen 583 101 2,569 1,453 3,748 568 1,348 959
Service Workers, Except Private Household 9,233 208 2,351 3,143 13,759 1,202 2,836 9,290
Cleaning Service Workers 2,168 100 467 674 2,473 199 588 2,063
Food Service Workers 2,974 56 810 1,103 4,824 414 973 3,362
Health Service Workers 765 10 333 307 1,889 236 420 1,174
Personal Service Workers 1,282 10 322 437 1,958 101 400 1,112
Protective Service Workers 1,366 24 224 402 1,493 144 301 885
Service Workers, Except Private Household 678 8 195 220 1,122 108 154 694
Private Household Workers 1,099 45 755 818 2,943 171 623 1,483
administrators
African Americans
aged
agriculture
Armed Forces
Asian Americans
assisted living facilities
Austrian Americans
automobiles
bakeries
bakers
bakery
banking
bars
bookkeepers
Brevard County
British Americans
bus
buses
business
cabs
Canadian Americans
Caribbean Americans
carpenters
cars
Caucasian Americans
census
Census of 1970
Central Americans
chemicals
Chinese Americans
civilian labor
cleaning services
clerical
college dormitories
college dorms
college education
communications
construction
crafts
craftsman
craftsmen
credit
Cuban Americans
Czech Americans
Czechoslovakian Americans
Danish Americans
dentists
dependents
dishwashers
divorced
divorcees
doctors
domestic service
drinking establishment
dryers
durable goods
Dutch Americans
eating establishment
education
educations
electric heat
electrical equipment
electrical machinery
electrical supply
elementary education
elevated transportation
employees
employment
engineering
engineers
English Americans
entertainment
European Americans
fabricated metal
fabrics
families
farm managers
farmers
farming
federal government
females
finance
Finnish Americans
fishery
Flagler County
food
food services
foreman
foremen
forestry
freight
French Americans
furniture
gas eat
German Americans
government
Greek Americans
group quarters
health care
health services
high school education
higher education
Hispanic Americans
hospitals
households
Hungarian Americans
inmates
institutionalized
insurance
Irish Americans
Italian Americans
Japanese Americans
kindred
Korean War
labor
labor force
laborers
Lake County
Latin Americans
Latinas
Latinos
legal
Lithuanian Americans
local government
lumber
machinery
machinists
males
managers
manufacturing
Marion County
marital status
married
material handlers
mechanics
medical
medical practitioners
mental hospitals
merchandise
Mexican Americans
Middle Eastern Americans
military barracks
mining
motor vehicles
non-durable goods
non-profit
Norwegian Americans
nursing homes
old folks homes
operatives
orange county
Osceola County
pedestrians
personal services
physicians
Polish Americans
population
Portuguese Americans
primary education
primary metal
printing
private sector
professionals
protective services
public administration
public sector
public transportation
publishing
railroads
railways
real estate
recreation
religious
repair
restaurants
retail
Romanian Americans
rooming houses
Russian Americans
salaried
sales
sanitary
sanitation
Scandinavian Americans
schools
secondary education
secretaries
secretary
self-employed
Seminole County
separated
servicemen
servicewomen
single
Slovakian Americans
Southwest Asian Americans
Spanish Americans
spouses
state government
stenographers
stock
streetcars
subways
Swedish Americans
Swiss Americans
taxicabs
teachers
technical
technicians
televisions
textiles
trade
transport equipment
transportation
truck drivers
trucking services
TV
typists
U.S. Census
unemployment
university education
utilities
veterans
Vietnam War
Volusia County
walkers
walking
warehousing
washing machines
welfare
wholesale
widowed
widowers
widows
workers
World War I
World War II
wringers
WWI
WWII
Yugoslavian Americans
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/f1daededa509d63078e20ecb89f2a2f4.jpg
3a7ef7ad3a7ce370fedcc74612a39049
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census Collection
Alternative Title
Census Collection
Subject
Census--United States
Population--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Description
Collection of United States Census population records for various counties in Central Florida from 1840 to 2000.
The Census Act of 1840 was signed into law on March 3, 1839 and later amended on February 26, 1840. This piece of legislation established a centralized census office during each enumeration. Congress designated the census questionnaire designs to the Secretary of State. However, each household received inquiries regarding "the pursuits, industry, education, and resources of the country" and included questions related to school attendance, literacy, and vocation.
In March of 1849, Congress pass legislation that established a census board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Postmaster General. The board was responsible for preparing and printing forms and schedules for enumeration related to population, mining, agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, education, etc. The 1850 Census also increased population inquiries to include every free person's name (as opposed to just the head of the household), as well as information on taxes, schools, crime, wages, estate values, etc.
The Census Act of 1850 authorized the U.S. Census of 1860 and stipulated that its provisions be adhered to for all future decennial censuses should no new legislation be passed by the first of the year of said census. In May of 1865, the U.S. Census Office was abolished and many superintending clerks were transferred to the General Land Office.
Although the 1870 Census was conducted under the provisions of the Census Act of 1850, a new act was passed on May 6, 1870. The new census legislation required two changes in procedures related to questionnaire return submission dates. Moreover, penalties for refusing to reply to inquires were expanded to apply to all questions and questionnaires. The questionnaires themselves had to be redesigned due to the end of the "slave questionnaire", as slavery had been formally abolished slavery nationwide via the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This left five schedules for the census: General Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Products of Industry, and Social Statistics. In addition, the use of a Charles W. Seaton, a U.S. Census Office chief clerk and later superintendent, invited a rudimentary tallying machine that partially alleviated the difficulties of tallying and tabulating questionnaire responses. Finally, the new superintendent for the Ninth Census, General Francis A. Walker, introduced employment examinations to test the qualifications of applicants to the Census Office, allowing for increased efficiency in the process of collecting census data.
The newest act authorizing the Census of 1880 provided for supervision of enumeration by "supervisors of the census", selected exclusively for the collection of census data. All supervisors, as well as the superintendent, were to appointed by the U.S. President and approved by the Senate. Census enumerators were required to personally visit each household and family within his subdivision. The new census act also allowed for the collection of data related to the condition and operation of railroad corporations, incorporated express companies, and telegraph companies, as well as data related to the condition and operation of life, fire, and marine insurance companies. Corporations who refused to provide the census with "true and complete" answers were subject to fines. In addition, the census superintendent was required to collect and publish data on the population, industries and resources of the District of Alaska. Finally, the 1880 Census consisted of five schedules: Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Social Statistics, and Manufacturing.
The Census of 1890 was authorized by an act modeled after the 1880 enumeration and signed into law on March 1, 1889. The 1890 Census was supervised by 175 employees and enumerators were required to collect all information by personally visiting each household. The 1890 Census included essentially the same inquires from the 1880 Census, with some notable additions, such as questions about home and farm ownership and indebtedness; and the names, units, length of service, and residences of former Union soldiers and sailors, as well as the names of the widows of those who were no longer alive. Racial categorization was expanded to include "Japanese", along with "Chinese", "Negro", "mulatto", "quadroon", "octoroon", and "White". Herman Hollerith, a former employee of the U.S. Census Office, invited the electric tabulating system, which was widely used in the 1890 Census, allowing data to be processed faster and more efficiently. On October 3, 1893, Congress passed a law that transferred census-related work to the direction of the commissioner of labor. Congress passed another act on March 2, 1895, effectively abolishing the U.S. Census Office and transferring the remaining responsibilities to the Office of the Secretary of the Interior.
Congress limited the Census of 1900 to content related to population, mortality, agriculture, and manufacturing. Special census agents were authorized to collect statistics related to incidents of deafness, blindness, insanity, and juvenile delinquency; as well as data on religious bodies, utilities, mining, and transportation. The act authorizing the 1900 Census designated the enumeration of military personally to the U.S. Department of War and the U.S. Department of the Navy, while Indiana Territory was to be enumerated by the commissioner of Indian Affairs. Annexed in 1898, Hawaii was included in the census for the first time. In 1902, the U.S. Census Office was officially established as a permanent organization within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The office became the U.S. Census Bureau in 1903 and was transferred to the Department of Commerce and Labor.
The Census of 1910 was approved by legislation introduced in December of 1907 and enacted in July of 1909. The delay was the result of a disagreement over the appointment of enumerators. President Theodore Roosevelt supported the hiring of enumerators via the civil service system, while Congress supported enumerators as positions of patronage. President Roosevelt successfully won the debate. This census act also changed Census Day from the traditional date of June 1st to April 15th. Additional questions regarding the nationality and native language of foreign-born persons and their parents. Funds for the U.S. Census Bureau were also increased to expand the Census' permanent workforce and created several new full-time positions, including a geographer, a chief statistician, and an assistant director. The assistant director was to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, while all other census employees were hired on the basis of open, competitive examinations administered by the Civil Service Commission. Despite the use of automatic counting machinery, issues with the tabulation process persisted. Finally, with the United States' entrance into World War I in 1917, the U.S. Census Bureau became a source of even more valuable purpose: the Census was able to use population and economic data to report on the populations of draft-age men, as well as information regarding each state's industrial capabilities.
The Census of 1920 changed the date of Census Day from April 15th to January 1st, as requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which argued that farmers' memories and harvest information would be more accurate on this day. The U.S. Census Bureau was also authorized to hire additional employees at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and to create a special field force to collect census data. The legislation authorizing the 1920 Census also allowed for a census of manufacturing to be conducted in 1921, and for such a census to be repeated every two years thereafter, as opposed to the traditional five-year census cycle. Furthermore, a census of agriculture and livestock was to be conducted in 1925 and to be repeated every ten years thereafter. In addition, penalties for those who refused to supply information or those who supplied false information were strengthened. As a result of these changes, census of population, manufacturing, and agriculture and livestock became increasingly independent of one another.
The "usual place of abode", the location where residents regularly slept, instead of where they worked or were visiting, became the new basis for enumeration in the 1920 Census. Those with no permanent or regular residence were listed as residents of the location that they were enumerated at. Enumeration related to institutional inmates and dependent, defective, and delinquent classes were also modified. Unlike the previous census, the 1920 Census did not have inquires related to unemployment, to Union or Confederate Army or Navy service, to the number of children born, or to the length of time that a couple had been married. The Census of 1920, however, did include four additional questions: one regarding year of naturalization and three regarding native languages. Issues also arose as a result of changes in international boundaries following World War I, particularly for persons declaring birth or parental birth in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, or Turkey. In response, enumerators were required to ask said persons for their province, state, or region of birth. Enumerators were not required to ask individuals how to spell their names, nor were respondents required to provide proof of various pieces of information. Race was determined by the enumerator's impressions.
The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for a census of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their territory. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demands and the bureau was accused of present unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.
Congress authorized the 1940 Census in August 1939, providing the Director of the Census the additional authority to conduct a national census of housing in each state, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Alaska. The housing census was conducted separately, though enumerators often collection housing information at the same time that they collected population information. The Census of 1940 was the first time that the U.S. Census Bureau used advanced statistical techniques. In particular, the census used probably sampling, which had only previously been tested in a trial census of unemployment conducted the Civil Works Administration during 1933-1934, in surveys of retail stores in the 1930s, and in an official sample survey of unemployment conducted amongst two percent of American households in 1937. Probability sampling allowed for the inclusion of additional demographic questions without increasing the burden on the collection process or on data processing. Moreover, sampling the U.S. Census Bureau was able to publish preliminary returns eight months before tabulations were completed. Likewise, the census increased its number of published tables, and also was able to complete data processing with higher quality and more efficiency. New census questions focused on employment, unemployment, internal migration, and incomes—reflecting on the concerns of the Great Depression, the country's housing stock, and the need for public housing programs.
The Census of 1950 encompassed every state, Alaska, Hawaii, American Samoa, the Panama Canal Zone, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other small American territories. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau enumerate American living abroad to account for members of the U.S. Armed Forces, vessel crew members, and government employees residing in foreign countries. The U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Maritime Administration, and several other federal agencies were responsible for distributing and collecting census questionnaires in a cooperative effort. Persons living abroad for reasons other than what is listed above had their census information reported by families or neighbors residing in the United States, but such data was criticized as unreliable and were not published in official statistics. The 1950 Census also included a new survey on residential financing collected separately on a sample basis from owners of owner-occupied properties, rental properties, and mortgage lenders. The accuracy of the new census was increased by improved enumerator training, the use of detailed street maps for enumerators, the publication of "Missed Person" forms in local newspapers, and the designation of a specific night to conduct a special enumeration of transient individuals. Moreover, a post-enumeration survey was conducted to further verify the accuracy of the original enumeration. A sample of approximately 3,500 small areas was compared to the original census data to identify households that may have been omitted initially. Likewise, a sample of approximately 22,000 households were re-interviewed to identify persons omitted in the original enumeration count. Though not used for the 1950 Census, the UNIVersal Automatic Computer I (UNIVAC I), the first non-military computer, was used to tabulate some of the statistics for the 1954 census of economy. In August of 1954, Congress codified various census statutes, such as the Fifteenth Census Act of 1929, authorizing the decennial census and other census.
The Census of 1960 was the first to be mailed to respondents. The U.S. Postal Service delivered census questionnaires to households, the head of household was required to complete the questionnaire, and an enumerator was to pick it up. The enumeration process was divided into two stages: first, select data for each person and dwelling unit was collected; and second, more detailed economic and social data was collected from a sample of households and dwelling units. The census questionnaires for the second stage were hand-delivered by enumerators as they were collecting data from the first stage. Households receiving the second census questionnaire were to complete the form and mail it to their local census office. Twenty-five percent of the population was giving additional sample questions. Because of the increased use of sampling, less populated areas were prone to sampling variation; however, this did not significantly decrease the usefulness of census statistics gathered. Moreover, increased use of sampling reduced data processing costs. Additional questions included in the 1960 Census were related to places of works and means of transportation to work. By 1960, nearly all census data was processed using computers. The U.S. Census Bureau used a Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer (FOSDIC) for the first time, thus decreasing the amount of time and money required for data input.
In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.
Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, were an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and used for a 17 percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.
Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in 6 languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100 percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process by instead following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census. Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Mosquito County, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Rights Holder
<span>This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:</span>
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul><span>This resources is provided here by </span><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a><span> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a><span> of </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a><span>.</span>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
<span>United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.</span>
<span>United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.</span>
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/" target="_blank">Through the Decades</a>." United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/.
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
1 table
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census for Central Florida, 1960
Alternative Title
Census, 1960
Subject
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Population--United States
Description
The Eighteenth United States Census records for Brevard County, Flagler County, Lake County, Marion County, Orange County, Osceola County, Seminole County, and Volusia County, Florida, for 1960. The census divides the population by gender, race ("white", "black", "Japanese", "Chinese", "Filipino", and "other"), and native-born vs. foreign-born. Those who are foreign born are further divided by country of origin. The census then lists the population categorized by age, military service, transportation use, primary and secondary school attendance, and college attendance. The census also collected information on labor and on unemployment.<br /><br />The Census of 1960 was the first to be mailed to respondents. The U.S. Post Office Department delivered census questionnaires to households, the head of household was required to complete the questionnaire, and an enumerator was to pick it up. The enumeration process was divided into two stages: first, select data for each person and dwelling unit was collected; and second, more detailed economic and social data was collected from a sample of households and dwelling units. The census questionnaires for the second stage were hand-delivered by enumerators as they were collecting data from the first stage. Households receiving the second census questionnaire were to complete the form and mail it to their local census office. Twenty-five percent of the population was giving additional sample questions. Because of the increased use of sampling, less populated areas were prone to sampling variation; however, this did not significantly decrease the usefulness of census statistics gathered. Moreover, increased use of sampling reduced data processing costs. Additional questions included in the 1960 Census were related to places of work and means of transportation to work. By 1960, nearly all census data was processed using computers. The U.S. Census Bureau used a Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer (FOSDIC) for the first time, thus decreasing the amount of time and money required for data input.
Type
Dataset
Source
Original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1960.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/104" target="_blank">U.S. Census Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1960.
Coverage
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Creator
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>
Publisher
<a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Date Created
ca. 1960-04-01
Format
image/jpg
Extent
1.75 MB
Medium
1 table
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Civics/Government Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a> and published by the <a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>.
Rights Holder
This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form;</li>
<li>create derivative works;</li>
<li>perform the work publicly;</li>
<li>display the work;</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul>
This resources is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a> of <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a>.
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1960.html" target="_blank">1960 Overview</a>." U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1960.html.
United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.
United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. <a href="http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/1960/proceduralHistory/1960proceduralhistory.zip" target="_blank"><em>1960 Censuses of Population and Housing: Procedural History</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966.
Transcript
U.S. Census of 1960
Population
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population Total 111,435 4,566 57,383 51,616 263,540 19,029 54,947 125,319
Males 56,724 2,297 28,893 24,940 129,843 9,237 27,495 59,635
Females 54,711 2,269 28,490 26,676 133,697 9,792 27,452 65,684
White Population Total 98,909 2,826 46,209 33,586 224,105 17,021 41,373 104,177
Males 50,286 1,406 22,691 16,535 109,757 8,239 20,900 49,530
Females 48,623 1,420 23,518 17,051 114,348 8,782 20,473 54,647
Black Population Total 12,334 1,733 11,122 18,001 39,088 1,977 13,500 21,048
Males 6,348 887 6,173 8,392 19,924 982 6,559 10,053
Females 5,986 846 4,949 9,609 19,164 995 6,941 10,995
Indian Population Total 78 2 34 16 89 21 3 24
Males 49 1 18 7 46 11 2 13
Females 29 1 16 9 43 10 1 11
Japanese Population Total 52 0 6 8 102 4 34 13
Males 11 0 2 2 42 2 14 5
Females 41 0 4 6 60 2 20 8
Chinese Population Total 14 0 0 0 60 0 0 19
Males 10 0 0 0 25 0 0 14
Females 4 0 0 0 35 0 0 5
Filipino Population Total 13 4 0 0 35 4 15 6
Males 5 2 0 0 14 2 9 3
Females 8 2 0 0 21 2 6 3
Other Race Population Total 35 1 12 5 61 2 22 32
Males 15 1 9 4 35 1 11 17
Females 20 0 3 1 26 1 11 15
Native-Born Population Total 11,374 N/A 5,825 2,751 27,317 2,065 4,391 20,186
Foreign-Born Population Total 100,061 N/A 51,558 48,865 236,223 16,964 50,556 105,133
Foreign-Born Population by Country of Origin United Kingdom 1,810 N/A 924 314 4,390 434 728 4,106
Irish Free State 414 N/A 171 97 845 96 113 1,010
Norway 164 N/A 113 20 444 34 59 290
Sweden 440 N/A 274 110 984 114 168 883
Denmark 158 N/A 75 33 321 28 66 259
Netherlands 147 N/A 77 32 381 26 74 253
Switzerland 103 N/A 87 52 287 29 48 215
France 295 N/A 109 83 543 63 78 430
Germany 1,969 N/A 981 516 4,214 460 737 3,566
Poland 433 N/A 157 390 1,125 58 183 634
Czechoslovakia 392 N/A 109 27 632 18 217 256
Austria 297 N/A 86 102 721 40 104 604
Hungary 197 N/A 74 48 577 33 70 415
Yugoslavia 73 N/A 31 21 222 28 31 201
USSR 275 N/A 77 63 931 13 98 555
Lithuania 118 N/A 12 61 154 4 30 120
Finland 88 N/A 55 4 166 9 66 129
Rumania 29 N/A 11 4 151 4 12 92
Greece 135 N/A 28 36 221 4 71 216
Italy 983 N/A 264 149 1,814 70 299 1,178
Portugal 57 N/A 4 4 43 0 12 74
Other European Countries 181 N/A 50 52 382 8 83 318
Asia 217 N/A 21 46 726 7 70 279
Canada 1,583 N/A 665 365 4,087 400 665 3,147
Mexico 46 N/A 26 0 167 4 4 33
Other North American Countries 533 N/A 1,194 79 2,115 61 139 508
Other 163 N/A 33 27 185 4 95 81
Unknown 74 N/A 117 16 489 16 71 334
Male Population by Marital Status Single 7,306 322 4,528 3,726 18,536 1,120 3,924 7,981
Married 28,357 1,125 15,250 11,960 66,364 5,148 13,327 33,219
Married, but Separated 587 76 372 545 1,967 108 491 990
Widowed 914 64 965 780 2,772 419 650 2,397
Divorced 960 36 448 444 2,189 177 345 1,230
Female Population by Marital Status Single 4,355 242 2,825 3,199 13,670 850 2,501 7,463
Married 28,245 1,072 14,909 1,304 66,413 5,155 12,350 33,699
Married, but Separated 664 52 371 781 2,394 135 656 1,357
Widowed 2,924 165 2,947 2,871 11,093 1,275 2,128 8,398
Divorced 1,017 28 494 584 3,038 178 442 1,974
Veteran Population by War or Conflict Total 178,181 491 6,962 5,615 35,621 2,555 6,478 18,002
Korean War 3,987 28 863 820 6,248 294 954 2,274
Korean War and World War II 1,529 32 233 204 2,485 136 454 605
World War II 9,091 293 3,420 3,068 18,672 1,105 3,488 8,857
World War I 1,389 33 1,552 832 4,014 611 800 4,269
Other Services 1,822 105 894 691 4,202 409 782 1,997
Population by Work Transportation Method Private Automobile 33,840 1,038 13,369 12,143 73,302 3,999 14,640 28,467
Railroad or Subway 17 N/A 13 4 13 N/A 8 70
Bus or Streetcar 542 18 71 64 4,505 42 70 1,510
Walking 3,022 144 1,859 2,081 7,529 617 1,689 4,002
Other Means 1,543 224 1,785 1,655 5,327 328 1,464 2,295
Working from Home 816 113 526 1,112 2,384 338 518 2,120
Not Reported 1,541 109 819 571 3,701 325 439 2085
Education
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population by School Enrollment Kindergarten 944 9 232 268 1,252 21 275 571
Public Kindergarten 317 5 129 111 558 11 172 370
Elementary (1-8 Years) 18,421 789 8,805 9,288 42,850 2,771 9,801 16,565
Public Elementary (1-8 Years) 17,139 785 8,708 9,078 40,071 2,739 9,026 15,728
High School (1-4 Years) 5,195 125 2,846 3,179 13,018 865 2,782 6,484
Public High School (1-4 Years) 5,005 125 2,755 3,155 12,091 850 2,528 6,204
College 494 16 111 402 1,936 25 162 2,412
Male Population by School Completion No School Completed 342 60 333 617 1,073 137 453 520
1-4 Years of Elementary School 1,583 251 1,808 2,008 5,133 476 1,402 2,372
5-6 Years of Elementary School 1,510 71 2,008 1,331 5,362 619 1,136 2,490
7 Years of Elementary School 1,262 86 1,164 822 3,617 548 750 2,035
8 Years of Elementary School 3,572 194 2,589 1,990 9,061 1,141 1,686 6,482
1-3 Years of High School 5,463 218 3,274 2,291 13,015 1,120 2,503 6,953
4 Years of High School 7,911 242 3,094 2,318 16,949 1,002 3,277 8,929
1-3 Years of College 3,804 56 1,236 898 8,107 366 1,519 3,681
4 Years of College 4,353 29 1,556 868 8,213 332 1,153 3,972
Female Population by School Completion No School Completed 180 30 179 378 742 79 224 384
1-4 Years of Elementary School 946 196 910 1,575 3,201 308 1,019 1,920
5-6 Years of Elementary School 1,439 112 1,569 1,413 4,499 441 1,157 2,243
7 Years of Elementary School 1,355 85 952 1,057 3,396 398 847 1,850
8 Years of Elementary School 3,199 158 2,613 1,894 9,234 1,370 1,645 6,566
1-3 Years of High School 5,829 270 3,615 3,237 15,859 1,496 3,306 9,149
4 Years of High School 10,140 277 4,317 3,353 23,559 1,449 4,282 13,131
1-3 Years of College 3,423 70 1,892 1,173 8,443 475 1,386 486
4 Years of College 2,047 25 1,249 815 5,536 307 830 3,404
Labor
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Male Population in Labor Force Total 31,421 1,243 14,506 12,168 70,773 4,158 14,005 27,526
Civilian Labor Force 28,918 1,243 14,482 12,148 64,546 4,041 11,892 27,425
Armed Forces 2,505 N/A 24 20 6,227 117 2,113 101
Employed 27,957 1,208 13,391 11,662 61,565 3,901 11,232 26,188
Unemployed 961 35 1,091 486 2,981 140 660 1,237
Not in Labor Force 6,257 305 6,683 4,742 19,083 2,706 4,241 17,261
Female Population in Labor Force Total 12,608 499 6,105 6,840 33,714 1,965 6,458 16,457
Employed 11,865 473 5,689 6,411 31,725 1,867 6,127 15,474
Unemployed 727 26 414 429 1,881 98 331 979
Not in Labor Force 23,981 1,008 15,074 12,118 60,497 5,493 12,143 35,117
Employment by Industry Agriculture 1,118 299 3,913 2,400 6,685 626 2,216 1,591
Forestry and Fishery 74 55 46 97 31 27 69 129
Mining 28 9 29 214 54 5 4 21
Construction 4,223 109 1,912 1,542 9,669 783 2,139 4,502
Manufacturing 9,782 367 1,714 1,889 15,701 808 1,976 3,860
Furniture, Lumber, and Wood Products Manufacturing 100 147 235 689 500 217 126 401
Primary Metal Manufacturing 12 N/A 7 N/A 52 4 N/A 53
Fabricated Metal 3,570 N/A 146 56 6,987 266 522 235
Machinery, Except Electrical, Manufacturing 339 4 61 19 570 17 69 199
Electrical Machinery and Equipment Manufacturing 4,141 5 25 49 896 24 146 283
Motor Vehicle Manufacturing 16 N/A 4 12 68 18 4 34
Transportation Equipment, Except Motor Vehicle, Manufacturing 582 N/A 71 74 224 33 51 247
Durable Goods Manufacturing 228 200 294 92 890 47 220 857
Food and Kindred Products Manufacturing 402 N/A 625 524 3,379 74 308 553
Textile Mill Manufacturing 12 N/A 4 5 47 N/A 8 17
Apparel Manufacturing 36 N/A 8 124 195 N/A 154 190
Printing and Publishing 242 11 100 179 1,060 65 244 638
Chemical 35 N/A 102 36 475 22 88 49
Other Non-Durable Goods Manufacturing 67 N/A 31 30 358 21 36 104
Railroad and Railways Services 102 15 106 214 180 39 351 603
Trucking Services and Warehouse 191 36 139 180 1,118 50 242 261
Other Transportation 288 4 110 116 633 47 126 307
Communication 447 N/A 247 228 1,576 28 260 609
Utilities and Sanitary Services 515 18 157 218 1,231 93 327 764
Wholesale and Trade 702 51 1,315 597 4,605 187 706 1,030
Food and Dairy Product 930 50 587 568 2,505 194 349 1,382
Eating and Drinking Establishments 1,397 85 619 915 2,622 213 446 2,121
Other Retail Services 3,345 118 2,213 2,326 10,799 640 1,988 5,783
Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate 1,134 41 675 638 5,258 183 855 1,969
Business Services 3,603 N/A 156 112 1,345 20 157 601
Repair Services 379 14 282 235 1,574 61 297 797
Private Households 1,661 62 936 1,189 4,803 358 986 2,496
Other Personal Services 1,394 94 670 896 3,519 262 635 3,329
Entertainment and Recreation Service 238 4 96 234 922 34 232 647
Hospital 350 29 298 224 1,866 103 270 749
Education Services with the Government 1,306 41 644 826 2,581 257 542 1,431
Education Services with the Private Sector 358 9 134 80 1,115 28 202 911
Welfare and Non-Profit Organizations 295 13 331 210 1,248 85 177 584
Other Professional Services 871 17 439 364 3,184 104 396 1,332
Public Administration 3,322 40 594 827 4,317 237 870 1,707
Industry Not Reported 1,769 101 716 734 4,147 298 541 2,146
Male Population by Employment Technical and Kindred Workers 6,078 61 820 744 7,109 283 956 387
Engineers and Technical Workers 2,107 5 70 65 2,045 39 149 273
Medical and Other Health-Related Salaried Workers 52 N/A 56 38 278 14 32 109
Medical and Other Health-Related Self-Employed Workers 136 N/A 63 54 424 24 48 169
Teachers 251 4 149 133 414 52 139 259
Farmers and Farm Managers 159 53 462 660 663 132 257 348
Managers and Official Workers 3,934 172 1,970 1,788 9,023 490 1,708 4,711
Managers and Official Salaried Workers 2,467 89 1,054 902 5,362 267 944 2,296
Self-Employed Retail Trade Workers 541 45 363 370 1,360 99 304 920
Other Retail Workers 926 38 553 516 2,301 124 460 1,495
Clerical and Kindred Workers 1,894 30 472 487 3,741 171 581 1,226
Sales Workers 1,004 31 757 754 5,234 169 836 2,238
Retail Sales Workers 455 24 375 346 1,930 96 370 983
Sales Other Than Retail Workers 549 7 382 408 3,304 73 466 1,255
Craftsmen and Foremen 6,668 223 2,355 2,019 12,301 868 2,571 5,839
Construction Craftsmen 2,689 73 1,052 854 4,846 448 1,159 2,560
Foremen 841 26 308 191 1,487 79 241 457
Mechanics and Repair Men 1,837 88 644 577 2,949 180 600 1,538
Metal Craftsmen 295 13 53 66 630 49 52 214
Other Craftsmen 1,006 23 278 331 2,389 112 519 1,070
Operative Workers 2,744 196 1,967 2,047 8,192 595 1,537 2,969
Drivers and Deliverymen Workers 976 94 923 870 3,668 288 656 1,289
Private Household Workers 44 N/A 30 39 157 7 11 87
Service Workers 1,543 47 476 609 2,993 205 427 1,942
Protective Services Workers 531 14 148 144 659 61 132 497
Waiters, Bartenders, and Cooks 255 4 114 115 500 16 76 483
Other Service Workers 757 29 214 350 1,834 128 219 962
Farm Laborer and Farm Foremen 468 144 2,384 937 3,734 311 983 615
Laborers, Except Farm and Mine 1,802 185 1,160 1,095 5,175 440 966 2,212
Construction Laborers 713 24 313 271 1,775 172 401 713
Manufacturing Laborers 96 73 170 284 515 105 88 190
Other Industry Laborers 993 88 677 540 2,885 163 477 1,309
Occupation Not Reported 1,619 66 558 483 3,243 230 399 1,614
Female Population by Employment Technical and Kindred Workers 1,495 37 685 693 3,940 241 667 1,883
Medical and Other Health-Related Salaried Workers 245 8 197 111 981 46 152 471
Medical and Other Health-Related Self-Employed Workers 24 N/A 28 4 230 21 12 71
Teachers 690 20 321 326 1,533 112 308 672
Farmers and Farm Managers 12 N/A 37 49 61 16 16 44
Managers and Official Workers 816 41 401 426 1,473 95 344 1,209
Managers and Official Salaried Workers 438 33 165 204 898 44 201 512
Self-Employed Retail Trade Workers 210 8 151 121 322 21 96 318
Self-Employed Other Than Retail Manager Workers 168 N/A 85 101 253 30 47 379
Clerical and Kindred Workers 4,022 54 1,267 1,189 9,493 309 1,468 3,468
Secretaries, Stenographers, and Typists 1,805 4 337 365 3,525 98 515 1,057
Other Clerical Workers 2,217 50 930 824 5,968 211 953 2,411
Sales Workers 818 27 467 517 2,371 141 419 1,396
Retail Sales Workers 678 22 409 455 1,931 126 334 1,191
Sales Other Than Retail Workers 140 5 58 62 440 15 85 205
Craftsmen and Foremen 97 N/A 16 54 294 27 41 145
Private Household Workers 1,481 52 765 1,606 4,064 305 911 2,019
Service Workers 1,665 118 878 1,195 4,376 439 728 3,097
Waiters, Bartenders, and Cooks 902 45 375 571 1,763 220 323 1,268
Other Service Workers 761 73 503 624 2,613 219 405 1,829
Farm Laborer and Farm Foremen 21 48 277 306 772 25 619 174
Laborers 43 25 64 152 11 64 52
Occupation Not Reported 691 47 274 399 1,778 124 263 943
African Americans
agriculture
Amerindians
Anglo Americans
apparel
Armed Forces
Asian Americans
Austrian Americans
automobiles
bars
bartenders
Brevard County
British Americans
bus
buses
business services
Canadian Americans
cars
Caucasian Americans
census
Census of 1960
Central Americans
chemical
Chinese Americans
civilian labor
clerical
college education
communication
construction
cooks
crafts
craftsman
craftsmen
Czech Americans
Czechoslovakian Americans
dairy
Danish Americans
deliverymen
deliverywomen
divorced
domestic services
drinking establishments
drivers
durable goods
Dutch Americans
eating establishments
education
educations
electrical equipment
electrical machinery
elementary education
employees
engineers
English Americans
entertainment
European Americans
fabricated metal
farm managers
farmers
females
Filipino Americans
finance
Finnish Americans
fishery
Flagler County
food
food products
foreman
foremen
forestry
forewoman
forewomen
French Americans
furniture
German Americans
government
Greek Americans
health care
high school education
Hispanic Americans
hospitals
Hungarian Americans
immigrants
immigration
Indians
insurance
Irish Americans
Italian Americans
Japanese Americans
kindergarten
kindred products
Korean War
labor
labor force
laborers
Lake County
Latin Americans
Latinas
Latinos
Lithuanian Americans
lumber
machinery
males
managers
manufacturing
Marion County
marital status
married
mechanics
medical
Mexican Americans
mining
motor vehicles
Native Americans
non-durable goods
non-profit organizations
North Americans
Norwegian Americans
officials
operative
orange county
Osceola County
pedestrians
personal services
Polish Americans
population
Portuguese Americans
primary education
primary metal
printing
professionals
protective services
public administration
public education
public transportation
publishing
railroad services
railroads
railway services
real estate
recreation
repair
restaurants
retail
Romanian Americans
Russian Americans
salaried
sales
sanitary services
Scandinavian Americans
schools
secondary education
self-employed
Seminole County
separated
single
Slovakian Americans
Soviet Americans
streetcars
subways
Swedish Americans
Swiss Americans
teachers
technicak
technicians
textile mills
trade
transportation
transportation equipment
trucking services
U.S. Census
unemployment
university education
utilities
veterans
Volusia County
waiters
waitresses
walking
warehouses
warehousing
welfare
wholesale
widowed
wood products
workers
World War I
World War II
WWI
WWII
Yugoslavian Americans
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/a7d8519a5cfcc6f86fc02ecc0498a2ec.jpg
3d767678891393a5630a9771d2e217e8
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census Collection
Alternative Title
Census Collection
Subject
Census--United States
Population--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Description
Collection of United States Census population records for various counties in Central Florida from 1840 to 2000.
The Census Act of 1840 was signed into law on March 3, 1839 and later amended on February 26, 1840. This piece of legislation established a centralized census office during each enumeration. Congress designated the census questionnaire designs to the Secretary of State. However, each household received inquiries regarding "the pursuits, industry, education, and resources of the country" and included questions related to school attendance, literacy, and vocation.
In March of 1849, Congress pass legislation that established a census board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Postmaster General. The board was responsible for preparing and printing forms and schedules for enumeration related to population, mining, agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, education, etc. The 1850 Census also increased population inquiries to include every free person's name (as opposed to just the head of the household), as well as information on taxes, schools, crime, wages, estate values, etc.
The Census Act of 1850 authorized the U.S. Census of 1860 and stipulated that its provisions be adhered to for all future decennial censuses should no new legislation be passed by the first of the year of said census. In May of 1865, the U.S. Census Office was abolished and many superintending clerks were transferred to the General Land Office.
Although the 1870 Census was conducted under the provisions of the Census Act of 1850, a new act was passed on May 6, 1870. The new census legislation required two changes in procedures related to questionnaire return submission dates. Moreover, penalties for refusing to reply to inquires were expanded to apply to all questions and questionnaires. The questionnaires themselves had to be redesigned due to the end of the "slave questionnaire", as slavery had been formally abolished slavery nationwide via the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This left five schedules for the census: General Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Products of Industry, and Social Statistics. In addition, the use of a Charles W. Seaton, a U.S. Census Office chief clerk and later superintendent, invited a rudimentary tallying machine that partially alleviated the difficulties of tallying and tabulating questionnaire responses. Finally, the new superintendent for the Ninth Census, General Francis A. Walker, introduced employment examinations to test the qualifications of applicants to the Census Office, allowing for increased efficiency in the process of collecting census data.
The newest act authorizing the Census of 1880 provided for supervision of enumeration by "supervisors of the census", selected exclusively for the collection of census data. All supervisors, as well as the superintendent, were to appointed by the U.S. President and approved by the Senate. Census enumerators were required to personally visit each household and family within his subdivision. The new census act also allowed for the collection of data related to the condition and operation of railroad corporations, incorporated express companies, and telegraph companies, as well as data related to the condition and operation of life, fire, and marine insurance companies. Corporations who refused to provide the census with "true and complete" answers were subject to fines. In addition, the census superintendent was required to collect and publish data on the population, industries and resources of the District of Alaska. Finally, the 1880 Census consisted of five schedules: Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Social Statistics, and Manufacturing.
The Census of 1890 was authorized by an act modeled after the 1880 enumeration and signed into law on March 1, 1889. The 1890 Census was supervised by 175 employees and enumerators were required to collect all information by personally visiting each household. The 1890 Census included essentially the same inquires from the 1880 Census, with some notable additions, such as questions about home and farm ownership and indebtedness; and the names, units, length of service, and residences of former Union soldiers and sailors, as well as the names of the widows of those who were no longer alive. Racial categorization was expanded to include "Japanese", along with "Chinese", "Negro", "mulatto", "quadroon", "octoroon", and "White". Herman Hollerith, a former employee of the U.S. Census Office, invited the electric tabulating system, which was widely used in the 1890 Census, allowing data to be processed faster and more efficiently. On October 3, 1893, Congress passed a law that transferred census-related work to the direction of the commissioner of labor. Congress passed another act on March 2, 1895, effectively abolishing the U.S. Census Office and transferring the remaining responsibilities to the Office of the Secretary of the Interior.
Congress limited the Census of 1900 to content related to population, mortality, agriculture, and manufacturing. Special census agents were authorized to collect statistics related to incidents of deafness, blindness, insanity, and juvenile delinquency; as well as data on religious bodies, utilities, mining, and transportation. The act authorizing the 1900 Census designated the enumeration of military personally to the U.S. Department of War and the U.S. Department of the Navy, while Indiana Territory was to be enumerated by the commissioner of Indian Affairs. Annexed in 1898, Hawaii was included in the census for the first time. In 1902, the U.S. Census Office was officially established as a permanent organization within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The office became the U.S. Census Bureau in 1903 and was transferred to the Department of Commerce and Labor.
The Census of 1910 was approved by legislation introduced in December of 1907 and enacted in July of 1909. The delay was the result of a disagreement over the appointment of enumerators. President Theodore Roosevelt supported the hiring of enumerators via the civil service system, while Congress supported enumerators as positions of patronage. President Roosevelt successfully won the debate. This census act also changed Census Day from the traditional date of June 1st to April 15th. Additional questions regarding the nationality and native language of foreign-born persons and their parents. Funds for the U.S. Census Bureau were also increased to expand the Census' permanent workforce and created several new full-time positions, including a geographer, a chief statistician, and an assistant director. The assistant director was to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, while all other census employees were hired on the basis of open, competitive examinations administered by the Civil Service Commission. Despite the use of automatic counting machinery, issues with the tabulation process persisted. Finally, with the United States' entrance into World War I in 1917, the U.S. Census Bureau became a source of even more valuable purpose: the Census was able to use population and economic data to report on the populations of draft-age men, as well as information regarding each state's industrial capabilities.
The Census of 1920 changed the date of Census Day from April 15th to January 1st, as requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which argued that farmers' memories and harvest information would be more accurate on this day. The U.S. Census Bureau was also authorized to hire additional employees at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and to create a special field force to collect census data. The legislation authorizing the 1920 Census also allowed for a census of manufacturing to be conducted in 1921, and for such a census to be repeated every two years thereafter, as opposed to the traditional five-year census cycle. Furthermore, a census of agriculture and livestock was to be conducted in 1925 and to be repeated every ten years thereafter. In addition, penalties for those who refused to supply information or those who supplied false information were strengthened. As a result of these changes, census of population, manufacturing, and agriculture and livestock became increasingly independent of one another.
The "usual place of abode", the location where residents regularly slept, instead of where they worked or were visiting, became the new basis for enumeration in the 1920 Census. Those with no permanent or regular residence were listed as residents of the location that they were enumerated at. Enumeration related to institutional inmates and dependent, defective, and delinquent classes were also modified. Unlike the previous census, the 1920 Census did not have inquires related to unemployment, to Union or Confederate Army or Navy service, to the number of children born, or to the length of time that a couple had been married. The Census of 1920, however, did include four additional questions: one regarding year of naturalization and three regarding native languages. Issues also arose as a result of changes in international boundaries following World War I, particularly for persons declaring birth or parental birth in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, or Turkey. In response, enumerators were required to ask said persons for their province, state, or region of birth. Enumerators were not required to ask individuals how to spell their names, nor were respondents required to provide proof of various pieces of information. Race was determined by the enumerator's impressions.
The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for a census of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their territory. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demands and the bureau was accused of present unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.
Congress authorized the 1940 Census in August 1939, providing the Director of the Census the additional authority to conduct a national census of housing in each state, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Alaska. The housing census was conducted separately, though enumerators often collection housing information at the same time that they collected population information. The Census of 1940 was the first time that the U.S. Census Bureau used advanced statistical techniques. In particular, the census used probably sampling, which had only previously been tested in a trial census of unemployment conducted the Civil Works Administration during 1933-1934, in surveys of retail stores in the 1930s, and in an official sample survey of unemployment conducted amongst two percent of American households in 1937. Probability sampling allowed for the inclusion of additional demographic questions without increasing the burden on the collection process or on data processing. Moreover, sampling the U.S. Census Bureau was able to publish preliminary returns eight months before tabulations were completed. Likewise, the census increased its number of published tables, and also was able to complete data processing with higher quality and more efficiency. New census questions focused on employment, unemployment, internal migration, and incomes—reflecting on the concerns of the Great Depression, the country's housing stock, and the need for public housing programs.
The Census of 1950 encompassed every state, Alaska, Hawaii, American Samoa, the Panama Canal Zone, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other small American territories. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau enumerate American living abroad to account for members of the U.S. Armed Forces, vessel crew members, and government employees residing in foreign countries. The U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Maritime Administration, and several other federal agencies were responsible for distributing and collecting census questionnaires in a cooperative effort. Persons living abroad for reasons other than what is listed above had their census information reported by families or neighbors residing in the United States, but such data was criticized as unreliable and were not published in official statistics. The 1950 Census also included a new survey on residential financing collected separately on a sample basis from owners of owner-occupied properties, rental properties, and mortgage lenders. The accuracy of the new census was increased by improved enumerator training, the use of detailed street maps for enumerators, the publication of "Missed Person" forms in local newspapers, and the designation of a specific night to conduct a special enumeration of transient individuals. Moreover, a post-enumeration survey was conducted to further verify the accuracy of the original enumeration. A sample of approximately 3,500 small areas was compared to the original census data to identify households that may have been omitted initially. Likewise, a sample of approximately 22,000 households were re-interviewed to identify persons omitted in the original enumeration count. Though not used for the 1950 Census, the UNIVersal Automatic Computer I (UNIVAC I), the first non-military computer, was used to tabulate some of the statistics for the 1954 census of economy. In August of 1954, Congress codified various census statutes, such as the Fifteenth Census Act of 1929, authorizing the decennial census and other census.
The Census of 1960 was the first to be mailed to respondents. The U.S. Postal Service delivered census questionnaires to households, the head of household was required to complete the questionnaire, and an enumerator was to pick it up. The enumeration process was divided into two stages: first, select data for each person and dwelling unit was collected; and second, more detailed economic and social data was collected from a sample of households and dwelling units. The census questionnaires for the second stage were hand-delivered by enumerators as they were collecting data from the first stage. Households receiving the second census questionnaire were to complete the form and mail it to their local census office. Twenty-five percent of the population was giving additional sample questions. Because of the increased use of sampling, less populated areas were prone to sampling variation; however, this did not significantly decrease the usefulness of census statistics gathered. Moreover, increased use of sampling reduced data processing costs. Additional questions included in the 1960 Census were related to places of works and means of transportation to work. By 1960, nearly all census data was processed using computers. The U.S. Census Bureau used a Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer (FOSDIC) for the first time, thus decreasing the amount of time and money required for data input.
In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.
Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, were an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and used for a 17 percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.
Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in 6 languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100 percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process by instead following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census. Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Mosquito County, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Rights Holder
<span>This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:</span>
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul><span>This resources is provided here by </span><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a><span> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a><span> of </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a><span>.</span>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
<span>United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.</span>
<span>United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.</span>
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/" target="_blank">Through the Decades</a>." United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/.
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
1 table
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census for Central Florida, 1950
Alternative Title
Census, 1950
Subject
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Population--United States
Description
The Seventeenth United States Census records for Brevard County, Flagler County, Lake County, Marion County, Orange County, Osceola County, Seminole County, and Volusia County, Florida, for 1950. The census divides the population by gender, race ("white" and "black"), and native-born vs. foreign-born. The census then lists the population categorized by age, marital status, primary and secondary school attendance, and college attendance. The census also collected information on agriculture, on unemployment, and on labor.<br /><br />The Census of 1950 encompassed every state, Alaska, Hawaii, American Samoa, the Panama Canal Zone, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other small American territories. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau enumerated Americans living abroad to account for members of the Armed Forces, vessel crew members, and government employees residing in foreign countries. The Department of Defense (DOD), the Department of State (DOS), the Maritime Administration (MARAD), and several other federal agencies were responsible for distributing and collecting census questionnaires in a cooperative effort. Persons living abroad for reasons other than what is listed above had their census information reported by families or neighbors residing in the United States, but such data was criticized as unreliable and were not published in official statistics.<br /><br />The 1950 Census also included a new survey on residential financing collected separately on a sample basis from owners of owner-occupied properties, rental properties, and mortgage lenders. The accuracy of the new census was increased by improved enumerator training, the use of detailed street maps for enumerators, the publication of "Missed Person" forms in local newspapers, and the designation of a specific night to conduct a special enumeration of transient individuals. Moreover, a post-enumeration survey was conducted to further verify the accuracy of the original enumeration. A sample of approximately 3,500 small areas was compared to the original census data to identify households that may have been omitted initially. Likewise, a sample of approximately 22,000 households were re-interviewed to identify persons omitted in the original enumeration count. Though not used for the 1950 Census, the UNIVersal Automatic Computer I (UNIVAC I), the first non-military computer, was used to tabulate some of the statistics for the 1954 census of economy. In August of 1954, Congress codified various census statutes, such as the Fifteenth Census Act of 1929, authorizing the decennial census and other census.
Type
Dataset
Source
Original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1950.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/104" target="_blank">U.S. Census Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1950.
Coverage
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Creator
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>
Publisher
<a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>
Contributor
<a href="http://www.defense.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Defense</a>
<a href="http://www.state.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of State</a>
<a href="http://www.marad.dot.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Maritime Administration</a>
Gibson, Ella
Date Created
ca. 1950-04-01
Format
image/jpg
Extent
1.59 MB
Medium
1 table
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Civics/Government Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a> and published by the <a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>.
Rights Holder
This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form;</li>
<li>create derivative works;</li>
<li>perform the work publicly;</li>
<li>display the work;</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul>
This resources is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a> of <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a>.
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1950.html" target="_blank">1950 Overview</a>." U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1950.html.
United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.
United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1950. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.
Office of the Assistant Director for Statistical Standards, Statistical Reports Division. <a href="http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/1950/proceduralHistory/1950proceduralhistory.zip" target="_blank"><em>The 1950 Censuses How They Were Taken</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1955.
Transcript
U.S. Census of 1950
Population
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population Total 23,653 3,367 36,340 38,187 114,950 11,406 26,883 74,229
Males 11,830 1,757 17,876 18,648 55,112 5,496 13,129 35,474
Females 11,823 1,610 18,464 19,539 59,838 5,910 13,754 38,755
White Population Total 17,652 1,833 27,798 23,593 92,184 9,914 14,943 57,844
Males 8,849 942 13,631 11,643 43,937 4,748 7,383 27,653
Females 8,803 891 14,167 11,950 48,247 5,166 7,560 30,191
Native-Born Population Males 8,397 85 13,176 11,366 42,144 4,544 7,105 25,983
Females 8,352 826 13,698 11,680 46,263 4,947 7,309 28,455
Foreign-Born Population Males 452 92 455 277 1,793 204 278 1,670
Females 451 65 469 270 1,984 219 251 1,736
Black Population Males 2,972 813 4,240 7,002 11,156 746 5,742 7,799
Females 3,012 718 4,293 7,587 11,575 742 6,193 8,550
Other Race Population Males 9 2 5 3 19 2 4 22
Females 8 1 4 2 16 2 1 14
Population by Marital Status, Aged 14+ Total 17,999 2,445 26,993 27,532 87,882 9,044 19,692 58,330
Single 3,145 414 4,711 5,214 15,291 1,362 3,822 10,445
Married 12,738 1,759 19,245 18,945 62,061 6,249 13,472 39,786
Widowed or Divorced 2,116 272 3,037 3,373 10,530 1,433 2,398 8,099
Male Population by Marital Status, Aged 15+ Total 8,992 1,308 13,249 13,237 41,526 4,311 9,441 27,509
Single 1,967 288 2,702 2,901 8,054 780 2,186 5,566
Married 6,379 901 9,665 9,395 30,748 3,101 6,577 19,819
Widowed or Divorced 646 119 882 941 2,724 430 678 2,104
Female Population by Marital Status, Aged 15+ Total 9,007 1,137 13,744 14,295 46,356 4,733 10,251 30,821
Single 1,178 126 2,009 2,313 7,237 582 1,636 4,859
Married 6,359 858 9,580 9,550 31,313 3,148 6,895 19,967
Widowed or Divorced 1,470 153 2,155 2,432 7,806 1,003 1,720 5,995
Education
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population by School Completion No School Completed 310 90 500 750 1,085 175 595 1,120
At Least Some Elementary 5,985 1,090 9,610 10,855 27,050 3,685 7,665 17,065
1-4 Years of Elementary 1,555 480 2,730 3,380 6,255 695 2,890 3,795
5-6 Years 1,380 285 2,450 2,750 6,340 890 1,970 3,635
7 Years 900 85 1,295 1,375 4,460 610 970 2,330
8 Years 2,150 240 3,135 3,350 9,995 1,490 1,835 7,305
At Least Some High School 5,585 390 7,510 6,915 28,585 2,445 4,390 18,655
1-3 Years of High School 2,545 215 3,595 3,445 12,440 1,235 2,210 8,400
4 Years of High School 3,040 175 3,915 3,470 16,145 121 2,180 10,255
At Least Some College 2,115 165 3,345 2,300 12,960 995 1,760 8,765
1-3 Years of College 1,125 90 1,795 1,315 7,010 650 995 4,890
4 Years of College 990 75 1,550 985 5,950 345 765 3,875
Unknown Years 840 60 565 570 1,790 250 440 1,235
Agriculture
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Farms by Race Total 705 111 1,711 1,906 1,780 399 541 1,066
White 686 111 1,669 1,348 1,740 397 521 1,038
Non-White 19 0 42 558 40 2 20 28
Acreage of Farms Total 277,842 170,435 249,815 621,134 354,080 766,899 155,595 210,933
Farms by Tenure Livestock-Share Tenants 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0
Croppers 1 0 4 12 3 0 0 1
Other and Unspecified Tenants 15 4 24 54 20 9 7 19
Other Tenants 9 3 5 20 3 1 1 0
Unspecified Tenants 6 1 19 34 17 8 6 19
All Tenants 22 5 42 116 39 11 17 32
Cash Tenants 4 1 10 37 12 1 8 8
Share-Cash Tenants 1 0 0 5 4 1 1 1
Farms of Full Owners Total 617 89 1,500 1,433 1,585 344 446 919
Tenants with Landlord Living on Farm Total 2 2 9 31 6 1 2 8
Farm Acreage by Ownership and Management Full Owners 94,958 78,912 161,135 255,841 182,321 191,967 92,919 114,807
Part Owners 72,157 70,244 61,915 139,905 112,627 357,850 54,985 50,729
Land Managers 109,430 17,900 24,588 207,067 45,699 213,813 7,362 43,335
Operated by Owner 150,373 106,563 197,473 351,029 268,274 445,689 130,590 136,635
Rented by Farm Operator 18,133 48,555 32,498 71,612 53,907 113,192 17,646 34,672
Managed by Farm Operator 109,945 17,900 24,588 210,715 54,258 213,813 7,442 43,335
Rented Out by Farm Operator 609 2,583 4,744 12,222 22,359 5,795 83 3,709
Farms by Acreage Less than 3 45 5 100 34 124 6 18 51
3-9 140 8 232 194 428 51 113 224
Less than 10 185 13 332 228 552 57 131 275
10-29 214 21 477 415 517 103 178 366
30-49 83 12 266 328 210 56 72 133
50-69 48 8 139 144 107 23 34 66
100-139 34 3 103 129 76 21 31 39
140-179 26 5 52 94 41 13 15 19
180-219 16 5 36 63 20 7 6 23
220-499 8 2 26 47 17 2 3 6
260-499 23 10 62 111 51 23 14 28
500-999 16 7 42 61 39 20 9 20
1,000+ 20 17 48 76 52 50 15 28
Value of All Farm Products Sold Total $4,464,184 $1,789,539 $17,744,044 $6,952,360 $26,072,891 $2,150,345 $9,812,180 $6,618,609
Value of All Crops Sold Total $3,818,351 $1,193,522 $16,777,487 $4,256,057 $23,135,632 $898,137 $9,204,491 $4,854,773
Field Crops, Other Than Vegetables $12,387 $835,574 $56,427 $222,924 $40,197 $8,394 $45,592 $20,241
Vegetables $60,813 $306,610 $691,211 $1,250,620 $1,715,864 $35,666 $6,786,987 $186,424
Fruits and Nuts $3,672,443 $50,858 $15,097,477 $2,738,300 $19,527,596 $853,082 $1,530,597 $3,389,325
Horticultural Specialties $72,708 $480 $932,372 $44,213 $1,851,975 $995 $841,315 $1,258,783
Labor
Population in Labor Force Total 9,232 1,317 13,948 142,833 45,869 3,535 10,530 27,998
Civilian Labor Force 8,679 1,316 13,924 14,267 45,750 3,526 10,520 27,944
Armed Forces 553 1 24 16 119 9 10 54
Employed 8,270 1,295 13,486 13,791 43,635 3,333 10,178 26,659
Unemployed 409 21 438 476 2,115 193 342 1,285
Not in Labor Force 8,767 1,128 13,045 13,249 42,013 5,509 9,162 30,332
Male Population in Labor Force Total 6,502 1,009 9,946 10,027 31,191 2,558 6,972 18,757
Civilian Labor Force 5,956 1,008 9,925 10,011 31,085 2,550 6,965 18,705
Armed Forces 546 1 21 16 106 8 7 52
Employed 5,688 996 9,650 9,722 29,651 2,414 6,736 17,870
Unemployed 268 12 275 289 1,434 136 229 835
Not in Labor Force 2,490 299 3,303 3,210 10,335 1,753 2,469 8,752
Female Population in Labor Force Total 2,730 308 4,002 4,256 14,678 977 3,558 9,241
Civilian Labor Force 2,723 308 3,999 4,256 14,665 976 3,555 9,239
Armed Forces 7 0 3 0 13 1 3 2
Employed 2,582 299 3,836 4,069 13,984 919 3,442 8,789
Unemployed 141 9 163 187 681 57 113 450
Not in Labor Force 8,277 829 9,742 10,039 31,678 3,756 6,693 21,580
Population by Sector Private Sector Workers 5,176 937 9,591 9,519 33,124 2,158 7,946 18,466
Government Workers 1,022 98 965 1,182 3,495 379 626 2,489
Self-Employed 1,973 233 2,800 2,850 6,727 772 1,537 5,419
Unpaid Family Works 99 27 130 240 289 24 69 285
Male Population by Sector Private Sector Workers 3,396 730 6,706 6,571 22,041 1,515 5,088 12,037
Government Workers 699 59 580 641 2,127 248 351 1,581
Self-Employed 1,569 198 2,320 2,397 5,426 648 1,266 4,177
Unpaid Family Works 24 9 44 113 57 3 31 75
Female Population by Sector Private Sector Workers 1,780 207 2,885 2,948 11,083 643 2,858 6,429
Government Workers 323 39 385 541 1,368 131 275 908
Self-Employed 404 35 480 453 1,301 124 271 1,242
Unpaid Family Works 75 18 86 127 232 21 38 210
Population by Industry Professional/Technical/Kindred Workers 535 62 866 941 3,780 263 607 2,502
Managers/Proprietors 1,558 236 2,399 2,667 6,189 569 1,304 4,639
Clerical/Kindred Workers 654 29 843 996 4,466 222 658 2,357
Sales Workers 516 34 795 944 4,425 269 557 2,216
Craftsmen/Foremen/Kindred Workers 999 107 1,363 1,446 5,404 431 963 3,584
Operative Workers 933 184 1,955 1,873 5,887 477 1,677 2,816
Private Household Workers 533 22 716 720 2,641 122 408 1,690
Service Workers 737 89 766 1,062 3,685 310 513 3,172
Laborers, Except Mine 1,679 510 3,469 3,011 6,542 592 3,247 3,297
Occupation Not Reported 126 22 314 131 616 78 244 386
Male Population by Industry Professional/Technical/Kindred Workers 309 39 473 469 2,068 140 319 1,451
Managers/Proprietors 1,249 207 2,080 2,341 5,253 482 1,114 3,665
Clerical/Kindred Workers 223 12 271 348 1,436 86 235 772
Sales Workers 319 14 500 591 3,148 156 404 1,424
Craftsmen/Foremen/Kindred Workers 984 106 1,334 1,416 5,273 421 942 3,510
Operative Workers 655 160 1,416 1,516 4,384 387 1,081 2,232
Private Household Workers 26 3 36 23 140 8 14 116
Service Workers 290 23 288 451 1,588 118 237 1,406
Laborers, Except Mine 1,543 418 3,068 2,480 5,957 565 2,245 3,036
Occupation Not Reported 90 14 184 87 404 51 145 258
Female Population by Industry Professional/Technical/Kindred Workers 226 23 393 472 1,712 123 288 1,051
Managers/Proprietors 309 29 319 326 936 87 190 974
Clerical/Kindred Workers 431 17 572 648 3,030 136 423 1,585
Sales Workers 197 20 295 353 1,277 113 153 792
Craftsmen/Foremen/Kindred Workers 15 1 29 30 131 10 21 74
Operative Workers 278 24 539 357 1,503 90 596 584
Private Household Workers 507 19 680 697 2,501 114 394 1,574
Service Workers 447 66 478 611 2,097 192 276 1,766
Laborers, Except Mine 136 92 401 531 585 27 1,002 261
Occupation Not Reported 36 8 130 44 212 27 99 128
African Americans
agriculture
Anglo Americans
Armed Forces
Brevard County
Caucasian Americans
census
Census of 1950
civilian labor
clerical
colleges
craftsman
craftsmen
crops
divorced
domestic service
education
employees
European Americans
farm operators
farm products
farmland
farms
females
field crops
Flagler County
foreman
foremen
forewoman
forewomen
fruits
government
horticultural specialties
kindred
labor
labor force
laborers
Lake County
land managers
landlords
livestock
males
managers
Marion County
marital status
married
nuts
operative
orange county
Osceola County
population
primary education
private household
private sector
professionals
proprietors
public sector
sales
schools
secondary education
Seminole County
service industry
sharecroppers
sharecropping
single
technical
tenant farmers
tenant farming
tenants
U.S. Census
unemployment
universities
university
vegetables
Volusia County
widowed
workers
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/3bee9bb2e9e2f39ea2b9ec6fd93d25b3.jpg
ce2af4d58276e348032e8c08d8bf1102
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census Collection
Alternative Title
Census Collection
Subject
Census--United States
Population--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Description
Collection of United States Census population records for various counties in Central Florida from 1840 to 2000.
The Census Act of 1840 was signed into law on March 3, 1839 and later amended on February 26, 1840. This piece of legislation established a centralized census office during each enumeration. Congress designated the census questionnaire designs to the Secretary of State. However, each household received inquiries regarding "the pursuits, industry, education, and resources of the country" and included questions related to school attendance, literacy, and vocation.
In March of 1849, Congress pass legislation that established a census board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Postmaster General. The board was responsible for preparing and printing forms and schedules for enumeration related to population, mining, agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, education, etc. The 1850 Census also increased population inquiries to include every free person's name (as opposed to just the head of the household), as well as information on taxes, schools, crime, wages, estate values, etc.
The Census Act of 1850 authorized the U.S. Census of 1860 and stipulated that its provisions be adhered to for all future decennial censuses should no new legislation be passed by the first of the year of said census. In May of 1865, the U.S. Census Office was abolished and many superintending clerks were transferred to the General Land Office.
Although the 1870 Census was conducted under the provisions of the Census Act of 1850, a new act was passed on May 6, 1870. The new census legislation required two changes in procedures related to questionnaire return submission dates. Moreover, penalties for refusing to reply to inquires were expanded to apply to all questions and questionnaires. The questionnaires themselves had to be redesigned due to the end of the "slave questionnaire", as slavery had been formally abolished slavery nationwide via the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This left five schedules for the census: General Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Products of Industry, and Social Statistics. In addition, the use of a Charles W. Seaton, a U.S. Census Office chief clerk and later superintendent, invited a rudimentary tallying machine that partially alleviated the difficulties of tallying and tabulating questionnaire responses. Finally, the new superintendent for the Ninth Census, General Francis A. Walker, introduced employment examinations to test the qualifications of applicants to the Census Office, allowing for increased efficiency in the process of collecting census data.
The newest act authorizing the Census of 1880 provided for supervision of enumeration by "supervisors of the census", selected exclusively for the collection of census data. All supervisors, as well as the superintendent, were to appointed by the U.S. President and approved by the Senate. Census enumerators were required to personally visit each household and family within his subdivision. The new census act also allowed for the collection of data related to the condition and operation of railroad corporations, incorporated express companies, and telegraph companies, as well as data related to the condition and operation of life, fire, and marine insurance companies. Corporations who refused to provide the census with "true and complete" answers were subject to fines. In addition, the census superintendent was required to collect and publish data on the population, industries and resources of the District of Alaska. Finally, the 1880 Census consisted of five schedules: Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Social Statistics, and Manufacturing.
The Census of 1890 was authorized by an act modeled after the 1880 enumeration and signed into law on March 1, 1889. The 1890 Census was supervised by 175 employees and enumerators were required to collect all information by personally visiting each household. The 1890 Census included essentially the same inquires from the 1880 Census, with some notable additions, such as questions about home and farm ownership and indebtedness; and the names, units, length of service, and residences of former Union soldiers and sailors, as well as the names of the widows of those who were no longer alive. Racial categorization was expanded to include "Japanese", along with "Chinese", "Negro", "mulatto", "quadroon", "octoroon", and "White". Herman Hollerith, a former employee of the U.S. Census Office, invited the electric tabulating system, which was widely used in the 1890 Census, allowing data to be processed faster and more efficiently. On October 3, 1893, Congress passed a law that transferred census-related work to the direction of the commissioner of labor. Congress passed another act on March 2, 1895, effectively abolishing the U.S. Census Office and transferring the remaining responsibilities to the Office of the Secretary of the Interior.
Congress limited the Census of 1900 to content related to population, mortality, agriculture, and manufacturing. Special census agents were authorized to collect statistics related to incidents of deafness, blindness, insanity, and juvenile delinquency; as well as data on religious bodies, utilities, mining, and transportation. The act authorizing the 1900 Census designated the enumeration of military personally to the U.S. Department of War and the U.S. Department of the Navy, while Indiana Territory was to be enumerated by the commissioner of Indian Affairs. Annexed in 1898, Hawaii was included in the census for the first time. In 1902, the U.S. Census Office was officially established as a permanent organization within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The office became the U.S. Census Bureau in 1903 and was transferred to the Department of Commerce and Labor.
The Census of 1910 was approved by legislation introduced in December of 1907 and enacted in July of 1909. The delay was the result of a disagreement over the appointment of enumerators. President Theodore Roosevelt supported the hiring of enumerators via the civil service system, while Congress supported enumerators as positions of patronage. President Roosevelt successfully won the debate. This census act also changed Census Day from the traditional date of June 1st to April 15th. Additional questions regarding the nationality and native language of foreign-born persons and their parents. Funds for the U.S. Census Bureau were also increased to expand the Census' permanent workforce and created several new full-time positions, including a geographer, a chief statistician, and an assistant director. The assistant director was to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, while all other census employees were hired on the basis of open, competitive examinations administered by the Civil Service Commission. Despite the use of automatic counting machinery, issues with the tabulation process persisted. Finally, with the United States' entrance into World War I in 1917, the U.S. Census Bureau became a source of even more valuable purpose: the Census was able to use population and economic data to report on the populations of draft-age men, as well as information regarding each state's industrial capabilities.
The Census of 1920 changed the date of Census Day from April 15th to January 1st, as requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which argued that farmers' memories and harvest information would be more accurate on this day. The U.S. Census Bureau was also authorized to hire additional employees at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and to create a special field force to collect census data. The legislation authorizing the 1920 Census also allowed for a census of manufacturing to be conducted in 1921, and for such a census to be repeated every two years thereafter, as opposed to the traditional five-year census cycle. Furthermore, a census of agriculture and livestock was to be conducted in 1925 and to be repeated every ten years thereafter. In addition, penalties for those who refused to supply information or those who supplied false information were strengthened. As a result of these changes, census of population, manufacturing, and agriculture and livestock became increasingly independent of one another.
The "usual place of abode", the location where residents regularly slept, instead of where they worked or were visiting, became the new basis for enumeration in the 1920 Census. Those with no permanent or regular residence were listed as residents of the location that they were enumerated at. Enumeration related to institutional inmates and dependent, defective, and delinquent classes were also modified. Unlike the previous census, the 1920 Census did not have inquires related to unemployment, to Union or Confederate Army or Navy service, to the number of children born, or to the length of time that a couple had been married. The Census of 1920, however, did include four additional questions: one regarding year of naturalization and three regarding native languages. Issues also arose as a result of changes in international boundaries following World War I, particularly for persons declaring birth or parental birth in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, or Turkey. In response, enumerators were required to ask said persons for their province, state, or region of birth. Enumerators were not required to ask individuals how to spell their names, nor were respondents required to provide proof of various pieces of information. Race was determined by the enumerator's impressions.
The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for a census of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their territory. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demands and the bureau was accused of present unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.
Congress authorized the 1940 Census in August 1939, providing the Director of the Census the additional authority to conduct a national census of housing in each state, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Alaska. The housing census was conducted separately, though enumerators often collection housing information at the same time that they collected population information. The Census of 1940 was the first time that the U.S. Census Bureau used advanced statistical techniques. In particular, the census used probably sampling, which had only previously been tested in a trial census of unemployment conducted the Civil Works Administration during 1933-1934, in surveys of retail stores in the 1930s, and in an official sample survey of unemployment conducted amongst two percent of American households in 1937. Probability sampling allowed for the inclusion of additional demographic questions without increasing the burden on the collection process or on data processing. Moreover, sampling the U.S. Census Bureau was able to publish preliminary returns eight months before tabulations were completed. Likewise, the census increased its number of published tables, and also was able to complete data processing with higher quality and more efficiency. New census questions focused on employment, unemployment, internal migration, and incomes—reflecting on the concerns of the Great Depression, the country's housing stock, and the need for public housing programs.
The Census of 1950 encompassed every state, Alaska, Hawaii, American Samoa, the Panama Canal Zone, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other small American territories. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau enumerate American living abroad to account for members of the U.S. Armed Forces, vessel crew members, and government employees residing in foreign countries. The U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Maritime Administration, and several other federal agencies were responsible for distributing and collecting census questionnaires in a cooperative effort. Persons living abroad for reasons other than what is listed above had their census information reported by families or neighbors residing in the United States, but such data was criticized as unreliable and were not published in official statistics. The 1950 Census also included a new survey on residential financing collected separately on a sample basis from owners of owner-occupied properties, rental properties, and mortgage lenders. The accuracy of the new census was increased by improved enumerator training, the use of detailed street maps for enumerators, the publication of "Missed Person" forms in local newspapers, and the designation of a specific night to conduct a special enumeration of transient individuals. Moreover, a post-enumeration survey was conducted to further verify the accuracy of the original enumeration. A sample of approximately 3,500 small areas was compared to the original census data to identify households that may have been omitted initially. Likewise, a sample of approximately 22,000 households were re-interviewed to identify persons omitted in the original enumeration count. Though not used for the 1950 Census, the UNIVersal Automatic Computer I (UNIVAC I), the first non-military computer, was used to tabulate some of the statistics for the 1954 census of economy. In August of 1954, Congress codified various census statutes, such as the Fifteenth Census Act of 1929, authorizing the decennial census and other census.
The Census of 1960 was the first to be mailed to respondents. The U.S. Postal Service delivered census questionnaires to households, the head of household was required to complete the questionnaire, and an enumerator was to pick it up. The enumeration process was divided into two stages: first, select data for each person and dwelling unit was collected; and second, more detailed economic and social data was collected from a sample of households and dwelling units. The census questionnaires for the second stage were hand-delivered by enumerators as they were collecting data from the first stage. Households receiving the second census questionnaire were to complete the form and mail it to their local census office. Twenty-five percent of the population was giving additional sample questions. Because of the increased use of sampling, less populated areas were prone to sampling variation; however, this did not significantly decrease the usefulness of census statistics gathered. Moreover, increased use of sampling reduced data processing costs. Additional questions included in the 1960 Census were related to places of works and means of transportation to work. By 1960, nearly all census data was processed using computers. The U.S. Census Bureau used a Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer (FOSDIC) for the first time, thus decreasing the amount of time and money required for data input.
In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.
Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, were an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and used for a 17 percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.
Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in 6 languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100 percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process by instead following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census. Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Mosquito County, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Rights Holder
<span>This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:</span>
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul><span>This resources is provided here by </span><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a><span> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a><span> of </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a><span>.</span>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
<span>United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.</span>
<span>United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.</span>
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/" target="_blank">Through the Decades</a>." United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/.
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
1 table
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census for Central Florida, 1940
Alternative Title
Census, 1940
Subject
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Population--United States
Description
The Sixteenth United States Census records for Brevard County, Flagler County, Lake County, Marion County, Orange County, Osceola County, Seminole County, and Volusia County, Florida for 1940. The census divides the population by gender, race ("white" and "black"), and native-born vs. foreign-born. Those who were foreign born were further divided by country of origin. The census then lists the population categorized by age, primary and secondary school attendance, and college attendance. The census also collected information on agriculture, on manufacturing, on commerce, on unemployment, and on labor.<br /><br />Congress authorized the 1940 Census in August 1939, providing the Director of the Census the additional authority to conduct a national census of housing in each state, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Alaska. The housing census was conducted separately, though enumerators often collection housing information at the same time that they collected population information. The Census of 1940 was the first time that the U.S. Census Bureau used advanced statistical techniques. In particular, the census used probablity sampling, which had only previously been tested in a trial census of unemployment conducted the Civil Works Administration during 1933-1934, in surveys of retail stores in the 1930s, and in an official sample survey of unemployment conducted amongst two percent of American households in 1937. Probability sampling allowed for the inclusion of additional demographic questions without increasing the burden on the collection process or on data processing. Moreover, sampling the U.S. Census Bureau was able to publish preliminary returns eight months before tabulations were completed. Likewise, the census increased its number of published tables, and was also able to complete data processing with higher quality and more efficiency. New census questions focused on employment, unemployment, internal migration, and incomes—reflecting on the concerns of the Great Depression, the country's housing stock, and the need for public housing programs.
Type
Dataset
Source
Original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1940.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/104" target="_blank">U.S. Census Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1940.
Coverage
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Creator
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>
Publisher
<a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Date Created
ca. 1940-04-01
Format
image/jpg
Extent
2.05 MB
Medium
1 table
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Civics/Government Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a> and published by the <a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>.
Rights Holder
This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form;</li>
<li>create derivative works;</li>
<li>perform the work publicly;</li>
<li>display the work;</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul>
This resources is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a> of <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a>.
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1940.html" target="_blank">1940 Overview</a>." U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1940.html.
United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.
United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1940. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.
"<a href="http://www.census.gov/1940census/" target="_blank">Taking You Back to the 1940s</a>." U.S. Census Bureau. http://www.census.gov/1940census/.
Transcript
U.S. Census of 1940
Population
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population Total 16,142 3,008 27,255 31,243 70,074 10,119 22,304 53,710
Males 8,175 1,631 13,553 15,574 33,901 5,118 11,234 25,899
Females 7,967 1,377 13,702 15,669 36,173 5,001 11,070 27,811
Black Population Total 5,256 1,334 7,602 13,671 16,940 2,061 10,751 14,787
Other Race Population Total 15 5 0 0 2 12 3 18
Native-Born Population Total 10,421 1,561 19,039 17,220 50,977 7,777 11,182 36,813
Males 7,912 1,569 13,224 15,374 32,841 4,967 11,024 24,890
Females 7,753 1,329 13,411 15,511 35,059 4,878 10,898 26,692
Foreign-Born Population Total 450 108 614 352 2,155 269 368 2,092
Males 263 62 329 200 1,060 151 210 1,009
Females 214 48 291 158 1,114 123 172 1,119
Foreign-Born Population by Country of Origin Latvia 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0
Finland 4 0 28 1 2 1 3 18
Rumania 0 0 1 3 15 0 10 7
Bulgaria 0 0 3 0 2 0 8 2
Greece 5 0 4 4 29 1 9 34
Italy 28 1 25 11 80 8 10 51
Lithuania 2 4 3 0 3 1 0 5
U.S.S.R. (Russia) 4 3 13 6 86 0 10 58
Yugoslavia 4 0 2 0 7 1 0 25
Hungary 3 6 14 2 33 4 8 36
Austria 16 4 12 6 59 14 4 40
Czechoslovakia 29 3 3 1 47 0 29 6
Belgium 1 0 4 0 10 0 1 8
Netherlands 15 1 7 8 22 3 2 32
Denmark 22 0 10 4 27 4 3 33
Sweden 13 5 73 13 107 12 31 107
Norway 11 1 11 4 38 2 2 23
Irish Free State 19 1 11 9 44 18 8 43
Northern Ireland 1 0 6 4 18 2 4 23
Wales 7 0 4 0 16 4 0 13
Scotland 8 5 25 20 69 11 20 81
England 71 18 102 73 372 48 57 489
Poland 5 34 22 17 40 1 2 43
Germany 91 8 73 60 266 54 44 267
France 12 6 6 11 46 3 9 33
Switzerland 3 0 10 3 27 4 9 24
Spain 1 0 1 0 6 1 2 5
Portugal 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 9
Azores 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 5
Australia 0 1 5 1 7 0 0 7
Central and South America 1 0 6 1 12 0 4 12
Cuba and Other West Indies 5 0 6 3 44 2 4 27
Mexico 1 0 1 0 5 1 1 1
Canada, Other 61 5 102 57 481 59 56 441
French Canada 2 1 9 4 34 6 2 33
Asian Countries 0 0 6 0 21 1 2 9
Turkey (Asia) 1 0 0 1 28 1 4 3
Palestine and Syria 0 1 0 22 22 1 5 27
Other European Countries 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 2
Luxemburg 2 0 0 1 2 1 5 0
Education
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population Attending School by Age 5-6 188 29 279 323 650 76 239 493
7-13 1,830 329 3,008 4,001 7,671 1,011 2,592 5,559
14-15 505 81 836 1,131 2,071 298 677 1,705
16-17 373 44 592 848 1,597 207 482 1,259
18-20 199 21 354 422 906 86 276 845
21-24 37 10 81 91 227 29 68 184
Years of School Completed for Males 0 181 112 431 669 688 176 429 639
1-4 847 286 1,367 1,715 3,008 456 1,501 2,054
5-6 650 130 1,103 1,286 2,356 499 1,019 1,946
7-8 1,313 208 2,065 1,932 4,810 1,062 1,377 4,283
Years of High School Completed for Males 1-3 619 101 941 1,133 2,861 389 727 2,181
4 639 54 958 834 3,231 359 650 2,260
Years of College Completed for Males 1-3 308 33 500 346 1,505 139 322 1,091
4+ 255 19 489 307 1,602 127 224 1,165
Males with School Completion Not Reported Total 55 11 64 188 257 13 34 81
Years of School Completed for Females 0 133 50 224 467 493 90 265 447
1-4 575 178 940 1,309 2,141 294 1,138 1,596
5-6 577 116 983 1,249 2,414 384 1,024 1,828
7-8 1,199 157 1,912 1,981 4,999 1,026 1,248 4,536
Years of High School Completed for Females 1-3 689 100 1,197 1,357 3,529 523 852 3,005
4 887 77 1,339 1,102 4,939 546 891 3,678
Years of College Completed for Females 1-3 389 31 670 477 1,849 163 420 1,547
4+ 200 14 437 295 1,334 98 237 1,016
Females with School Completion Not Reported Total 26 5 44 46 191 1 12 74
Agriculture
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Number of Farms by Race White 715 104 1,966 1,324 2,337 432 706 1,454
Non-White 49 3 51 822 62 10 54 64
Acreage of Farms by Race White 169,671 30,726 111,511 188,138 207,353 488,471 64,934 261,864
Non-White 1,268 60 2,013 31,912 2,482 117 810 1,422
Farms by Ownership and Management Full Owners 649 88 1,767 1,399 1,399 355 583 1,292
Part Owners 25 12 50 334 334 25 68 80
Manager-Operated 60 2 117 69 69 15 39 34
Farms by Tenure Total 30 5 83 344 107 47 70 112
Share Tenants and Croppers 0 0 11 62 12 3 9 12
Share-Cash Tenants 0 0 0 8 1 0 1 2
Cash Tenant-Operated 9 4 34 171 53 30 45 63
Other Tenant-Operated 21 1 38 103 41 14 15 37
Farm Acreage by Ownership and Management Full Owners 8,750 3,175 32,704 34,004 33,942 3,409 7,140 12,749
Part Owners 292 1,446 2,384 16,380 1,586 198 1,917 1,862
Manager-Operated 28,717 N/A 17,453 34,549 41,939 62,552 4,211 70,395
Acres of Land in Farms of Full Owners Total 28,438 8,868 83,123 123,333 135,783 189,299 41,437 65,959
Acres of Land in Farms of Part Owners Total 112,463 18,743 8,080 36,018 28,108 143,323 18,300 118,971
Owned Land 31,403 1,233 3,468 21,809 4,996 14,542 11,861 9,179
Farm Acreage by Tenure Total 1,321 61 4,868 26,150 4,005 93,414 1,796 7,961
Share Tenants and Croppers 0 N/A 369 4,255 N/A 138 N/A 5,257
Share-Cash Tenants 0 61 0 379 518 0 308 0
Cash Tenants 236 N/A 2,191 15,049 1,377 92,716 661 1,235
Other Tenants 1,085 N/A 2,308 6,467 2,110 560 827 1,469
Farms by Acreage 3-9 162 6 327 216 567 84 211 381
10-19 274 26 819 559 898 138 267 568
20-29 174 13 523 306 585 91 169 375
30-49 126 28 336 431 371 80 100 205
50-69 47 12 141 190 143 23 56 86
70-99 43 8 145 256 138 29 29 74
100-139 30 4 93 125 85 15 31 52
140-179 26 9 36 112 50 11 10 23
175-179 0 2 3 5 2 0 1 2
180-219 9 3 29 68 30 3 9 14
220-259 4 0 2 38 16 3 1 14
260-379 7 3 21 61 22 9 1 20
380-499 4 1 12 26 11 3 5 5
500-699 3 1 9 23 10 3 4 4
700-999 7 1 6 13 10 2 1 3
1,000+ 14 5 10 24 9 36 7 24
Acres of Cropland Harvested on Farms of Managers Total 2,935 N/A 9,271 8,325 11,386 931 2,944 2,844
Acres of Cropland Harvested on Farms of Tenants Total 560 26 1,911 8,442 528 313 555 506
Share Tenants and Croppers 0 N/A 125 2,023 N/A 81 N/A 71
Share-Cash Tenants 0 26 0 112 150 0 162 0
Cash Tenants 31 N/A 450 4,160 143 106 307 305
Other Tenants 529 N/A 1,336 2,147 235 126 86 130
Value of Farms Under 10 Acres Total $170 $6 $340 $220 $606 $87 $239 $423
Value of Farm Buildings on Tenant Farms Total $57,580 $800 $49,350 $176,635 $77,100 $39,475 $61,275 $124,190
Share Tenants and Croppers $0 $0 $4,950 $27,655 $17,700 $6,100 $21,300 $17,100
Share-Cash Tenants $0 $0 $0 $3,710 $0 $0 N/A $0
Cash Tenants $13,450 N/A $29,850 $98,250 $35,250 $23,450 $33,425 $70,750
Other Tenants $44,130 N/A $14,550 $47,020 $24,150 $9,925 $5,550 $36,340
Value of Farm Land Buildings By Ownership and Management Full Owners $6,524,000 $468,000 $14,608,732 $4,220,440 $20,378,911 $2,041,470 $4,986,379 $8,333,465
Part Owners $490,700 $153,500 $642,155 $1,160,466 $1,037,610 $345,313 $1,465,319 $1,031,531
Manager-Operated $2,179,500 N/A $3,940,936 $2,136,970 $6,052,604 $320,880 $1,363,018 $1,820,022
Value of Farm Land Buildings on Tenant Farms Total $480,200 $4,150 $234,380 $624,360 $472,190 $449,085 $382,550 $342,185
Share Tenants and Croppers $0 N/A $16,995 $93,490 N/A $28,000 N/A $51,200
Share-Cash Tenants $0 $4,150 $0 $10,465 $139,200 $0 $95,600 $0
Cash Tenants $24,400 N/A $87,745 $341,600 $143,020 $357,335 $226,550 $188,325
Other Tenants $455,800 N/A $129,640 $178,805 $189,970 $63,750 $60,400 $102,660
Value of Farm Land Buildings by Race White $9,373,800 $686,850 $19,282,088 $7,485,731 $7,485,731 $3,139,498 $8,104,051 $11,357,438
Non-White $300,600 $5,000 $144,115 $656,505 $656,505 $17,250 $93,215 $169,765
Value of Farm Implements and Machinery by Ownership and Operation Full Owners $1,250,220 $145,775 $2,398,955 $1,444,823 $3,787,109 $470,435 $1,209,070 $2,139,500
Part Owners $47,600 $25,325 $96,645 $365,566 $157,250 $30,650 $220,675 $199,935
Manager-Operated $218,500 N/A $196,090 $192,015 $444,016 $37,651 $139,524 $148,894
Value of Farm Implements and Machinery on Tenant Farms Total $9,575 $800 $16,610 $89,513 $13,085 $9,873 $27,177 $30,840
Share Tenants and Croppers $0 $0 $1,975 $13,255 $2,440 $1,970 $11,117 $2,535
Share-Cash Tenants $0 $0 $0 $1,165 N/A $0 N/A $0
Cash Tenants $6,250 N/A $14,080 $54,562 $8,550 $6,040 $14,650 $23,975
Other Tenants $3,325 N/A $555 $20,531 $2,070 $1,863 $1,210 $4,330
Value of Farm Implements and Machinery by Ownership and Operation Full Owners $260,622 $80,526 $333,441 $380,938 $510,070 $81,756 $332,728 $345,871
Part Owners $30,540 $42,717 $41,220 $159,302 $59,630 $7,890 $133,112 $58,115
Manager-Operated $62,470 N/A $178,375 $113,821 $145,223 $10,400 $53,052 $59,095
Value of All Crops Harvested Total $1,038,148 $501,412 $2,922,914 $1,410,710 $3,796,758 $307,552 $3,083,712 $1,401,807
Vegetables (for sale and for farm households) $39,560 $78,230 $239,125 $392,898 $219,593 $26,705 $2,325,406 $81,734
Fruits and Nuts $942,134 $2,429 $2,393,123 $486,945 $3,350,438 $271,885 $406,025 $809,119
Horticultural Specialties $52,249 N/A $238,247 $25,111 $197,802 $2,127 $298,859 $470,353
All Other Crops $878 N/A $2,932 $17,901 $807 $877 $95 $1,459
Irish and Sweet Potatoes $2,688 $367,580 $10,344 $24,872 $2,903 $3,244 $20,856 $17,578
Cereals N/A $28,406 $7,927 $165,793 $2,500 $631 $27,304 $8,604
Corn (harvested for grain) N/A $28,406 $7,909 $164,222 $2,448 $610 $27,304 $8,572
Other Grains and Seeds $24 $290 $5,264 $120,720 $362 $570 $71 $2,151
Hay and Forage $99 $23,572 $9,705 $145,127 $22,353 $1,513 $4,853 $10,809
Forest Products Sold Total 755 N/A 5,263 36,190 1,421 3,133 2,322 18,088
Manufacturing and Labor
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Manufacturing Establishments Total 15 7 30 39 71 12 16 59
Wages Paid in Manufacturing Total $71,590 $4,073 $471,766 $382,112 $842,257 $371,217 $162,698 $467,223
Value of Products of Manufacturing Establishments Total $329 $93 $1,923 $2,447 $5,991 $1,020 $1,488 $2,451
Cost of Materials, Supplies, Fuels, Purchased Electrical Energy Total $120 $64 $872 $1,208 $2,964 $367 $792 $1,021
Wholesale Business Establishments Total 31 5 53 36 146 9 16 69
Active Proprietors of Unincorporated Wholesale Business Establishments Total 22 3 37 27 75 9 23 55
Number of Employees of Wholesale Business Establishments Total 495 4 1,285 356 3,284 90 744 479
Service Business Establishments Total 89 7 107 66 369 37 125 270
Active Proprietors of Unincorporated Service Business Establishments Total 89 5 104 64 366 42 131 274
Retail Stores Total 409 59 442 362 1,192 146 411 1,083
Amount of Retail Sales Total $5,366 $478 $7,010 $7,734 $31,510 $2,144 $5,189 $19,364
Active Proprietors of Unincorporated Retail Businesses Total 381 48 407 306 1,046 143 357 977
Persons in the Labor Force Males 4,908 1,059 7,909 9,021 20,740 2,776 6,842 14,854
Females 1,835 187 2,634 3,111 10,132 851 3,081 6,907
Employed Persons Males 4,385 1,016 6,941 8,090 18,408 2,424 6,293 12,236
Females 1,615 164 2,294 2,603 8,864 690 2,841 6,076
Employed Clerical, Sales, and Kindred Workers Males 352 26 609 648 2,860 180 488 1,562
Females 230 15 384 390 1,879 113 291 1,100
Employed Craftsmen, Foremen, and Kindred Workers Males 429 68 632 675 2,396 301 561 1,685
Females 6 0 5 8 66 4 9 27
Employed Operatives and Kindred Workers Males 543 83 766 992 2,461 307 1,128 1,513
Females 165 1 267 158 999 78 592 330
Employed Domestic Service Workers Males 67 7 121 80 457 8 51 338
Females 623 56 769 903 2,971 176 627 2,134
Employed Service Workers, Except Domestic Males 234 33 310 351 1,343 104 227 1,208
Females 221 12 240 278 1,145 127 183 1,129
Employed Proprietors, Managers and Officials Males 601 92 745 790 2,545 262 665 1,978
Females 128 12 144 148 441 66 85 424
Employed Professional Workers Males 149 18 248 257 835 84 167 669
Females 136 12 311 314 1,025 85 191 693
Employed Semiprofessional Workers Males 38 2 50 36 175 15 30 151
Females 9 0 12 3 57 9 6 34
Employed Farm Laborers, Unpaid Family Workers Males 15 11 40 186 39 21 46 38
Females 2 1 8 55 9 3 16 51
Employed Laborers, Except Farm Males 758 419 995 1,093 2,007 664 689 1,656
Females 4 2 13 35 31 3 49 18
Employed Farmers and Farm Managers Males 345 84 675 1,518 767 228 480 596
Females 43 2 43 68 69 13 37 46
Employed Female Farm Laborers and Foremen (Wage Workers) Total 20 50 73 222 116 3 826 52
Registered Emergency Workers Total 248 56 310 463 653 192 344 693
White Males 90 31 165 234 302 110 101 311
White Females 61 19 69 58 173 40 77 118
Black Males 80 6 54 136 118 30 139 245
Black Females 17 0 22 35 60 12 27 19
Persons Employed in Public Emergency Workers Males 217 21 315 411 723 147 243 1,106
Females 89 17 132 146 367 76 130 252
Employed Persons, Occupation Not Reported Males 35 6 79 46 139 19 31 73
Females 28 1 25 21 56 10 11 38
Totally Unemployed Persons, Registered Total 529 39 629 1,290 1,952 405 809 1,956
White Males 146 24 269 360 780 208 199 586
White Females 75 10 156 186 506 114 90 332
Black Males 107 4 103 352 346 37 336 499
Black Females 201 1 101 392 317 46 184 537
Partially Unemployed Persons, Registered Total 606 43 723 1,090 1,736 322 810 1,724
White Males 179 24 368 356 905 159 196 682
White Females 48 5 64 47 204 70 35 114
Black Males 233 13 208 512 424 54 410 646
Black Females 126 1 82 174 201 39 169 281
Persons Seeking Work Males 306 22 653 520 1,609 205 306 1,512
Females 131 6 208 362 901 85 110 579
New Persons Workers Seeking Work Males 26 2 24 32 68 8 12 97
Females 9 1 11 28 65 7 5 53
African Americans
agriculture
Asian Americans
Australian Americans
Azorean Americans
Belgian Americans
Brevard County
British Americans
Bulgarian Americans
Canadian Americans
Caribbean Americans
Caucasian Americans
census
Census of 1940
Central Americans
cereals
clerical
college
corn
crop
cropland
Cuban Americans
Czech Americans
Czechoslovakian Americans
Danish Americans
domestic service
Dutch Americans
education
electricity
emergency workers
employees
employment
energy
English Americans
European Americans
farm laborers
farm managers
farm workers
farming
farming implements
farms
females
Finnish Americans
Flagler County
forage
forest products
forestry
French Americans
fruits
fuel
German Americans
grain
Greek Americans
hay
Hispanic Americans
horticultural specialties
horticulture
Hungarian Americans
Irish Americans
Irish potatoes
Italian Americans
kindred
labor
laborers
Lake County
Latin Americans
Latinas
Latinos
Latvian Americans
Lithuanian Americans
Luxembourger Americans
machinery
males
managers
manufacturing
Marion County
Mexican Americans
Northern Irish Americans
Norwegian Americans
nuts
officials
operatives
orange county
Osceola County
Palestinian Americans
Polish Americans
population
Portuguese Americans
potatoes
primary education
professionals
proprietors
public emergency workers
retail
Romanian Americans
Russian Americans
sales
Scandinavian Americans
school
Scotch Americans
Scottish Americans
secondary education
seeds
Seminole County
semiprofessionals
service industry
sharecroppers
sharecropping
Slovakian Americans
South Americans
Soviet Americans
Spanish Americans
stores
Swedish Americans
sweet potatoes
Swiss Americans
Syrian Americans
tenant farmers
tenant farming
tenants
Turkish Americans
U.S. Census
unemployment
university
vegetables
Volusia County
wages
Welsh Americans
West Indian Americans
wholesale
workers
Yugoslavian Americans
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/ee509e0bf2aa8f9ca179841ea5393069.jpg
ae7185ec1a3e743ab87b32dd6dd4c446
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census Collection
Alternative Title
Census Collection
Subject
Census--United States
Population--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Description
Collection of United States Census population records for various counties in Central Florida from 1840 to 2000.
The Census Act of 1840 was signed into law on March 3, 1839 and later amended on February 26, 1840. This piece of legislation established a centralized census office during each enumeration. Congress designated the census questionnaire designs to the Secretary of State. However, each household received inquiries regarding "the pursuits, industry, education, and resources of the country" and included questions related to school attendance, literacy, and vocation.
In March of 1849, Congress pass legislation that established a census board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Postmaster General. The board was responsible for preparing and printing forms and schedules for enumeration related to population, mining, agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, education, etc. The 1850 Census also increased population inquiries to include every free person's name (as opposed to just the head of the household), as well as information on taxes, schools, crime, wages, estate values, etc.
The Census Act of 1850 authorized the U.S. Census of 1860 and stipulated that its provisions be adhered to for all future decennial censuses should no new legislation be passed by the first of the year of said census. In May of 1865, the U.S. Census Office was abolished and many superintending clerks were transferred to the General Land Office.
Although the 1870 Census was conducted under the provisions of the Census Act of 1850, a new act was passed on May 6, 1870. The new census legislation required two changes in procedures related to questionnaire return submission dates. Moreover, penalties for refusing to reply to inquires were expanded to apply to all questions and questionnaires. The questionnaires themselves had to be redesigned due to the end of the "slave questionnaire", as slavery had been formally abolished slavery nationwide via the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This left five schedules for the census: General Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Products of Industry, and Social Statistics. In addition, the use of a Charles W. Seaton, a U.S. Census Office chief clerk and later superintendent, invited a rudimentary tallying machine that partially alleviated the difficulties of tallying and tabulating questionnaire responses. Finally, the new superintendent for the Ninth Census, General Francis A. Walker, introduced employment examinations to test the qualifications of applicants to the Census Office, allowing for increased efficiency in the process of collecting census data.
The newest act authorizing the Census of 1880 provided for supervision of enumeration by "supervisors of the census", selected exclusively for the collection of census data. All supervisors, as well as the superintendent, were to appointed by the U.S. President and approved by the Senate. Census enumerators were required to personally visit each household and family within his subdivision. The new census act also allowed for the collection of data related to the condition and operation of railroad corporations, incorporated express companies, and telegraph companies, as well as data related to the condition and operation of life, fire, and marine insurance companies. Corporations who refused to provide the census with "true and complete" answers were subject to fines. In addition, the census superintendent was required to collect and publish data on the population, industries and resources of the District of Alaska. Finally, the 1880 Census consisted of five schedules: Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Social Statistics, and Manufacturing.
The Census of 1890 was authorized by an act modeled after the 1880 enumeration and signed into law on March 1, 1889. The 1890 Census was supervised by 175 employees and enumerators were required to collect all information by personally visiting each household. The 1890 Census included essentially the same inquires from the 1880 Census, with some notable additions, such as questions about home and farm ownership and indebtedness; and the names, units, length of service, and residences of former Union soldiers and sailors, as well as the names of the widows of those who were no longer alive. Racial categorization was expanded to include "Japanese", along with "Chinese", "Negro", "mulatto", "quadroon", "octoroon", and "White". Herman Hollerith, a former employee of the U.S. Census Office, invited the electric tabulating system, which was widely used in the 1890 Census, allowing data to be processed faster and more efficiently. On October 3, 1893, Congress passed a law that transferred census-related work to the direction of the commissioner of labor. Congress passed another act on March 2, 1895, effectively abolishing the U.S. Census Office and transferring the remaining responsibilities to the Office of the Secretary of the Interior.
Congress limited the Census of 1900 to content related to population, mortality, agriculture, and manufacturing. Special census agents were authorized to collect statistics related to incidents of deafness, blindness, insanity, and juvenile delinquency; as well as data on religious bodies, utilities, mining, and transportation. The act authorizing the 1900 Census designated the enumeration of military personally to the U.S. Department of War and the U.S. Department of the Navy, while Indiana Territory was to be enumerated by the commissioner of Indian Affairs. Annexed in 1898, Hawaii was included in the census for the first time. In 1902, the U.S. Census Office was officially established as a permanent organization within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The office became the U.S. Census Bureau in 1903 and was transferred to the Department of Commerce and Labor.
The Census of 1910 was approved by legislation introduced in December of 1907 and enacted in July of 1909. The delay was the result of a disagreement over the appointment of enumerators. President Theodore Roosevelt supported the hiring of enumerators via the civil service system, while Congress supported enumerators as positions of patronage. President Roosevelt successfully won the debate. This census act also changed Census Day from the traditional date of June 1st to April 15th. Additional questions regarding the nationality and native language of foreign-born persons and their parents. Funds for the U.S. Census Bureau were also increased to expand the Census' permanent workforce and created several new full-time positions, including a geographer, a chief statistician, and an assistant director. The assistant director was to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, while all other census employees were hired on the basis of open, competitive examinations administered by the Civil Service Commission. Despite the use of automatic counting machinery, issues with the tabulation process persisted. Finally, with the United States' entrance into World War I in 1917, the U.S. Census Bureau became a source of even more valuable purpose: the Census was able to use population and economic data to report on the populations of draft-age men, as well as information regarding each state's industrial capabilities.
The Census of 1920 changed the date of Census Day from April 15th to January 1st, as requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which argued that farmers' memories and harvest information would be more accurate on this day. The U.S. Census Bureau was also authorized to hire additional employees at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and to create a special field force to collect census data. The legislation authorizing the 1920 Census also allowed for a census of manufacturing to be conducted in 1921, and for such a census to be repeated every two years thereafter, as opposed to the traditional five-year census cycle. Furthermore, a census of agriculture and livestock was to be conducted in 1925 and to be repeated every ten years thereafter. In addition, penalties for those who refused to supply information or those who supplied false information were strengthened. As a result of these changes, census of population, manufacturing, and agriculture and livestock became increasingly independent of one another.
The "usual place of abode", the location where residents regularly slept, instead of where they worked or were visiting, became the new basis for enumeration in the 1920 Census. Those with no permanent or regular residence were listed as residents of the location that they were enumerated at. Enumeration related to institutional inmates and dependent, defective, and delinquent classes were also modified. Unlike the previous census, the 1920 Census did not have inquires related to unemployment, to Union or Confederate Army or Navy service, to the number of children born, or to the length of time that a couple had been married. The Census of 1920, however, did include four additional questions: one regarding year of naturalization and three regarding native languages. Issues also arose as a result of changes in international boundaries following World War I, particularly for persons declaring birth or parental birth in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, or Turkey. In response, enumerators were required to ask said persons for their province, state, or region of birth. Enumerators were not required to ask individuals how to spell their names, nor were respondents required to provide proof of various pieces of information. Race was determined by the enumerator's impressions.
The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for a census of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their territory. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demands and the bureau was accused of present unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.
Congress authorized the 1940 Census in August 1939, providing the Director of the Census the additional authority to conduct a national census of housing in each state, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Alaska. The housing census was conducted separately, though enumerators often collection housing information at the same time that they collected population information. The Census of 1940 was the first time that the U.S. Census Bureau used advanced statistical techniques. In particular, the census used probably sampling, which had only previously been tested in a trial census of unemployment conducted the Civil Works Administration during 1933-1934, in surveys of retail stores in the 1930s, and in an official sample survey of unemployment conducted amongst two percent of American households in 1937. Probability sampling allowed for the inclusion of additional demographic questions without increasing the burden on the collection process or on data processing. Moreover, sampling the U.S. Census Bureau was able to publish preliminary returns eight months before tabulations were completed. Likewise, the census increased its number of published tables, and also was able to complete data processing with higher quality and more efficiency. New census questions focused on employment, unemployment, internal migration, and incomes—reflecting on the concerns of the Great Depression, the country's housing stock, and the need for public housing programs.
The Census of 1950 encompassed every state, Alaska, Hawaii, American Samoa, the Panama Canal Zone, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other small American territories. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau enumerate American living abroad to account for members of the U.S. Armed Forces, vessel crew members, and government employees residing in foreign countries. The U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Maritime Administration, and several other federal agencies were responsible for distributing and collecting census questionnaires in a cooperative effort. Persons living abroad for reasons other than what is listed above had their census information reported by families or neighbors residing in the United States, but such data was criticized as unreliable and were not published in official statistics. The 1950 Census also included a new survey on residential financing collected separately on a sample basis from owners of owner-occupied properties, rental properties, and mortgage lenders. The accuracy of the new census was increased by improved enumerator training, the use of detailed street maps for enumerators, the publication of "Missed Person" forms in local newspapers, and the designation of a specific night to conduct a special enumeration of transient individuals. Moreover, a post-enumeration survey was conducted to further verify the accuracy of the original enumeration. A sample of approximately 3,500 small areas was compared to the original census data to identify households that may have been omitted initially. Likewise, a sample of approximately 22,000 households were re-interviewed to identify persons omitted in the original enumeration count. Though not used for the 1950 Census, the UNIVersal Automatic Computer I (UNIVAC I), the first non-military computer, was used to tabulate some of the statistics for the 1954 census of economy. In August of 1954, Congress codified various census statutes, such as the Fifteenth Census Act of 1929, authorizing the decennial census and other census.
The Census of 1960 was the first to be mailed to respondents. The U.S. Postal Service delivered census questionnaires to households, the head of household was required to complete the questionnaire, and an enumerator was to pick it up. The enumeration process was divided into two stages: first, select data for each person and dwelling unit was collected; and second, more detailed economic and social data was collected from a sample of households and dwelling units. The census questionnaires for the second stage were hand-delivered by enumerators as they were collecting data from the first stage. Households receiving the second census questionnaire were to complete the form and mail it to their local census office. Twenty-five percent of the population was giving additional sample questions. Because of the increased use of sampling, less populated areas were prone to sampling variation; however, this did not significantly decrease the usefulness of census statistics gathered. Moreover, increased use of sampling reduced data processing costs. Additional questions included in the 1960 Census were related to places of works and means of transportation to work. By 1960, nearly all census data was processed using computers. The U.S. Census Bureau used a Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer (FOSDIC) for the first time, thus decreasing the amount of time and money required for data input.
In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.
Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, were an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and used for a 17 percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.
Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in 6 languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100 percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process by instead following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census. Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Mosquito County, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Rights Holder
<span>This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:</span>
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul><span>This resources is provided here by </span><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a><span> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a><span> of </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a><span>.</span>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
<span>United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.</span>
<span>United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.</span>
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/" target="_blank">Through the Decades</a>." United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/.
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
1 table
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census for Central Florida, 1930
Alternative Title
Census, 1930
Subject
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Population--United States
Description
The Fifteenth United States Census records for Brevard County, Flagler County, Lake County, Marion County, Orange County, Osceola County, Seminole County, and Volusia County, Florida, for 1930. The census divides the population by gender, race ("white" and "black"), and native-born vs. foreign-born. Those who are foreign born are further divided by country of origin. The census then lists the population categorized by age, family size (as well as rural families vs. urban families), family radio ownership, marital status, school attendance, and literacy. The census also collected information on agriculture, on manufacturing, and on unemployment.<br /><br />The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for censuses of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their respective territories. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demand and the bureau was accused of presenting unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.
Type
Dataset
Source
Original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1930.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/104" target="_blank">U.S. Census Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1930.
Coverage
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Creator
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>
Publisher
<a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Date Created
ca. 1930-04-01
Format
image/jpg
Extent
1.99 MB
Medium
1 table
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a> and published by the <a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>.
Rights Holder
This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form;</li>
<li>create derivative works;</li>
<li>perform the work publicly;</li>
<li>display the work;</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul>
This resources is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a> of <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a>.
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1930.html" target="_blank">1930 Overview</a>." U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1930.html.
United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.
United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1930. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.
Transcript
U.S. Census of 1930
Population
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population Total 13,283 2,466 23,161 29,578 49,737 10,699 18,735 42,757
Males 6,766 1,355 11,673 14,970 24,034 5,500 9,467 20,850
Females 6,517 1,111 11,488 14,608 25,703 5,199 9,268 21,907
White Population Total 9,062 1,613 16,717 15,065 37,495 7,610 10,302 30,205
Males 4,642 874 8,346 7,664 18,260 3,773 5,228 14,746
Females 4,420 739 8,371 7,401 19,235 3,837 5,074 15,459
Native-Born Population Total 8,593 1,491 16,068 14,645 35,498 7,316 9,875 28,379
Males 4,390 802 7,992 7,439 17,270 3,608 4,984 13,829
Females 4,203 689 8,076 7,206 18,228 3,708 4,891 14,549
Foreign-Born Population Total 469 122 649 420 1,997 294 427 1,827
Males 252 72 354 225 990 165 244 917
Females 217 50 295 195 1,007 129 183 910
Black Population Total 4,199 852 6,442 14,513 12,226 3,056 8,431 12,537
Males 2,112 480 3,235 7,306 5,764 1,710 4,238 6,093
Females 2,087 372 3,117 7,207 6,462 1,346 4,193 6,444
Other Race Population Total 22 1 2 0 16 33 2 15
Males 12 1 2 0 10 17 1 11
Females 10 0 0 0 6 16 1 4
Population by Age Under 1 205 49 393 523 785 180 338 648
1-4 1,028 196 1,894 2,345 3,558 761 1,474 2,938
5-9 1,336 264 2,349 3,126 4,709 1,000 1,911 4,001
10-14 1,230 238 2,109 3,022 4,353 929 1,846 3,729
15-19 1,117 220 2,114 3,092 4,433 933 1,883 3,435
20-24 1,159 235 1,992 2,874 4,486 888 1,753 3,524
25-29 1,068 214 1,826 2,298 4,349 852 1,689 3,471
30-34 981 184 1,656 1,905 3,826 691 1,488 3,132
35-44 1,826 343 3,047 3,653 7,036 1,331 2,703 6,141
45-54 1,452 250 2,326 3,081 5,344 1,100 1,861 4,700
55-64 1,030 162 1,721 2,065 3,711 917 1,022 3,665
65-74 615 79 1,219 1,105 2,184 623 549 2,266
75+ 224 31 498 457 924 470 214 1,033
Age Unknown 12 1 17 32 39 24 4 74
Number of Families Total 3,761 653 6,460 7,483 13,852 3,198 5,043 12,444
Farm 462 131 1,506 2,559 1,308 451 781 892
Rural Farm 454 131 1,468 2,557 1,257 433 722 876
Urban Farm 8 0 38 2 51 18 59 16
Non-Farm 3,299 522 4,954 4,924 12,544 2,747 4,262 11,552
Rural Non-Farm 2,523 522 3,106 3,028 3,775 1,898 1,590 3,887
Urban Non-Farm 776 0 1,848 1,896 8,769 849 2,672 7,665
Number of Families by Size 1 Person 597 91 912 968 1,654 593 611 1,905
2 Persons 1,078 186 1,814 1,778 4,030 984 1,288 3,855
3 Persons 715 123 1,225 1,412 2,895 548 1,052 2,368
4 Persons 514 84 955 1,144 2,117 447 814 1,734
5 Persons 359 60 639 779 1,383 246 516 1,127
6 Persons 196 39 392 530 837 160 319 666
7 Persons 116 33 221 348 422 96 192 378
8 Persons 82 23 144 224 238 65 121 189
9 Persons 52 10 81 135 130 30 67 116
10 Persons 19 3 29 76 84 18 33 60
11 Persons 18 0 19 45 32 7 18 27
12+ Persons 15 1 29 44 30 4 12 19
Radio Ownership Families Reporting Radios 783 57 1,072 680 2,638 323 729 2,164
Urban Families Reporting Radios 165 0 434 319 1,850 140 491 1,526
Rural Families Reporting Radios 618 57 638 361 786 183 238 638
Families Without Radios 2,978 596 5,388 6,803 11,216 2,875 4,314 10,280
Urban Families Without Radios 619 0 1,452 1,579 6,970 727 2,240 6,155
Rural Families Without Radios 2,359 596 3,936 5,224 4,246 2,148 2,074 4,125
Population by Marital Status, Aged 15+ Total 9,484 1,719 16,416 20,562 36,332 7,829 13,166 31,441
Single 2,352 427 4,010 5,432 8,705 1,754 3,094 7,221
Married 6,127 1,170 10,540 12,562 23,568 4,894 8,821 20,237
Widowed 898 104 1,603 2,141 3,404 1,091 1,059 3,388
Divorced 105 18 241 404 474 83 183 539
Unknown Marital Status 2 0 22 23 181 7 9 56
Male Population by Marital Status, Aged 15+ Total 4,850 963 8,306 10,465 17,303 4,080 6,633 15,090
Single 1,442 308 2,407 3,217 4,634 1,138 1,814 3,993
Married 3,060 601 5,252 6,294 11,615 2,454 4,371 10,007
Widowed 299 43 512 747 833 449 348 829
Divorced 49 11 122 193 171 34 94 231
Unknown Marital Status 0 0 13 14 50 5 6 30
Female Population by Marital Status, Aged 15+ Total 4,634 756 8,110 10,097 19,029 3,749 6,533 16,351
Single 910 119 1,603 2,215 4,071 616 1,280 3,228
Married 306 569 5,288 6,268 11,953 2,440 4,450 10,230
Widowed 599 61 1,091 1,394 2,571 642 711 2,559
Divorced 56 7 119 211 303 49 89 308
Unknown Marital Status 2 0 9 9 131 2 3 26
Foreign-Born Population by Country of Origin Austria 18 5 11 7 40 14 1 27
Canada 84 9 140 80 486 62 79 399
Cuba 2 0 0 4 7 3 2 8
Czechoslovakia 27 4 9 2 52 3 28 16
Denmark 6 2 15 8 24 5 3 31
England 76 20 132 101 361 67 62 438
France 8 1 12 11 35 5 10 47
Germany 96 15 59 59 273 50 51 233
Greece 6 0 7 4 58 0 11 36
Irish (free state) 16 0 12 6 51 12 9 50
Italy 17 0 27 15 48 11 12 30
Northern Ireland 2 2 3 7 18 2 2 13
Norway 11 1 9 2 20 1 7 24
Palestine and Syria 0 1 0 18 28 1 4 28
Poland 5 30 8 8 22 0 5 32
Rumania 5 0 3 0 20 1 21 9
Russia 2 8 11 12 83 1 11 32
Scotland 18 6 29 29 68 8 23 61
Spain 0 0 0 2 2 2 1 5
Sweden 17 4 81 18 124 24 40 106
Switzerland 8 2 10 9 23 4 15 24
West Indies 4 0 3 5 13 3 2 14
West Indies, Others 6 0 3 1 6 0 0 6
Other Countries 41 12 68 17 147 18 30 172
Education
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population, Aged 7-20 Total 3,387 646 6,029 8,598 12,507 2,646 5,221 10,252
Population Attending School, Aged 7-20 Total 2,589 441 4,295 6,304 9,178 1,894 3,764 7,924
Ages 7-13 1,765 297 2,871 4,167 6,043 1,250 2,514 5,285
Ages 14-15 424 81 709 1,049 1,493 320 618 1,288
Ages 16-17 259 43 458 751 1,057 221 426 872
Ages 18-20 141 20 257 367 585 103 206 479
Population Not Attending School, Aged 7-20 Total 798 205 1,734 2,294 3,329 752 1,457 2,328
Ages 7-13 34 32 206 181 274 94 126 159
Ages 14-15 64 19 131 176 265 46 133 144
Ages 16-17 184 42 380 513 725 196 320 523
Ages 18-20 516 112 1,017 1,424 2,065 416 878 1,502
Population, Aged 10+ Total 10,714 1,957 18,525 23,584 40,685 8,758 15,012 35,170
White 7,365 1,266 13,493 12,047 30,806 6,262 8,311 24,894
Black 3,334 690 5,030 11,537 9,865 2,472 6,699 10,262
Other 15 1 2 0 14 24 2 14
Illiterate Population, Aged 10+ Total 503 182 1,089 2,216 1,738 547 1,280 1,749
White 35 13 158 145 257 86 59 161
Black 463 169 931 2,071 1,479 444 1,220 1,585
Other 5 0 0 0 2 17 1 3
Literate Population, Aged 10+ Total 10,211 1,775 17,436 21,368 38,947 8,211 13,732 33,421
White 7,330 1,253 13,335 11,902 30,549 6,176 8,252 24,733
Black 2,871 521 4,099 9,466 8,386 2,028 5,479 8,677
Other 10 1 2 0 12 7 1 11
Agriculture
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Number of Farms by Race Total 633 144 1,981 2,175 1,608 497 780 1,013
White 39 3 109 955 56 10 40 49
Colored 594 141 1,872 1,220 1,552 487 740 964
Acreage of Farms by Race Total 25,608 13,463 127,027 204,467 102,347 75,608 34,471 76,681
White 24,825 13,418 124,578 169,229 100,982 75,501 33,834 75,363
Colored 783 45 2,449 35,238 1,365 107 637 1,318
Farms by Ownership, Tenure, and Management Full Owners 501 105 1,468 1,451 1,380 416 615 900
Part Owners 7 11 66 351 38 21 53 34
Manager-Operated 97 9 285 78 110 22 61 25
Tenant-Operated 28 19 162 295 80 38 51 54
Cash Tenant-Operated 13 16 54 114 48 16 35 31
Other Tenant-Operated 15 3 108 181 32 22 16 23
Farm Acreage by Ownership, Tenure, and Management Full Owners 25,608 13,463 127,027 204,467 102,347 75,608 34,471 76,681
Part Owners 18,856 10,976 70,810 118,675 54,674 23,426 20,430 61,131
Manager-Operated 505 1,015 6,660 33,026 3,982 2,787 1,573 2,753
Tenant-Operated 5,334 345 38,524 32,722 18,419 48,614 10,690 11,441
Cash Tenant-Operated 913 1,127 11,033 20,044 25,272 781 1,778 1,356
Other Tenant-Operated 516 1,043 4,721 7,667 24,182 381 1,392 766
Farms by Acreage Less than 3 15 0 88 16 87 31 36 47
3-9 137 5 391 166 342 92 180 206
10-19 169 17 487 343 416 115 221 251
20-49 183 67 547 793 455 150 237 265
50-99 57 33 234 406 168 60 57 117
100-174 52 12 136 225 71 21 30 69
175-259 13 2 43 94 27 7 9 22
260-499 3 5 32 76 17 7 4 14
500-999 4 1 10 34 16 8 3 8
1,000-4,999 0 2 11 20 7 4 2 14
5,000+ 0 0 2 2 2 2 1 0
Value of Farms Total $12,560,869 $1,152,345 $34,719,355 $14,108,455 $32,468,362 $4,352,981 $13,207,921 $17,052,127
Farmland $9,974,127 $645,100 $28,863,318 $9,560,832 $24,961,455 $3,067,920 $9,712,100 $12,293,764
Buildings $1,402,675 $282,025 $3,100,276 $2,397,812 $4,063,348 $691,705 $1,774,708 $2,600,511
Farmers' Dwellings $982,800 $143,450 $235,270 $1,573,405 $2,866,942 $463,220 $1,241,200 $1,752,640
Farming Implements and Machinery $201,267 $81,770 $405,491 $576,406 $576,617 $130,136 $479,913 $405,212
Value of All Crops Total $2,024,972 $560,114 $3,896,294 $2,489,061 $4,330,237 $434,275 $3,761,321 $1,840,084
Cereal $164 $32,327 $16,425 $293,916 $9,133 $5,830 $36,218 $14,457
Other Grains and Seeds $481 $2,801 $5,359 $85,029 $2,706 $1,859 $50 $4,129
Hay and Forage $145 $10,124 $9,207 $64,930 $19,444 $3,035 $16,658 $12,075
Vegetables $101,832 $496,606 $472,268 $973,677 $395,621 $60,768 $2,904,857 $203,665
Fruits and Nuts $1,910,835 $6,253 $3,356,253 $931,117 $3,878,778 $351,429 $774,298 $1,576,158
All Other Crops $0 $2,213 $8,048 $53,978 $1,576 $2,132 $0 $3,594
Garden Vegetables $11,515 $9,790 $28,734 $86,414 $22,979 $9,222 $29,240 $26,006
Manufacturing
Manufacturing Establishments Total 20 12 35 52 62 19 21 60
Average Number of Wage Earners in Manufacturing Total 257 413 619 913 716 1,202 611 781
Annual Wages in Manufacturing Total $194,907 $195,277 $568,133 $515,673 $741,979 $686,476 $602,100 $681,583
Value of Products of Manufacturing Establishments Total $640,042 $4,359,445 $1,789,513 $2,027,539 $3,695,845 $2,144,695 $3,034,534 $2,613,996
Wholesale Establishments Total 24 5 35 36 62 9 30 46
Number of Employees of Wholesale Establishments Total 91 6 588 106 1,902 15 335 236
Males 78 6 529 96 1,429 14 251 198
Females 13 0 59 10 473 1 84 38
Salaries and Wages Paid in Wholesale Establishments Total $134,450 $13,672 $425,507 $306,370 $1,177,251 $42,041 $394,430 $306,052
Retail Distribution Stores Total 317 68 368 444 799 149 295 801
Number of Retail Distribution Proprietors and Firm Members Total 282 63 351 423 725 137 265 687
Full-time Employees of Retail Stores Total 361 43 560 732 1945 188 393 1427
Labor Force (Gainful Workers, Unemployed, and Lay-off) Total 5,644 1,037 9,382 12,206 22,751 4,373 8,429 18,154
Unemployed (Out of job, Able to work, and Looking for a job) Total 223 8 476 220 1,733 199 224 942
Males 173 7 361 153 1,172 154 162 710
Females 50 1 115 67 561 45 62 232
Registered Fully Unemployed Persons Total 529 39 629 1,290 1,952 405 809 1,956
White 221 34 425 546 1,286 322 289 918
White Males 146 24 269 360 780 208 199 586
White Females 75 10 156 186 506 114 90 332
Black 308 5 204 744 663 83 520 1,036
Black Males 107 4 103 352 346 37 336 499
Black Females 201 1 101 392 317 46 184 537
African Americans
agriculture
Anglo Americans
Austrian Americans
Brevard County
British Americans
Canadian Americans
Caribbean Americans
Caucasian Americans
census
Census of 1930
cereals
crops
Cuban Americans
Czech Americans
Czechoslovakian Americans
Danish Americans
distribution
divorced
dwellings
education
employees
English Americans
European Americans
families
farm
farmers
farming
farming implements
farmland
farms
females
firm members
Flagler County
forage
French Americans
fruits
gainful workers
garden vegetables
German Americans
grains
Greek Americans
hay
Hispanic Americans
illiteracy
Irish Americans
Italian Americans
labor
laborers
Lake County
Latin Americans
Latinas
Latinos
lay-offs
literacy
machinery
males
manufacturing
Marion County
marital status
married
Middle Eastern Americans
Northern Irish Americans
Norwegian Americans
nuts
orange county
Osceola County
Palestinian Americans
Polish Americans
population
proprietors
radios
retail
Romanian Americans
rural
Russian Americans
Scandinavian Americans
school
Scotch Americans
Scottish Americans
seeds
Seminole County
single
Slovakian Americans
Spanish Americans
stores
Swedish Americans
Swiss Americans
Syrian Americans
tenant farmers
tenant farming
tenants
U.S. Census
unemployment
urban
vegetables
Volusia County
wages
West Indian Americans
wholesale
widowed
workers
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/12393dba254f2ac70d22b9a23a09c12d.jpg
8137091dfcd240d36abc411d790e6f51
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census Collection
Alternative Title
Census Collection
Subject
Census--United States
Population--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Description
Collection of United States Census population records for various counties in Central Florida from 1840 to 2000.
The Census Act of 1840 was signed into law on March 3, 1839 and later amended on February 26, 1840. This piece of legislation established a centralized census office during each enumeration. Congress designated the census questionnaire designs to the Secretary of State. However, each household received inquiries regarding "the pursuits, industry, education, and resources of the country" and included questions related to school attendance, literacy, and vocation.
In March of 1849, Congress pass legislation that established a census board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Postmaster General. The board was responsible for preparing and printing forms and schedules for enumeration related to population, mining, agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, education, etc. The 1850 Census also increased population inquiries to include every free person's name (as opposed to just the head of the household), as well as information on taxes, schools, crime, wages, estate values, etc.
The Census Act of 1850 authorized the U.S. Census of 1860 and stipulated that its provisions be adhered to for all future decennial censuses should no new legislation be passed by the first of the year of said census. In May of 1865, the U.S. Census Office was abolished and many superintending clerks were transferred to the General Land Office.
Although the 1870 Census was conducted under the provisions of the Census Act of 1850, a new act was passed on May 6, 1870. The new census legislation required two changes in procedures related to questionnaire return submission dates. Moreover, penalties for refusing to reply to inquires were expanded to apply to all questions and questionnaires. The questionnaires themselves had to be redesigned due to the end of the "slave questionnaire", as slavery had been formally abolished slavery nationwide via the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This left five schedules for the census: General Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Products of Industry, and Social Statistics. In addition, the use of a Charles W. Seaton, a U.S. Census Office chief clerk and later superintendent, invited a rudimentary tallying machine that partially alleviated the difficulties of tallying and tabulating questionnaire responses. Finally, the new superintendent for the Ninth Census, General Francis A. Walker, introduced employment examinations to test the qualifications of applicants to the Census Office, allowing for increased efficiency in the process of collecting census data.
The newest act authorizing the Census of 1880 provided for supervision of enumeration by "supervisors of the census", selected exclusively for the collection of census data. All supervisors, as well as the superintendent, were to appointed by the U.S. President and approved by the Senate. Census enumerators were required to personally visit each household and family within his subdivision. The new census act also allowed for the collection of data related to the condition and operation of railroad corporations, incorporated express companies, and telegraph companies, as well as data related to the condition and operation of life, fire, and marine insurance companies. Corporations who refused to provide the census with "true and complete" answers were subject to fines. In addition, the census superintendent was required to collect and publish data on the population, industries and resources of the District of Alaska. Finally, the 1880 Census consisted of five schedules: Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Social Statistics, and Manufacturing.
The Census of 1890 was authorized by an act modeled after the 1880 enumeration and signed into law on March 1, 1889. The 1890 Census was supervised by 175 employees and enumerators were required to collect all information by personally visiting each household. The 1890 Census included essentially the same inquires from the 1880 Census, with some notable additions, such as questions about home and farm ownership and indebtedness; and the names, units, length of service, and residences of former Union soldiers and sailors, as well as the names of the widows of those who were no longer alive. Racial categorization was expanded to include "Japanese", along with "Chinese", "Negro", "mulatto", "quadroon", "octoroon", and "White". Herman Hollerith, a former employee of the U.S. Census Office, invited the electric tabulating system, which was widely used in the 1890 Census, allowing data to be processed faster and more efficiently. On October 3, 1893, Congress passed a law that transferred census-related work to the direction of the commissioner of labor. Congress passed another act on March 2, 1895, effectively abolishing the U.S. Census Office and transferring the remaining responsibilities to the Office of the Secretary of the Interior.
Congress limited the Census of 1900 to content related to population, mortality, agriculture, and manufacturing. Special census agents were authorized to collect statistics related to incidents of deafness, blindness, insanity, and juvenile delinquency; as well as data on religious bodies, utilities, mining, and transportation. The act authorizing the 1900 Census designated the enumeration of military personally to the U.S. Department of War and the U.S. Department of the Navy, while Indiana Territory was to be enumerated by the commissioner of Indian Affairs. Annexed in 1898, Hawaii was included in the census for the first time. In 1902, the U.S. Census Office was officially established as a permanent organization within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The office became the U.S. Census Bureau in 1903 and was transferred to the Department of Commerce and Labor.
The Census of 1910 was approved by legislation introduced in December of 1907 and enacted in July of 1909. The delay was the result of a disagreement over the appointment of enumerators. President Theodore Roosevelt supported the hiring of enumerators via the civil service system, while Congress supported enumerators as positions of patronage. President Roosevelt successfully won the debate. This census act also changed Census Day from the traditional date of June 1st to April 15th. Additional questions regarding the nationality and native language of foreign-born persons and their parents. Funds for the U.S. Census Bureau were also increased to expand the Census' permanent workforce and created several new full-time positions, including a geographer, a chief statistician, and an assistant director. The assistant director was to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, while all other census employees were hired on the basis of open, competitive examinations administered by the Civil Service Commission. Despite the use of automatic counting machinery, issues with the tabulation process persisted. Finally, with the United States' entrance into World War I in 1917, the U.S. Census Bureau became a source of even more valuable purpose: the Census was able to use population and economic data to report on the populations of draft-age men, as well as information regarding each state's industrial capabilities.
The Census of 1920 changed the date of Census Day from April 15th to January 1st, as requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which argued that farmers' memories and harvest information would be more accurate on this day. The U.S. Census Bureau was also authorized to hire additional employees at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and to create a special field force to collect census data. The legislation authorizing the 1920 Census also allowed for a census of manufacturing to be conducted in 1921, and for such a census to be repeated every two years thereafter, as opposed to the traditional five-year census cycle. Furthermore, a census of agriculture and livestock was to be conducted in 1925 and to be repeated every ten years thereafter. In addition, penalties for those who refused to supply information or those who supplied false information were strengthened. As a result of these changes, census of population, manufacturing, and agriculture and livestock became increasingly independent of one another.
The "usual place of abode", the location where residents regularly slept, instead of where they worked or were visiting, became the new basis for enumeration in the 1920 Census. Those with no permanent or regular residence were listed as residents of the location that they were enumerated at. Enumeration related to institutional inmates and dependent, defective, and delinquent classes were also modified. Unlike the previous census, the 1920 Census did not have inquires related to unemployment, to Union or Confederate Army or Navy service, to the number of children born, or to the length of time that a couple had been married. The Census of 1920, however, did include four additional questions: one regarding year of naturalization and three regarding native languages. Issues also arose as a result of changes in international boundaries following World War I, particularly for persons declaring birth or parental birth in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, or Turkey. In response, enumerators were required to ask said persons for their province, state, or region of birth. Enumerators were not required to ask individuals how to spell their names, nor were respondents required to provide proof of various pieces of information. Race was determined by the enumerator's impressions.
The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for a census of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their territory. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demands and the bureau was accused of present unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.
Congress authorized the 1940 Census in August 1939, providing the Director of the Census the additional authority to conduct a national census of housing in each state, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Alaska. The housing census was conducted separately, though enumerators often collection housing information at the same time that they collected population information. The Census of 1940 was the first time that the U.S. Census Bureau used advanced statistical techniques. In particular, the census used probably sampling, which had only previously been tested in a trial census of unemployment conducted the Civil Works Administration during 1933-1934, in surveys of retail stores in the 1930s, and in an official sample survey of unemployment conducted amongst two percent of American households in 1937. Probability sampling allowed for the inclusion of additional demographic questions without increasing the burden on the collection process or on data processing. Moreover, sampling the U.S. Census Bureau was able to publish preliminary returns eight months before tabulations were completed. Likewise, the census increased its number of published tables, and also was able to complete data processing with higher quality and more efficiency. New census questions focused on employment, unemployment, internal migration, and incomes—reflecting on the concerns of the Great Depression, the country's housing stock, and the need for public housing programs.
The Census of 1950 encompassed every state, Alaska, Hawaii, American Samoa, the Panama Canal Zone, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other small American territories. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau enumerate American living abroad to account for members of the U.S. Armed Forces, vessel crew members, and government employees residing in foreign countries. The U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Maritime Administration, and several other federal agencies were responsible for distributing and collecting census questionnaires in a cooperative effort. Persons living abroad for reasons other than what is listed above had their census information reported by families or neighbors residing in the United States, but such data was criticized as unreliable and were not published in official statistics. The 1950 Census also included a new survey on residential financing collected separately on a sample basis from owners of owner-occupied properties, rental properties, and mortgage lenders. The accuracy of the new census was increased by improved enumerator training, the use of detailed street maps for enumerators, the publication of "Missed Person" forms in local newspapers, and the designation of a specific night to conduct a special enumeration of transient individuals. Moreover, a post-enumeration survey was conducted to further verify the accuracy of the original enumeration. A sample of approximately 3,500 small areas was compared to the original census data to identify households that may have been omitted initially. Likewise, a sample of approximately 22,000 households were re-interviewed to identify persons omitted in the original enumeration count. Though not used for the 1950 Census, the UNIVersal Automatic Computer I (UNIVAC I), the first non-military computer, was used to tabulate some of the statistics for the 1954 census of economy. In August of 1954, Congress codified various census statutes, such as the Fifteenth Census Act of 1929, authorizing the decennial census and other census.
The Census of 1960 was the first to be mailed to respondents. The U.S. Postal Service delivered census questionnaires to households, the head of household was required to complete the questionnaire, and an enumerator was to pick it up. The enumeration process was divided into two stages: first, select data for each person and dwelling unit was collected; and second, more detailed economic and social data was collected from a sample of households and dwelling units. The census questionnaires for the second stage were hand-delivered by enumerators as they were collecting data from the first stage. Households receiving the second census questionnaire were to complete the form and mail it to their local census office. Twenty-five percent of the population was giving additional sample questions. Because of the increased use of sampling, less populated areas were prone to sampling variation; however, this did not significantly decrease the usefulness of census statistics gathered. Moreover, increased use of sampling reduced data processing costs. Additional questions included in the 1960 Census were related to places of works and means of transportation to work. By 1960, nearly all census data was processed using computers. The U.S. Census Bureau used a Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer (FOSDIC) for the first time, thus decreasing the amount of time and money required for data input.
In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.
Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, were an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and used for a 17 percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.
Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in 6 languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100 percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process by instead following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census. Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Mosquito County, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Rights Holder
<span>This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:</span>
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul><span>This resources is provided here by </span><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a><span> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a><span> of </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a><span>.</span>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
<span>United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.</span>
<span>United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.</span>
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/" target="_blank">Through the Decades</a>." United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/.
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
1 table
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census for Central Florida, 1920
Alternative Title
Census, 1920
Subject
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Population--United States
Description
The Fourteenth United States Census records for Brevard County, Flagler County, Lake County, Marion County, Orange County, Osceola County, Seminole County, and Volusia County, Florida for 1920. The census divides the population by gender, race ("white" and "black"), and native-born vs. foreign-born. Those who are foreign born are further divided by country of origin. The census then lists the population categorized by age, school attendance, race, and literacy. The census also collected information on agriculture and on manufacturing.<br /><br />The Census of 1920 changed the date of Census Day from April 15th to January 1st, as requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which argued that farmers' memories and harvest information would be more accurate on this day. The U.S. Census Bureau was also authorized to hire additional employees at its headquarters in Washington, D.C., and to create a special field force to collect census data. The legislation authorizing the 1920 Census also allowed for a census of manufacturing to be conducted in 1921, and for such a census to be repeated every two years thereafter, as opposed to the traditional five-year census cycle. Furthermore, a census of agriculture and livestock was to be conducted in 1925 and to be repeated every 10 years thereafter. In addition, penalties for those who refused to supply information or those who supplied false information were strengthened. As a result of these changes, the censuses of population, manufacturing, and agriculture and livestock became increasingly independent of one another.<br /><br />The "usual place of abode," the location where residents regularly slept, instead of where they worked or were visiting, became the new basis for enumeration in the 1920 Census. Those with no permanent or regular residence were listed as residents of the location that they were enumerated at. Enumeration related to institutional inmates, and dependent, defective, and delinquent classes were also modified. Unlike the previous census, the 1920 Census did not have inquiries related to unemployment, to Union or Confederate Army or Navy service, to the number of children born, or to the length of time that a couple had been married. The Census of 1920, however, did include four additional questions: one regarding year of naturalization and three regarding native languages. Issues also arose as a result of changes in international boundaries following World War I, particularly for persons declaring birth or parental birth in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, or Turkey. In response, enumerators were required to ask said persons for their province, state, or region of birth. Enumerators were not required to ask individuals how to spell their names, nor were respondents required to provide proof of various pieces of information. Race was determined by the enumerator's impressions.
Type
Dataset
Source
Original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1920.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/104" target="_blank">U.S. Census Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1920.
Coverage
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Creator
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>
Publisher
<a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Date Created
ca. 1920-01-01
Format
image/jpg
Extent
1.39 MB
Medium
1 table
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a> and published by the <a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>.
Rights Holder
This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form;</li>
<li>create derivative works;</li>
<li>perform the work publicly;</li>
<li>display the work;</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul>
This resources is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a> of <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a>.
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1920.html" target="_blank">1920 Overview</a>." U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1920.html.
United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.
United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1920. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.
Transcript
U.S. Census of 1920
Population
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population Total 8,505 2,442 12,744 23,968 19,890 7,195 10,986 23,374
Males 4,483 1,439 6,612 12,048 10,042 3,662 5,695 11,663
Females 4,022 1,003 6,132 11,920 9,848 3,563 5,291 11,711
White Population Total 6,006 1,481 8,927 11,080 14,423 6,072 5,933 15,159
Males 3,139 833 4,590 5,599 7,22 3,054 3,095 7,435
Females 2,867 648 4,337 5,481 7,201 3,018 2,838 7,724
Black Population Total 2,483 958 3,817 12,887 5,464 1,122 5,044 8,199
Males 1,335 605 2,022 6,448 2,817 578 2,594 4,216
Females 1,148 353 1,795 6,439 2,647 544 2,450 3,983
Native-Born Population Total 5,615 1,317 8,486 10,698 13,609 5,771 5,559 14,070
Males 29,919 730 4,353 5,397 6,786 2,884 2,879 6,897
Females 2,696 587 4,133 5,301 6,823 2,887 2,680 7,173
Foreign-Born Population Total 391 164 441 382 814 301 374 1,089
Males 220 103 237 202 436 170 216 538
Females 171 61 204 180 378 131 158 551
Under Age 7 1,213 347 1,744 3,725 2,485 836 1,532 2,766
Aged 7-13 1,139 347 1,834 4,118 2,589 908 1,628 3,059
Aged 14-15 300 92 484 1,098 653 240 416 786
Aged 16-17 283 91 472 1,037 681 215 368 739
Aged 18-20 434 129 635 1,261 1,039 341 592 1,264
Aged 21-44 3,053 945 4,340 7,501 7,011 1,987 4,282 8,349
Aged 45+ 2,083 491 3,235 5,228 5,432 2,668 2,168 6,411
Foreign-Born Population by Country of Origin Canada 52 23 76 63 130 74 53 228
Austria 13 7 5 4 11 11 5 25
Cuba 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 6
Denmark 13 3 7 4 15 3 3 14
England 74 34 111 86 157 64 51 247
France 7 2 8 14 12 3 12 24
Germany 75 22 51 61 166 66 61 139
Greece 5 2 0 8 3 0 3 14
Holland and the Netherlands 15 3 2 5 13 3 0 9
Born in Hungary 6 1 1 6 10 5 29 9
Ireland 15 4 17 14 37 17 19 57
Italy 11 0 10 20 17 4 22 16
Norway 10 3 6 5 4 4 2 18
Poland 5 35 6 3 13 1 0 19
Romania 2 0 0 0 11 0 8 0
Russia 5 0 2 6 45 5 6 25
Scotland 11 8 24 22 26 9 17 63
Spain 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 1
Sweden 14 3 50 15 61 11 44 93
Switzerland 5 0 6 7 7 12 8 13
Syria 0 0 0 25 8 0 4 6
West Indies 9 0 0 3 5 0 0 11
Other Countries 44 14 59 11 61 9 24 58
Education
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Population Attending School Total 1,499 393 2,191 5,297 3,523 1,268 2,212 3,969
Ages 7-13 1,025 294 1,481 3,635 2,391 831 1,520 2,708
Ages 14-15 266 61 380 916 587 216 376 665
Ages 16-17 148 29 227 560 375 137 208 384
Ages 18-20 60 9 103 186 170 84 108 212
Population Not Attending School Total 657 266 1,234 2,217 1,439 436 792 1,879
Ages 7-13 114 53 353 483 198 77 108 351
Ages 14-15 34 31 104 182 66 24 40 121
Ages 16-17 135 62 245 477 306 78 160 355
Ages 18-20 374 120 532 1,075 869 257 484 1,052
Illiterate Population, Aged 10+ Total 236 319 759 1,685 743 256 713 1,241
White 57 29 91 143 123 68 73 74
Black 179 290 668 1,541 620 188 640 1,167
Other 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Literate Population, Aged 10+ Total 6,555 1,633 9,428 16,823 15,535 5,700 8,091 18,134
White 4,770 1,136 7,089 8,549 11,739 4,993 4,671 12,572
Black 1,776 495 2,339 8,274 3,793 706 3,339 5,549
Other 9 2 0 0 3 1 9 13
Population, Aged 21+ Total 5,136 1,436 7,575 12,729 12,443 4,655 6,450 14,760
Illiterate Population, Aged 21+ Total 211 249 602 1,449 685 233 625 1,157
Males 126 160 334 718 386 122 333 672
Females 85 89 268 731 299 111 292 485
Literate Population, Aged 21+ Total 4,925 1,187 6,973 11,280 11,758 4,422 5,825 13,603
Males 2,675 755 3,603 5,865 5,945 2,256 3,138 6,714
Females 2,250 432 3,370 5,415 5,813 2,166 2,687 6,889
Agriculture
Brevard County Flagler County Lake County Marion County Orange County Osceola County Seminole County Volusia County
Number of Farms by Race Ownership Total 672 187 876 2,215 10,093 304 573 998
White-Owned 628 179 826 1,143 1,013 292 510 899
Black-Owned and Other Non-White-Owned 110 8 50 1,072 80 12 63 99
Farms by Acreage Less than 3 15 0 14 5 7 8 19 31
3-9 110 8 65 153 180 34 138 241
10-19 116 37 135 323 234 64 134 219
20-49 169 86 297 770 309 96 139 282
50-99 80 31 160 448 181 47 63 119
100-174 130 21 114 255 100 20 50 54
175-259 22 1 34 110 30 6 14 27
260-499 19 1 40 96 34 7 3 15
500-999 4 1 10 34 7 13 3 3
1,000+ 7 1 7 21 11 9 10 7
Owner-Operated Farms Total 587 152 733 1,802 988 274 463 803
Owners Owning Entire Farm Total 574 139 707 1,458 927 263 418 798
Owners Hiring Additional Land Total 13 13 26 344 61 11 45 5
Farms by Tenure Total 7 25 69 382 41 9 63 48
Share Tenants 2 2 24 123 12 2 11 7
Share-Cash Tenants 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 1
Share-Cropper Tenants 0 0 21 116 7 3 8 11
Stand-In Renters 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cash Tenants 4 20 24 113 16 2 38 26
Tenants, Tenure Not Specified 1 3 0 29 6 2 4 3
Farm Ownership and Management by Race White 551 148 703 971 914 263 409 726
Black/Non-White 36 4 30 831 74 11 54 77
Tenant Farmers by Race White 7 22 54 143 36 9 56 40
Black/Non-White 0 3 15 239 5 0 7 8
Acres of Land in Farms Improved Land 10,945 4,070 32,917 105,471 70,572 6,304 11,795 18,258
Unimproved Land 47,625 6,547 55,422 119,577 171,871 60,614 53,671 51,365
Acres of Land in Farms by Ownership, Tenure, and Management Total 58,570 10,617 88,339 225,048 242,443 66,918 65,466 69,623
Operated by Owners 50,963 7,289 64,190 182,244 114,688 56,622 50,272 44,706
Operated by Tenants 451 741 6,390 18,093 1,414 191 11,752 1,836
Operated by Managers 7,156 2,587 17,759 24,711 126,341 10,105 3,442 23,081
Value of All Farm Property Total 8,351,940 1,103,571 10,148,325 9,490,125 16,322,344 3,349,955 7,202,407 7,677,096
Land $6,179,710 743,250 7,544,815 5,771,755 12,329,463 2,084,905 4,982,110 4,733,950
Buildings $1,628,265 166,750 1,607,360 1,618,814 2,569,440 485,100 1,265,235 1,742,930
Farming Implements and Machinery $263,303 65,083 512,813 462,004 663,834 121,052 429,834 272,770
Livestock $280,662 128,488 483,337 1,637,552 760,433 658,898 525,228 927,448
Value of All Crops Total 1,459,327 390,476 1,731,903 23,156,002 3,254,302 518,552 3,231,896 1,312,882
Cereal 6,012 10,390 75,515 663,888 90,784 29,382 50,085 78,907
Other Grains and Seeds 1,869 327 10,580 205,601 2,409 7,636 2,287 3,695
Hay and Forage 18,347 20,300 77,736 146,957 96,155 20,536 24,449 34,967
Vegetables 112,003 344,267 374,821 657,611 608,884 88,695 2,559,886 307,790
Fruits and Nuts 1,319,907 7,688 1,148,708 473,202 2,448,047 367,217 586,161 $865,762
All Other Crops 1,189 7,504 44,543 168,343 8,023 5,086 9,028 $21,761
Manufacturing
Manufacturing Establishments Total 32 16 34 53 51 15 25 63
Average Number of Wage Earners in Manufacturing Total 343 212 517 1,173 521 186 560 1,218
Manufacturing Costs Total 520,298 240,385 790,364 1,764,111 1,491,813 288,603 1,533,377 2,152,679
Wages 313,365 146,611 468,808 770,684 410,203 146,663 600,842 981,679
Rents and Taxes 30,919 6,412 10,913 70,415 38,732 12,034 64,289 62,799
Materials 176,014 87,362 340,643 923,012 1,042,876 129,099 868,246 1,108,836
Value of Products of Manufacturing Establishments Total 735,535 330,664 1,343,070 2,568,991 1,938,183 459,099 1,799,142 3,020,521
Primary Horsepower in Manufacturing Establishments, Rated Capacity of Engines, Motors, etc. Total 1,519 575 1,739 2,523 1,519 260 1,541 2,616
African Americans
Anglo Americans
Austrian Americans
Brevard County
British Americans
Canadian Americans
Caribbean Americans
Caucasian Americans
census
Census of 1920
cereals
crops
Cuban Americans
Dutch Americans
education
employees
English Americans
European Americans
farm managers
farming implements
farmland
farms
females
Flagler County
forage
French Americans
fruits
German Americans
grains
Greek Americans
hay
Hispanic Americans
horsepower
Hungarian Americans
illiteracy
Irish Americans
Italian Americans
labor
laborers
Lake County
Latin Americans
Latinas
Latinos
literacy
machinery
males
manufacturing
Marion County
Middle Eastern Americans
Norwegian Americans
nuts
orange county
Osceola County
Polish Americans
population
Romanian Americans
Russian Americans
Scandinavian Americans
Scotch Americans
Scottish Americans
seeds
Seminole County
sharecroppers
sharecropping
students
Swedish Americans
Swiss Americans
Syrian Americans
taxes
tenant farmers
tenant farming
tenants
U.S. Census
vegetables
Volusia County
wages
West Indian Americans
workers
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/cc6b425dabe82c1220ad4d78ffbed86d.jpg
25cb585b15e648c5491b115826cf333f
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census Collection
Alternative Title
Census Collection
Subject
Census--United States
Population--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Description
Collection of United States Census population records for various counties in Central Florida from 1840 to 2000.
The Census Act of 1840 was signed into law on March 3, 1839 and later amended on February 26, 1840. This piece of legislation established a centralized census office during each enumeration. Congress designated the census questionnaire designs to the Secretary of State. However, each household received inquiries regarding "the pursuits, industry, education, and resources of the country" and included questions related to school attendance, literacy, and vocation.
In March of 1849, Congress pass legislation that established a census board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Postmaster General. The board was responsible for preparing and printing forms and schedules for enumeration related to population, mining, agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, education, etc. The 1850 Census also increased population inquiries to include every free person's name (as opposed to just the head of the household), as well as information on taxes, schools, crime, wages, estate values, etc.
The Census Act of 1850 authorized the U.S. Census of 1860 and stipulated that its provisions be adhered to for all future decennial censuses should no new legislation be passed by the first of the year of said census. In May of 1865, the U.S. Census Office was abolished and many superintending clerks were transferred to the General Land Office.
Although the 1870 Census was conducted under the provisions of the Census Act of 1850, a new act was passed on May 6, 1870. The new census legislation required two changes in procedures related to questionnaire return submission dates. Moreover, penalties for refusing to reply to inquires were expanded to apply to all questions and questionnaires. The questionnaires themselves had to be redesigned due to the end of the "slave questionnaire", as slavery had been formally abolished slavery nationwide via the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This left five schedules for the census: General Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Products of Industry, and Social Statistics. In addition, the use of a Charles W. Seaton, a U.S. Census Office chief clerk and later superintendent, invited a rudimentary tallying machine that partially alleviated the difficulties of tallying and tabulating questionnaire responses. Finally, the new superintendent for the Ninth Census, General Francis A. Walker, introduced employment examinations to test the qualifications of applicants to the Census Office, allowing for increased efficiency in the process of collecting census data.
The newest act authorizing the Census of 1880 provided for supervision of enumeration by "supervisors of the census", selected exclusively for the collection of census data. All supervisors, as well as the superintendent, were to appointed by the U.S. President and approved by the Senate. Census enumerators were required to personally visit each household and family within his subdivision. The new census act also allowed for the collection of data related to the condition and operation of railroad corporations, incorporated express companies, and telegraph companies, as well as data related to the condition and operation of life, fire, and marine insurance companies. Corporations who refused to provide the census with "true and complete" answers were subject to fines. In addition, the census superintendent was required to collect and publish data on the population, industries and resources of the District of Alaska. Finally, the 1880 Census consisted of five schedules: Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Social Statistics, and Manufacturing.
The Census of 1890 was authorized by an act modeled after the 1880 enumeration and signed into law on March 1, 1889. The 1890 Census was supervised by 175 employees and enumerators were required to collect all information by personally visiting each household. The 1890 Census included essentially the same inquires from the 1880 Census, with some notable additions, such as questions about home and farm ownership and indebtedness; and the names, units, length of service, and residences of former Union soldiers and sailors, as well as the names of the widows of those who were no longer alive. Racial categorization was expanded to include "Japanese", along with "Chinese", "Negro", "mulatto", "quadroon", "octoroon", and "White". Herman Hollerith, a former employee of the U.S. Census Office, invited the electric tabulating system, which was widely used in the 1890 Census, allowing data to be processed faster and more efficiently. On October 3, 1893, Congress passed a law that transferred census-related work to the direction of the commissioner of labor. Congress passed another act on March 2, 1895, effectively abolishing the U.S. Census Office and transferring the remaining responsibilities to the Office of the Secretary of the Interior.
Congress limited the Census of 1900 to content related to population, mortality, agriculture, and manufacturing. Special census agents were authorized to collect statistics related to incidents of deafness, blindness, insanity, and juvenile delinquency; as well as data on religious bodies, utilities, mining, and transportation. The act authorizing the 1900 Census designated the enumeration of military personally to the U.S. Department of War and the U.S. Department of the Navy, while Indiana Territory was to be enumerated by the commissioner of Indian Affairs. Annexed in 1898, Hawaii was included in the census for the first time. In 1902, the U.S. Census Office was officially established as a permanent organization within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The office became the U.S. Census Bureau in 1903 and was transferred to the Department of Commerce and Labor.
The Census of 1910 was approved by legislation introduced in December of 1907 and enacted in July of 1909. The delay was the result of a disagreement over the appointment of enumerators. President Theodore Roosevelt supported the hiring of enumerators via the civil service system, while Congress supported enumerators as positions of patronage. President Roosevelt successfully won the debate. This census act also changed Census Day from the traditional date of June 1st to April 15th. Additional questions regarding the nationality and native language of foreign-born persons and their parents. Funds for the U.S. Census Bureau were also increased to expand the Census' permanent workforce and created several new full-time positions, including a geographer, a chief statistician, and an assistant director. The assistant director was to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, while all other census employees were hired on the basis of open, competitive examinations administered by the Civil Service Commission. Despite the use of automatic counting machinery, issues with the tabulation process persisted. Finally, with the United States' entrance into World War I in 1917, the U.S. Census Bureau became a source of even more valuable purpose: the Census was able to use population and economic data to report on the populations of draft-age men, as well as information regarding each state's industrial capabilities.
The Census of 1920 changed the date of Census Day from April 15th to January 1st, as requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which argued that farmers' memories and harvest information would be more accurate on this day. The U.S. Census Bureau was also authorized to hire additional employees at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and to create a special field force to collect census data. The legislation authorizing the 1920 Census also allowed for a census of manufacturing to be conducted in 1921, and for such a census to be repeated every two years thereafter, as opposed to the traditional five-year census cycle. Furthermore, a census of agriculture and livestock was to be conducted in 1925 and to be repeated every ten years thereafter. In addition, penalties for those who refused to supply information or those who supplied false information were strengthened. As a result of these changes, census of population, manufacturing, and agriculture and livestock became increasingly independent of one another.
The "usual place of abode", the location where residents regularly slept, instead of where they worked or were visiting, became the new basis for enumeration in the 1920 Census. Those with no permanent or regular residence were listed as residents of the location that they were enumerated at. Enumeration related to institutional inmates and dependent, defective, and delinquent classes were also modified. Unlike the previous census, the 1920 Census did not have inquires related to unemployment, to Union or Confederate Army or Navy service, to the number of children born, or to the length of time that a couple had been married. The Census of 1920, however, did include four additional questions: one regarding year of naturalization and three regarding native languages. Issues also arose as a result of changes in international boundaries following World War I, particularly for persons declaring birth or parental birth in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, or Turkey. In response, enumerators were required to ask said persons for their province, state, or region of birth. Enumerators were not required to ask individuals how to spell their names, nor were respondents required to provide proof of various pieces of information. Race was determined by the enumerator's impressions.
The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for a census of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their territory. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demands and the bureau was accused of present unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.
Congress authorized the 1940 Census in August 1939, providing the Director of the Census the additional authority to conduct a national census of housing in each state, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Alaska. The housing census was conducted separately, though enumerators often collection housing information at the same time that they collected population information. The Census of 1940 was the first time that the U.S. Census Bureau used advanced statistical techniques. In particular, the census used probably sampling, which had only previously been tested in a trial census of unemployment conducted the Civil Works Administration during 1933-1934, in surveys of retail stores in the 1930s, and in an official sample survey of unemployment conducted amongst two percent of American households in 1937. Probability sampling allowed for the inclusion of additional demographic questions without increasing the burden on the collection process or on data processing. Moreover, sampling the U.S. Census Bureau was able to publish preliminary returns eight months before tabulations were completed. Likewise, the census increased its number of published tables, and also was able to complete data processing with higher quality and more efficiency. New census questions focused on employment, unemployment, internal migration, and incomes—reflecting on the concerns of the Great Depression, the country's housing stock, and the need for public housing programs.
The Census of 1950 encompassed every state, Alaska, Hawaii, American Samoa, the Panama Canal Zone, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other small American territories. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau enumerate American living abroad to account for members of the U.S. Armed Forces, vessel crew members, and government employees residing in foreign countries. The U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Maritime Administration, and several other federal agencies were responsible for distributing and collecting census questionnaires in a cooperative effort. Persons living abroad for reasons other than what is listed above had their census information reported by families or neighbors residing in the United States, but such data was criticized as unreliable and were not published in official statistics. The 1950 Census also included a new survey on residential financing collected separately on a sample basis from owners of owner-occupied properties, rental properties, and mortgage lenders. The accuracy of the new census was increased by improved enumerator training, the use of detailed street maps for enumerators, the publication of "Missed Person" forms in local newspapers, and the designation of a specific night to conduct a special enumeration of transient individuals. Moreover, a post-enumeration survey was conducted to further verify the accuracy of the original enumeration. A sample of approximately 3,500 small areas was compared to the original census data to identify households that may have been omitted initially. Likewise, a sample of approximately 22,000 households were re-interviewed to identify persons omitted in the original enumeration count. Though not used for the 1950 Census, the UNIVersal Automatic Computer I (UNIVAC I), the first non-military computer, was used to tabulate some of the statistics for the 1954 census of economy. In August of 1954, Congress codified various census statutes, such as the Fifteenth Census Act of 1929, authorizing the decennial census and other census.
The Census of 1960 was the first to be mailed to respondents. The U.S. Postal Service delivered census questionnaires to households, the head of household was required to complete the questionnaire, and an enumerator was to pick it up. The enumeration process was divided into two stages: first, select data for each person and dwelling unit was collected; and second, more detailed economic and social data was collected from a sample of households and dwelling units. The census questionnaires for the second stage were hand-delivered by enumerators as they were collecting data from the first stage. Households receiving the second census questionnaire were to complete the form and mail it to their local census office. Twenty-five percent of the population was giving additional sample questions. Because of the increased use of sampling, less populated areas were prone to sampling variation; however, this did not significantly decrease the usefulness of census statistics gathered. Moreover, increased use of sampling reduced data processing costs. Additional questions included in the 1960 Census were related to places of works and means of transportation to work. By 1960, nearly all census data was processed using computers. The U.S. Census Bureau used a Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer (FOSDIC) for the first time, thus decreasing the amount of time and money required for data input.
In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.
Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, were an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and used for a 17 percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.
Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in 6 languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100 percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process by instead following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census. Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Mosquito County, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Rights Holder
<span>This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:</span>
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul><span>This resources is provided here by </span><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a><span> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a><span> of </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a><span>.</span>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
<span>United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.</span>
<span>United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.</span>
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/" target="_blank">Through the Decades</a>." United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/.
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
1 table
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census for Central Florida, 1910
Alternative Title
Census, 1910
Subject
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Population--United States
Description
The Thirteenth United States Census records for Brevard County, Lake County, Marion County, Orange County (including present-day Seminole County), Osceola County, and Volusia County (including present-day Flagler County), Florida, for 1910. The census divides the population by gender, race ("white" and "black"), and native-born vs. foreign-born. Those who are foreign born are further divided by country of origin. The census then lists the illiterate population categorized by age, race, gender, and school attendance. The census also collected information on agriculture.<br /><br />The Census of 1910 was approved by legislation introduced in December of 1907 and enacted in July of 1909. The delay was the result of a disagreement over the appointment of enumerators. President Theodore Roosevelt (1858-1919) supported the hiring of enumerators via the civil service system, while Congress supported enumerators as positions of patronage. President Roosevelt successfully won the debate. This census act also changed Census Day from the traditional date of June 1st to April 15th. Additional questions regarding the nationality and native language of foreign-born persons and their parents. Funds for the U.S. Census Bureau were also increased to expand the Census' permanent workforce and created several new full-time positions, including a geographer, a chief statistician, and an assistant director. The assistant director was to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, while all other census employees were hired on the basis of open, competitive examinations administered by the Civil Service Commission. Despite the use of automatic counting machinery, issues with the tabulation process persisted. Finally, with the United States' entrance into World War I in 1917, the U.S. Census Bureau became a source of even more valuable purpose: the Census was able to use population and economic data to report on the populations of draft-age men, as well as information regarding each state's industrial capabilities.
Type
Dataset
Source
Original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1910.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/104" target="_blank">U.S. Census Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1910.
Coverage
Brevard County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Creator
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>
Publisher
<a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Date Created
ca. 1910-04-15
Format
image/jpg
Extent
874 KB
Medium
1 table
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a> and published by the <a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>.
Rights Holder
This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form;</li>
<li>create derivative works;</li>
<li>perform the work publicly;</li>
<li>display the work;</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul>
This resources is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a> of <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a>.
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1910.html" target="_blank">1910 Overview</a>." U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1910.html.
United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.
United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1910. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.
Transcript
U.S. Census of 1910
Population
Brevard County* Lake County Marion County Orange County** Osceola County Volusia County***
Population Total 5,158 7,467 24,403 11,374 3,444 10,003
Males 2,842 3,959 12,918 5,767 1,783 5,153
Females 2,316 3,508 11,485 5,607 1,661 4,850
White Population Total 4,003 4,829 9,356 7,347 3,013 6,538
Males 2,188 2,474 4,927 3,698 1,547 3,323
Females 1,815 2,355 4,429 3,649 1,466 3,215
Black Population Total 1,074 2,636 15,047 4,027 431 3,464
Males 613 1,484 7,991 2,069 236 1,829
Females 461 1,152 7,056 1,958 195 1,635
Native-Born Population Total 4,796 7,220 24,058 10,769 3,369 9,538
Males 2,608 3,816 12,704 5,432 1,732 4,904
Females 2,188 3,404 11,354 5,337 1,637 4,634
Foreign-Born Population Total 362 247 345 605 75 465
Males 234 143 214 335 51 249
Females 128 104 131 270 24 216
Foreign-Born Population by Country of Origin English Canada 31 43 44 42 3 68
Cuba 1 1 23 0 0 0
Denmark 57 4 4 3 2 1
England 96 112 84 184 38 131
France 3 4 18 11 1 4
Germany 58 31 57 117 6 96
Ireland 30 8 13 31 8 30
Italy 4 0 22 14 4 0
Norway 15 1 1 3 0 2
Russia 3 3 5 4 0 1
Scotland 18 22 13 31 7 15
Spain 0 0 2 0 1 0
Sweden 18 10 8 115 0 72
West Indies 13 18 2 0 11
Other Countries 17 8 33 48 5 34
Education
Brevard County* Lake County Marion County Orange County** Osceola County Volusia County***
Illiterate Population, Aged 10+ Total 265 765 3,937 993 315 899
White 50 132 180 257 183 149
Colored 206 633 3,757 736 132 750
Total 149 631 9,757 736 132 750
Male Population, Aged 21+ Illiterate 109 354 1,797 377 119 386
Literate 1,590 1,833 4,955 2,808 714 2,441
Agriculture
Brevard County* Lake County Marion County Orange County** Osceola County Volusia County***
Farms Total 615 848 2,520 1,218 354 430
Farmers by Ownership, Management, and Tenure Full Owners 479 576 1,824 779 312 362
Part Owners 11 116 228 79 7 22
Owners and Tenants 2 1 19 2 0 0
Farm Managers 99 102 85 279 1 32
Cash Tenants 12 40 228 58 26 10
Share Tenants 12 13 136 21 8 4
White Farmers by Ownership, Management, and Tenure Total 579 784 1,246 1,132 351 399
Full Owners 458 542 894 732 309 338
Part Owners 7 106 98 69 7 19
Owners and Tenants 2 0 12 2 0 0
Farm Managers 89 91 78 271 1 31
Cash Tenants 11 33 103 40 26 7
Share Tenants 12 12 60 18 8 4
Colored Farmers by Ownership, Management, and Tenure Total 36 64 1,274 86 3 31
Full Owners 21 34 930 47 3 24
Part Owners 4 10 130 10 0 3
Owners and Tenants 0 1 6 0 0 0
Farm Managers 10 11 7 8 0 1
Cash Tenants 1 7 125 18 0 3
Share Tenants 0 1 76 3 0 0
Acres of Farm Land Improved Farm Land 7,290 22,171 72,755 20,790 5,251 10,741
Unimproved Farm Land 30,823 65,928 128,717 64,719 48,875 36,017
Farms by Acreage 1-2 19 24 15 51 99 3
3-9 104 64 216 180 21 41
10-19 140 115 403 202 21 60
20-49 166 245 784 359 111 140
50-99 80 177 556 204 50 69
100-174 65 127 322 145 20 65
175-259 20 52 117 36 9 21
260-499 13 28 76 31 8 16
500-999 5 11 22 7 7 5
1,000+ 3 5 9 3 8 10
Acres of Farm Land Improved Farm Land 7,290 22,171 72,755 20,790 5,251 10,741
Unimproved Farm Land 30,823 65,928 128,717 64,719 48,875 36,017
Value of Land and Buildings on Farms Farm Buildings $483,590 $400,610 $704,230 $659,570 $66,130 $316,640
Farm Implements and Machinery $26,440 $46,840 $112,030 $71,580 $11,030 $32,330
Farm Products $207,942 $227,451 $227,451 $355,891 $229,068 $178,869
Livestock $160,625 $176,259 $176,259 $362,058 $783,030 $220,568
"*Includes present-day St, Lucie County
**Includes present-day Seminole County
***Includes present-day Flagler County"
African Americans
agriculture
Brevard County
British Americans
Canadian Americans
Caribbean Americans
Caucasian Americans
census
Census of 1910
Cuban Americans
Danish Americans
education
English Americans
European Americans
farm managers
farming implements
farmland
farms
females
French Americans
German Americans
illiteracy
Irish Americans
Italian Americans
Lake County
Latin Americans
literacy
livestock
machinery
males
Marion County
Norwegian Americans
orange county
Osceola County
population
Russian Americans
Scandinavian Americans
Scotch Americans
Scottish Americans
sharecropping
Spanish Americans
Swedish Americans
tenant farmers
tenant farming
U.S. Census
Volusia County
West Indian Americans
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/8cd9ed4bdc90b01922a119368548b64b.jpg
0944b913e80e3709b97682bb699514b7
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census Collection
Alternative Title
Census Collection
Subject
Census--United States
Population--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Description
Collection of United States Census population records for various counties in Central Florida from 1840 to 2000.
The Census Act of 1840 was signed into law on March 3, 1839 and later amended on February 26, 1840. This piece of legislation established a centralized census office during each enumeration. Congress designated the census questionnaire designs to the Secretary of State. However, each household received inquiries regarding "the pursuits, industry, education, and resources of the country" and included questions related to school attendance, literacy, and vocation.
In March of 1849, Congress pass legislation that established a census board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Postmaster General. The board was responsible for preparing and printing forms and schedules for enumeration related to population, mining, agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, education, etc. The 1850 Census also increased population inquiries to include every free person's name (as opposed to just the head of the household), as well as information on taxes, schools, crime, wages, estate values, etc.
The Census Act of 1850 authorized the U.S. Census of 1860 and stipulated that its provisions be adhered to for all future decennial censuses should no new legislation be passed by the first of the year of said census. In May of 1865, the U.S. Census Office was abolished and many superintending clerks were transferred to the General Land Office.
Although the 1870 Census was conducted under the provisions of the Census Act of 1850, a new act was passed on May 6, 1870. The new census legislation required two changes in procedures related to questionnaire return submission dates. Moreover, penalties for refusing to reply to inquires were expanded to apply to all questions and questionnaires. The questionnaires themselves had to be redesigned due to the end of the "slave questionnaire", as slavery had been formally abolished slavery nationwide via the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This left five schedules for the census: General Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Products of Industry, and Social Statistics. In addition, the use of a Charles W. Seaton, a U.S. Census Office chief clerk and later superintendent, invited a rudimentary tallying machine that partially alleviated the difficulties of tallying and tabulating questionnaire responses. Finally, the new superintendent for the Ninth Census, General Francis A. Walker, introduced employment examinations to test the qualifications of applicants to the Census Office, allowing for increased efficiency in the process of collecting census data.
The newest act authorizing the Census of 1880 provided for supervision of enumeration by "supervisors of the census", selected exclusively for the collection of census data. All supervisors, as well as the superintendent, were to appointed by the U.S. President and approved by the Senate. Census enumerators were required to personally visit each household and family within his subdivision. The new census act also allowed for the collection of data related to the condition and operation of railroad corporations, incorporated express companies, and telegraph companies, as well as data related to the condition and operation of life, fire, and marine insurance companies. Corporations who refused to provide the census with "true and complete" answers were subject to fines. In addition, the census superintendent was required to collect and publish data on the population, industries and resources of the District of Alaska. Finally, the 1880 Census consisted of five schedules: Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Social Statistics, and Manufacturing.
The Census of 1890 was authorized by an act modeled after the 1880 enumeration and signed into law on March 1, 1889. The 1890 Census was supervised by 175 employees and enumerators were required to collect all information by personally visiting each household. The 1890 Census included essentially the same inquires from the 1880 Census, with some notable additions, such as questions about home and farm ownership and indebtedness; and the names, units, length of service, and residences of former Union soldiers and sailors, as well as the names of the widows of those who were no longer alive. Racial categorization was expanded to include "Japanese", along with "Chinese", "Negro", "mulatto", "quadroon", "octoroon", and "White". Herman Hollerith, a former employee of the U.S. Census Office, invited the electric tabulating system, which was widely used in the 1890 Census, allowing data to be processed faster and more efficiently. On October 3, 1893, Congress passed a law that transferred census-related work to the direction of the commissioner of labor. Congress passed another act on March 2, 1895, effectively abolishing the U.S. Census Office and transferring the remaining responsibilities to the Office of the Secretary of the Interior.
Congress limited the Census of 1900 to content related to population, mortality, agriculture, and manufacturing. Special census agents were authorized to collect statistics related to incidents of deafness, blindness, insanity, and juvenile delinquency; as well as data on religious bodies, utilities, mining, and transportation. The act authorizing the 1900 Census designated the enumeration of military personally to the U.S. Department of War and the U.S. Department of the Navy, while Indiana Territory was to be enumerated by the commissioner of Indian Affairs. Annexed in 1898, Hawaii was included in the census for the first time. In 1902, the U.S. Census Office was officially established as a permanent organization within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The office became the U.S. Census Bureau in 1903 and was transferred to the Department of Commerce and Labor.
The Census of 1910 was approved by legislation introduced in December of 1907 and enacted in July of 1909. The delay was the result of a disagreement over the appointment of enumerators. President Theodore Roosevelt supported the hiring of enumerators via the civil service system, while Congress supported enumerators as positions of patronage. President Roosevelt successfully won the debate. This census act also changed Census Day from the traditional date of June 1st to April 15th. Additional questions regarding the nationality and native language of foreign-born persons and their parents. Funds for the U.S. Census Bureau were also increased to expand the Census' permanent workforce and created several new full-time positions, including a geographer, a chief statistician, and an assistant director. The assistant director was to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, while all other census employees were hired on the basis of open, competitive examinations administered by the Civil Service Commission. Despite the use of automatic counting machinery, issues with the tabulation process persisted. Finally, with the United States' entrance into World War I in 1917, the U.S. Census Bureau became a source of even more valuable purpose: the Census was able to use population and economic data to report on the populations of draft-age men, as well as information regarding each state's industrial capabilities.
The Census of 1920 changed the date of Census Day from April 15th to January 1st, as requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which argued that farmers' memories and harvest information would be more accurate on this day. The U.S. Census Bureau was also authorized to hire additional employees at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and to create a special field force to collect census data. The legislation authorizing the 1920 Census also allowed for a census of manufacturing to be conducted in 1921, and for such a census to be repeated every two years thereafter, as opposed to the traditional five-year census cycle. Furthermore, a census of agriculture and livestock was to be conducted in 1925 and to be repeated every ten years thereafter. In addition, penalties for those who refused to supply information or those who supplied false information were strengthened. As a result of these changes, census of population, manufacturing, and agriculture and livestock became increasingly independent of one another.
The "usual place of abode", the location where residents regularly slept, instead of where they worked or were visiting, became the new basis for enumeration in the 1920 Census. Those with no permanent or regular residence were listed as residents of the location that they were enumerated at. Enumeration related to institutional inmates and dependent, defective, and delinquent classes were also modified. Unlike the previous census, the 1920 Census did not have inquires related to unemployment, to Union or Confederate Army or Navy service, to the number of children born, or to the length of time that a couple had been married. The Census of 1920, however, did include four additional questions: one regarding year of naturalization and three regarding native languages. Issues also arose as a result of changes in international boundaries following World War I, particularly for persons declaring birth or parental birth in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, or Turkey. In response, enumerators were required to ask said persons for their province, state, or region of birth. Enumerators were not required to ask individuals how to spell their names, nor were respondents required to provide proof of various pieces of information. Race was determined by the enumerator's impressions.
The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for a census of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their territory. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demands and the bureau was accused of present unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.
Congress authorized the 1940 Census in August 1939, providing the Director of the Census the additional authority to conduct a national census of housing in each state, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Alaska. The housing census was conducted separately, though enumerators often collection housing information at the same time that they collected population information. The Census of 1940 was the first time that the U.S. Census Bureau used advanced statistical techniques. In particular, the census used probably sampling, which had only previously been tested in a trial census of unemployment conducted the Civil Works Administration during 1933-1934, in surveys of retail stores in the 1930s, and in an official sample survey of unemployment conducted amongst two percent of American households in 1937. Probability sampling allowed for the inclusion of additional demographic questions without increasing the burden on the collection process or on data processing. Moreover, sampling the U.S. Census Bureau was able to publish preliminary returns eight months before tabulations were completed. Likewise, the census increased its number of published tables, and also was able to complete data processing with higher quality and more efficiency. New census questions focused on employment, unemployment, internal migration, and incomes—reflecting on the concerns of the Great Depression, the country's housing stock, and the need for public housing programs.
The Census of 1950 encompassed every state, Alaska, Hawaii, American Samoa, the Panama Canal Zone, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other small American territories. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau enumerate American living abroad to account for members of the U.S. Armed Forces, vessel crew members, and government employees residing in foreign countries. The U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Maritime Administration, and several other federal agencies were responsible for distributing and collecting census questionnaires in a cooperative effort. Persons living abroad for reasons other than what is listed above had their census information reported by families or neighbors residing in the United States, but such data was criticized as unreliable and were not published in official statistics. The 1950 Census also included a new survey on residential financing collected separately on a sample basis from owners of owner-occupied properties, rental properties, and mortgage lenders. The accuracy of the new census was increased by improved enumerator training, the use of detailed street maps for enumerators, the publication of "Missed Person" forms in local newspapers, and the designation of a specific night to conduct a special enumeration of transient individuals. Moreover, a post-enumeration survey was conducted to further verify the accuracy of the original enumeration. A sample of approximately 3,500 small areas was compared to the original census data to identify households that may have been omitted initially. Likewise, a sample of approximately 22,000 households were re-interviewed to identify persons omitted in the original enumeration count. Though not used for the 1950 Census, the UNIVersal Automatic Computer I (UNIVAC I), the first non-military computer, was used to tabulate some of the statistics for the 1954 census of economy. In August of 1954, Congress codified various census statutes, such as the Fifteenth Census Act of 1929, authorizing the decennial census and other census.
The Census of 1960 was the first to be mailed to respondents. The U.S. Postal Service delivered census questionnaires to households, the head of household was required to complete the questionnaire, and an enumerator was to pick it up. The enumeration process was divided into two stages: first, select data for each person and dwelling unit was collected; and second, more detailed economic and social data was collected from a sample of households and dwelling units. The census questionnaires for the second stage were hand-delivered by enumerators as they were collecting data from the first stage. Households receiving the second census questionnaire were to complete the form and mail it to their local census office. Twenty-five percent of the population was giving additional sample questions. Because of the increased use of sampling, less populated areas were prone to sampling variation; however, this did not significantly decrease the usefulness of census statistics gathered. Moreover, increased use of sampling reduced data processing costs. Additional questions included in the 1960 Census were related to places of works and means of transportation to work. By 1960, nearly all census data was processed using computers. The U.S. Census Bureau used a Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer (FOSDIC) for the first time, thus decreasing the amount of time and money required for data input.
In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.
Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, were an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and used for a 17 percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.
Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in 6 languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100 percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process by instead following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census. Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Mosquito County, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Rights Holder
<span>This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:</span>
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul><span>This resources is provided here by </span><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a><span> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a><span> of </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a><span>.</span>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
<span>United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.</span>
<span>United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.</span>
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/" target="_blank">Through the Decades</a>." United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/.
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
1 table
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census for Central Florida, 1900
Alternative Title
Census, 1900
Subject
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Population--United States
Description
The Twelfth United States Census records for Brevard County, Lake County, Marion County, Orange County (including present-day Seminole County), Osceola County, and Volusia County (including present-day Flagler County), Florida, for 1900. The census divides the population by gender, race ("white" and "black"), and native-born vs. foreign-born. Those who are foreign born are further divided by country of origin. The census then lists the illiterate population categorized by age, race, and gender. The census also collected information on agriculture and on manufacturing. <br /><br /> Congress limited the Census of 1900 to content related to population, mortality, agriculture, and manufacturing. Special census agents were authorized to collect statistics related to incidents of deafness, blindness, insanity, and juvenile delinquency; as well as data on religious bodies, utilities, mining, and transportation. The act authorizing the 1900 Census designated the enumeration of military personally to the U.S. Department of War and the U.S. Department of the Navy, while Indiana Territory was to be enumerated by the Commissioner of Indian Affairs. Annexed in 1898, Hawaii was included in the census for the first time. In 1902, the U.S. Census Office was officially established as a permanent organization within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The office became the U.S. Census Bureau in 1903 and was transferred to the Department of Commerce and Labor.
Type
Dataset
Source
Original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a> and the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1900.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/104" target="_blank">U.S. Census Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a> and the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1900.
Coverage
Brevard County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Creator
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a>
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>
Publisher
<a href="http://www.doi.gov/index.cfm/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of the Interior</a>
<a href="https://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce and Labor</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Date Created
ca. 1900-06-01
Format
image/jpg
Extent
787 KB
Medium
1 table
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a> and the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, and published by the <a href="http://www.doi.gov/index.cfm/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of the Interior</a> and the <a href="https://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce and Labor</a>.
Rights Holder
This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form;</li>
<li>create derivative works;</li>
<li>perform the work publicly;</li>
<li>display the work;</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul>
This resources is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a> of <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a>.
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1900.html" target="_blank">1900 Overview</a>." U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1900.html.
United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.
United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.
Transcript
U.S. Census of 1900
Population
Brevard County* Lake County Marion County Orange County** Osceola County Volusia County***
Population Total 5,158 7,467 24,403 11,374 3,44 10,003
Males 2,842 3,959 12,918 5,767 1,783 5,153
Females 2,316 3,508 11,485 5,607 1,611 4,850
White Population Total 4,003 4,829 9,356 7,347 3,013 6,538
Males 2,188 2,474 4,927 3,698 1,547 3,323
Females 1,815 2,355 4,429 3,649 1,466 3,215
Black Population Total 1,074 2,636 15,047 4,027 431 3,464
Males 613 1,484 7,991 2,069 236 1,829
Females 461 1,152 7,056 1,958 195 1,635
Native-Born Population Total 4,796 7,220 24,058 10,769 3,369 9,538
Males 2,608 3,816 12,704 5,432 1,732 4,904
Females 2,188 3,404 11,354 5,337 1,637 4,634
Foreign-Born Population Total 362 247 345 605 75 465
Males 234 143 214 335 51 249
Females 128 104 131 270 24 216
Foreign-Born Population by Country of Origin English Canada 31 43 44 42 3 68
Cuba 1 1 23 0 0 0
Denmark 57 4 4 3 2 1
England 96 112 84 184 38 131
France 3 4 18 11 1 4
Germany 58 31 57 117 6 96
Ireland 30 8 13 31 8 30
Italy 4 0 22 14 4 0
Norway 15 1 1 3 0 2
Russia 3 3 5 4 0 1
Scotland 18 22 13 31 7 15
Spain 0 0 2 0 1 0
West Indies 13 0 18 2 0 11
Other Countries 17 8 33 48 5 34
Illiteracy
Brevard County* Lake County Marion County Orange County** Osceola County Volusia County***
Illiterate Population, Aged 10+ Total 265 765 3,937 993 315 899
White 50 132 180 257 183 149
Colored 206 633 3,757 736 132 750
Black 149 631 9,757 736 132 750
Males, Aged 21+ Illiterate 109 354 1,797 377 119 386
Literate 1,590 1,833 4,955 2,808 714 2,441
Agriculture
Brevard County* Lake County Marion County Orange County** Osceola County Volusia County***
Farms by Acreage Total 615 848 2,520 1,218 354 430
1-2 19 24 15 51 99 3
3-9 104 64 216 180 21 41
10-19 140 115 403 202 21 60
20-49 166 245 784 359 111 140
50-99 80 177 556 204 50 69
100-174 65 127 322 145 20 65
175-259 20 52 117 36 9 21
260-499 13 28 76 31 8 16
500-999 5 11 22 7 7 5
1,000+ 3 5 9 3 8 10
Farm Owners Full Owners 479 576 1,824 779 312 362
Part-Owners 11 116 228 79 7 22
Owners and Tenants of Farms Total 2 1 19 2 0 0
Farm Managers Total 99 102 85 279 1 32
Tenants Cash Tenants 12 40 228 58 26 10
Share Tenants 12 13 136 21 8 4
White Farmers Total 579 784 1,246 1,132 351 39
Farm Owners 458 542 894 732 309 338
Part-Owners of Farms 7 106 98 69 7 19
Owners and Tenants of Farms 2 0 12 2 0 0
Farm Managers 89 91 78 271 1 31
Cash Tenants 11 33 103 40 26 7
Share Tenants 12 12 60 18 8 4
Colored Farmers Total 36 64 1,274 86 3 31
Farm Owners 21 34 930 47 3 24
Part-Owners of Farms 4 10 130 10 0 3
Owners and Tenants of Farms 0 1 6 0 0 0
Farm Managers 10 11 7 8 0 1
Cash Tenants 1 7 125 18 0 3
Share Tenants 0 1 76 3 0 0
Acres Land on Farms Improved Land 2,311 22,219 65,315 24,561 1,803 16,185
Unimproved Land 15,544 101,317 144,702 82,711 4,963 48,402
Present Cash Value of Farming Implements and Machinery Total $4,170 $60,060 $92,940 $82,070 $2,910 $42,010
Value of Livestock Total $36,360 $153,910 $487,460 $214,490 $47,930 $231,640
Bushels of Agricultural Products Produced Total N/A $27,811 $217,941 $12,702 $4,192 $10,611
Indian Corn N/A $26,338 $166,481 11,870 $4,192 $10,611
Oats N/A $1,381 $41,820 $832 $0 $0
Rye N/A $84 $9,640 $0 $0 $0
Manufacturing
Brevard County* Lake County Marion County Orange County** Osceola County Volusia County***
Manufacturing Establishments Total 17 47 97 57 11 51
Capital Invested in Manufacturing Total $124,209 $331,703 $1,300,901 $726,223 $38,755 $390,364
Capital Invested in Plant Land of Manufacturing Establishments Plant Land $5,500 134,482 $596,203 $168,731 $16,700 $120,457
Building of Manufacturing Establishments $22,050 $27,507 $85,330 $79,582 $1,310 $32,627
Machinery, Tools, and Equipment $67,357 $72,542 $321,929 $276,081 $7,995 $138,120
Cash and Sundries $29,302 $97,172 $297,439 $201,829 $12,750 $99,160
"*Includes present-day St, Lucie County
**Includes present-day Seminole County
***Includes present-day Flagler County
African Americans
agriculture
Brevard County
British Americans
Canadian Americans
capital
Caribbean Americans
census
Census of 1900
corn
Cuban Americans
Danish Americans
English Americans
European Americans
farm managers
farmers
farming implements
farmings
farmland
females
French Americans
German Americans
Hispanic Americans
illiteracy
Indian corn
investments
Irish Americans
Italian Americans
Lake County
Latin Americans
Latinas
Latinos
literacy
livestock
machinery
males
manufacturing
Marion County
Norwegian Americans
oats
orange county
Osceola County
population
Russian Americans
rye
Scandinavian Americans
Scotch Americans
Scottish Americans
Spanish Americans
sundries
tenant farming
tenants
U.S. Census
Volusia County
West Indian Americans
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/06986ab371e1b80c8cc662cca7f2fd46.jpg
c924774d8aff6d620459ed7d9ea3eeb7
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census Collection
Alternative Title
Census Collection
Subject
Census--United States
Population--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Description
Collection of United States Census population records for various counties in Central Florida from 1840 to 2000.
The Census Act of 1840 was signed into law on March 3, 1839 and later amended on February 26, 1840. This piece of legislation established a centralized census office during each enumeration. Congress designated the census questionnaire designs to the Secretary of State. However, each household received inquiries regarding "the pursuits, industry, education, and resources of the country" and included questions related to school attendance, literacy, and vocation.
In March of 1849, Congress pass legislation that established a census board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Postmaster General. The board was responsible for preparing and printing forms and schedules for enumeration related to population, mining, agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, education, etc. The 1850 Census also increased population inquiries to include every free person's name (as opposed to just the head of the household), as well as information on taxes, schools, crime, wages, estate values, etc.
The Census Act of 1850 authorized the U.S. Census of 1860 and stipulated that its provisions be adhered to for all future decennial censuses should no new legislation be passed by the first of the year of said census. In May of 1865, the U.S. Census Office was abolished and many superintending clerks were transferred to the General Land Office.
Although the 1870 Census was conducted under the provisions of the Census Act of 1850, a new act was passed on May 6, 1870. The new census legislation required two changes in procedures related to questionnaire return submission dates. Moreover, penalties for refusing to reply to inquires were expanded to apply to all questions and questionnaires. The questionnaires themselves had to be redesigned due to the end of the "slave questionnaire", as slavery had been formally abolished slavery nationwide via the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This left five schedules for the census: General Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Products of Industry, and Social Statistics. In addition, the use of a Charles W. Seaton, a U.S. Census Office chief clerk and later superintendent, invited a rudimentary tallying machine that partially alleviated the difficulties of tallying and tabulating questionnaire responses. Finally, the new superintendent for the Ninth Census, General Francis A. Walker, introduced employment examinations to test the qualifications of applicants to the Census Office, allowing for increased efficiency in the process of collecting census data.
The newest act authorizing the Census of 1880 provided for supervision of enumeration by "supervisors of the census", selected exclusively for the collection of census data. All supervisors, as well as the superintendent, were to appointed by the U.S. President and approved by the Senate. Census enumerators were required to personally visit each household and family within his subdivision. The new census act also allowed for the collection of data related to the condition and operation of railroad corporations, incorporated express companies, and telegraph companies, as well as data related to the condition and operation of life, fire, and marine insurance companies. Corporations who refused to provide the census with "true and complete" answers were subject to fines. In addition, the census superintendent was required to collect and publish data on the population, industries and resources of the District of Alaska. Finally, the 1880 Census consisted of five schedules: Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Social Statistics, and Manufacturing.
The Census of 1890 was authorized by an act modeled after the 1880 enumeration and signed into law on March 1, 1889. The 1890 Census was supervised by 175 employees and enumerators were required to collect all information by personally visiting each household. The 1890 Census included essentially the same inquires from the 1880 Census, with some notable additions, such as questions about home and farm ownership and indebtedness; and the names, units, length of service, and residences of former Union soldiers and sailors, as well as the names of the widows of those who were no longer alive. Racial categorization was expanded to include "Japanese", along with "Chinese", "Negro", "mulatto", "quadroon", "octoroon", and "White". Herman Hollerith, a former employee of the U.S. Census Office, invited the electric tabulating system, which was widely used in the 1890 Census, allowing data to be processed faster and more efficiently. On October 3, 1893, Congress passed a law that transferred census-related work to the direction of the commissioner of labor. Congress passed another act on March 2, 1895, effectively abolishing the U.S. Census Office and transferring the remaining responsibilities to the Office of the Secretary of the Interior.
Congress limited the Census of 1900 to content related to population, mortality, agriculture, and manufacturing. Special census agents were authorized to collect statistics related to incidents of deafness, blindness, insanity, and juvenile delinquency; as well as data on religious bodies, utilities, mining, and transportation. The act authorizing the 1900 Census designated the enumeration of military personally to the U.S. Department of War and the U.S. Department of the Navy, while Indiana Territory was to be enumerated by the commissioner of Indian Affairs. Annexed in 1898, Hawaii was included in the census for the first time. In 1902, the U.S. Census Office was officially established as a permanent organization within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The office became the U.S. Census Bureau in 1903 and was transferred to the Department of Commerce and Labor.
The Census of 1910 was approved by legislation introduced in December of 1907 and enacted in July of 1909. The delay was the result of a disagreement over the appointment of enumerators. President Theodore Roosevelt supported the hiring of enumerators via the civil service system, while Congress supported enumerators as positions of patronage. President Roosevelt successfully won the debate. This census act also changed Census Day from the traditional date of June 1st to April 15th. Additional questions regarding the nationality and native language of foreign-born persons and their parents. Funds for the U.S. Census Bureau were also increased to expand the Census' permanent workforce and created several new full-time positions, including a geographer, a chief statistician, and an assistant director. The assistant director was to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, while all other census employees were hired on the basis of open, competitive examinations administered by the Civil Service Commission. Despite the use of automatic counting machinery, issues with the tabulation process persisted. Finally, with the United States' entrance into World War I in 1917, the U.S. Census Bureau became a source of even more valuable purpose: the Census was able to use population and economic data to report on the populations of draft-age men, as well as information regarding each state's industrial capabilities.
The Census of 1920 changed the date of Census Day from April 15th to January 1st, as requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which argued that farmers' memories and harvest information would be more accurate on this day. The U.S. Census Bureau was also authorized to hire additional employees at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and to create a special field force to collect census data. The legislation authorizing the 1920 Census also allowed for a census of manufacturing to be conducted in 1921, and for such a census to be repeated every two years thereafter, as opposed to the traditional five-year census cycle. Furthermore, a census of agriculture and livestock was to be conducted in 1925 and to be repeated every ten years thereafter. In addition, penalties for those who refused to supply information or those who supplied false information were strengthened. As a result of these changes, census of population, manufacturing, and agriculture and livestock became increasingly independent of one another.
The "usual place of abode", the location where residents regularly slept, instead of where they worked or were visiting, became the new basis for enumeration in the 1920 Census. Those with no permanent or regular residence were listed as residents of the location that they were enumerated at. Enumeration related to institutional inmates and dependent, defective, and delinquent classes were also modified. Unlike the previous census, the 1920 Census did not have inquires related to unemployment, to Union or Confederate Army or Navy service, to the number of children born, or to the length of time that a couple had been married. The Census of 1920, however, did include four additional questions: one regarding year of naturalization and three regarding native languages. Issues also arose as a result of changes in international boundaries following World War I, particularly for persons declaring birth or parental birth in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, or Turkey. In response, enumerators were required to ask said persons for their province, state, or region of birth. Enumerators were not required to ask individuals how to spell their names, nor were respondents required to provide proof of various pieces of information. Race was determined by the enumerator's impressions.
The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for a census of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their territory. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demands and the bureau was accused of present unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.
Congress authorized the 1940 Census in August 1939, providing the Director of the Census the additional authority to conduct a national census of housing in each state, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Alaska. The housing census was conducted separately, though enumerators often collection housing information at the same time that they collected population information. The Census of 1940 was the first time that the U.S. Census Bureau used advanced statistical techniques. In particular, the census used probably sampling, which had only previously been tested in a trial census of unemployment conducted the Civil Works Administration during 1933-1934, in surveys of retail stores in the 1930s, and in an official sample survey of unemployment conducted amongst two percent of American households in 1937. Probability sampling allowed for the inclusion of additional demographic questions without increasing the burden on the collection process or on data processing. Moreover, sampling the U.S. Census Bureau was able to publish preliminary returns eight months before tabulations were completed. Likewise, the census increased its number of published tables, and also was able to complete data processing with higher quality and more efficiency. New census questions focused on employment, unemployment, internal migration, and incomes—reflecting on the concerns of the Great Depression, the country's housing stock, and the need for public housing programs.
The Census of 1950 encompassed every state, Alaska, Hawaii, American Samoa, the Panama Canal Zone, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other small American territories. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau enumerate American living abroad to account for members of the U.S. Armed Forces, vessel crew members, and government employees residing in foreign countries. The U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Maritime Administration, and several other federal agencies were responsible for distributing and collecting census questionnaires in a cooperative effort. Persons living abroad for reasons other than what is listed above had their census information reported by families or neighbors residing in the United States, but such data was criticized as unreliable and were not published in official statistics. The 1950 Census also included a new survey on residential financing collected separately on a sample basis from owners of owner-occupied properties, rental properties, and mortgage lenders. The accuracy of the new census was increased by improved enumerator training, the use of detailed street maps for enumerators, the publication of "Missed Person" forms in local newspapers, and the designation of a specific night to conduct a special enumeration of transient individuals. Moreover, a post-enumeration survey was conducted to further verify the accuracy of the original enumeration. A sample of approximately 3,500 small areas was compared to the original census data to identify households that may have been omitted initially. Likewise, a sample of approximately 22,000 households were re-interviewed to identify persons omitted in the original enumeration count. Though not used for the 1950 Census, the UNIVersal Automatic Computer I (UNIVAC I), the first non-military computer, was used to tabulate some of the statistics for the 1954 census of economy. In August of 1954, Congress codified various census statutes, such as the Fifteenth Census Act of 1929, authorizing the decennial census and other census.
The Census of 1960 was the first to be mailed to respondents. The U.S. Postal Service delivered census questionnaires to households, the head of household was required to complete the questionnaire, and an enumerator was to pick it up. The enumeration process was divided into two stages: first, select data for each person and dwelling unit was collected; and second, more detailed economic and social data was collected from a sample of households and dwelling units. The census questionnaires for the second stage were hand-delivered by enumerators as they were collecting data from the first stage. Households receiving the second census questionnaire were to complete the form and mail it to their local census office. Twenty-five percent of the population was giving additional sample questions. Because of the increased use of sampling, less populated areas were prone to sampling variation; however, this did not significantly decrease the usefulness of census statistics gathered. Moreover, increased use of sampling reduced data processing costs. Additional questions included in the 1960 Census were related to places of works and means of transportation to work. By 1960, nearly all census data was processed using computers. The U.S. Census Bureau used a Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer (FOSDIC) for the first time, thus decreasing the amount of time and money required for data input.
In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.
Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, were an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and used for a 17 percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.
Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in 6 languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100 percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process by instead following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census. Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Mosquito County, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Rights Holder
<span>This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:</span>
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul><span>This resources is provided here by </span><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a><span> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a><span> of </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a><span>.</span>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
<span>United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.</span>
<span>United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.</span>
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/" target="_blank">Through the Decades</a>." United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/.
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
1 table
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census for Central Florida, 1880
Alternative Title
Census, 1880
Subject
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Population--United States
Description
The Tenth United States Census records for Brevard County (including present-day St. Lucie County), Marion County, Orange County (including present-day Seminole County and parts of present-day Lake County, Osceola County, and Volusia County), and Volusia County (including present-day Flagler County), Florida, for 1880. The census divides the population by gender, race ("white", "colored", and "Indian"), and native-born vs. foreign-born. Those born outside of Florida are then divided by state or country of origin. The census also collected information on agriculture and on manufacturing.<br /><br />The newest act authorizing the Census of 1880 provided for supervision of enumeration by "supervisors of the census," selected exclusively for the collection of census data. All supervisors, as well as the superintendent, were to appointed by the President and approved by the Senate. Census enumerators were required to personally visit each household and family within his subdivision. The new census act also allowed for the collection of data related to the condition and operation of railroad corporations, incorporated express companies, and telegraph companies, as well as data related to the condition and operation of life, fire, and marine insurance companies. Corporations who refused to provide the census with "true and complete" answers were subject to fines. In addition, the census superintendent was required to collect and publish data on the population, industries and resources of the District of Alaska. Finally, the 1880 Census consisted of five schedules: Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Social Statistics, and Manufacturing.
Type
Dataset
Source
Original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a>, 1880.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/104" target="_blank">U.S. Census Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a>, 1880.
Coverage
Brevard County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Creator
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a>
Publisher
<a href="http://www.doi.gov/index.cfm/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of the Interior</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Date Created
ca. 1880-06-01
Format
image/jpg
Extent
589 KB
Medium
1 table
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a> and published by the <a href="http://www.doi.gov/index.cfm/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of the Interior</a>.
Rights Holder
This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul>
This resources is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a> of <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a>.
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1880.html" target="_blank">1880 Overview</a>." U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1880.html.
United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.
United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.
Transcript
U.S. Census of 1880
Population
Brevard County* Marion County Orange County** Volusia County***
Population Total 1,478 13,046 6,618 3,294
Males 819 6,580 3,863 1,796
Females 659 6,466 2,755 1,498
Population by Race White 1,379 4,471 5,595 2,756
Colored 84 8,305 1,023 538
Indian 15 0 0 0
Native-Born Population Total 1,421 12,958 6,315 3,167
Native-Born Population by State of Origin Alabama 38 337 164 31
Georgia 242 949 1,331 461
Massachusetts 9 27 95 58
New York 46 117 187 140
North Carolina 18 181 162 72
Pennsylvania 14 9 55 55
South Carolina 74 2,797 282 209
Tennessee 8 70 73 13
Virginia 5 101 133 23
Foreign-Born Population by Country of Origin Total 57 88 303 127
British America 5 13 44 20
Cuba 0 1 0 0
England and Wales 14 15 40 35
France 0 2 27 0
German Empire 13 14 38 11
Ireland 11 13 20 13
Scotland 6 3 7 11
Sweden and Norway 0 13 99 21
West Indies 2 1 2 9
Other Foreign Places 6 13 26 6
Agriculture
Brevard County* Marion County Orange County** Volusia County***
Farms by Ownership and Tenure Total 231 1,434 893 244
Owner-Operated 228 1,170 875 240
Rented for Fixed Money 3 142 8 1
Rented for Shares of Products 0 122 10 3
Farms by Acreage Less than 3 11 0 0 0
3-9 44 79 39 6
10-19 23 129 71 20
20-49 46 240 162 45
50-99 33 465 135 52
100-499 69 467 460 109
500-999 3 34 19 9
1000+ 2 20 7 3
Acres of Land in Farms Improved Land 1,956 52,888 19,024 6,108
Unimproved Land 20,070 163,650 123,241 36,316
Value of Farms Farmland, Fences, and Buildings $309,055 $1,294,066 $3,245,510 $745,910
Farming Machinery and Implements $6,823 $44,391 $30,512 $9,994
Livestock $204,051 $293,360 $174,228 $47,894
Cost of Buildings and Repairing Fences Total $3,442 $34,533 $11,890 $5,542
Bushels of Crops Produced Barley $0 $90 $0 $0
Indian Corn $6,186 186,917 26,727 12,672
Oats $100 $15,629 $1,412 $375
Rye $0 $21 $160 $10
Manufacturing
Brevard County* Marion County Orange County** Volusia County***
Manufacturing Establishments Total 1 15 12 4
Average Males Aged 16+ Employed in Manufacturing Total 2 38 50 9
Value of Products in Manufacturing Total $1,800 $46,381 $62,000 $21,944
Capital Invested in Manufacturing Total $1,000 $66,200 $24,500 $15,100
Value of Raw Materials in Manufacturing Total $1,025 $27,900 $33,175 $12,100
Annual Wages Paid in Manufacturing Total $300 $7,582 $8,740 $2,050
"*Includes present-day St, Lucie County
**Includes present-day Seminole County and parts of present-day Lake and Osceola counties
***Includes present-day Flagler County"
African Americans
Amerindians
Anglo Americans
barley
Brevard County
British Americans
capital
census
Census of 1880
corn
crops
Cuban Americans
employees
employment
English Americans
European Americans
farming implements
farmland
farms
females
French Americans
German Americans
Indian corn
Indians
investments
Irish Americans
labor
laborers
livestock
machinery
males
manufacturing
Marion County
Native Americans
Norwegian Americans
oats
orange county
population
raw materials
rye
Scandinavian Americans
Scotch Americans
Scottish Americans
Swedish Americans
U.S. Census
Volusia County
wages
Welsh Americans
West Indian Americans
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/eba79a2268eb5f407da13bc844c868e6.jpg
09bca50dad90ed5d7b3a667b96d18d1e
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census Collection
Alternative Title
Census Collection
Subject
Census--United States
Population--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Description
Collection of United States Census population records for various counties in Central Florida from 1840 to 2000.
The Census Act of 1840 was signed into law on March 3, 1839 and later amended on February 26, 1840. This piece of legislation established a centralized census office during each enumeration. Congress designated the census questionnaire designs to the Secretary of State. However, each household received inquiries regarding "the pursuits, industry, education, and resources of the country" and included questions related to school attendance, literacy, and vocation.
In March of 1849, Congress pass legislation that established a census board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Postmaster General. The board was responsible for preparing and printing forms and schedules for enumeration related to population, mining, agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, education, etc. The 1850 Census also increased population inquiries to include every free person's name (as opposed to just the head of the household), as well as information on taxes, schools, crime, wages, estate values, etc.
The Census Act of 1850 authorized the U.S. Census of 1860 and stipulated that its provisions be adhered to for all future decennial censuses should no new legislation be passed by the first of the year of said census. In May of 1865, the U.S. Census Office was abolished and many superintending clerks were transferred to the General Land Office.
Although the 1870 Census was conducted under the provisions of the Census Act of 1850, a new act was passed on May 6, 1870. The new census legislation required two changes in procedures related to questionnaire return submission dates. Moreover, penalties for refusing to reply to inquires were expanded to apply to all questions and questionnaires. The questionnaires themselves had to be redesigned due to the end of the "slave questionnaire", as slavery had been formally abolished slavery nationwide via the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This left five schedules for the census: General Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Products of Industry, and Social Statistics. In addition, the use of a Charles W. Seaton, a U.S. Census Office chief clerk and later superintendent, invited a rudimentary tallying machine that partially alleviated the difficulties of tallying and tabulating questionnaire responses. Finally, the new superintendent for the Ninth Census, General Francis A. Walker, introduced employment examinations to test the qualifications of applicants to the Census Office, allowing for increased efficiency in the process of collecting census data.
The newest act authorizing the Census of 1880 provided for supervision of enumeration by "supervisors of the census", selected exclusively for the collection of census data. All supervisors, as well as the superintendent, were to appointed by the U.S. President and approved by the Senate. Census enumerators were required to personally visit each household and family within his subdivision. The new census act also allowed for the collection of data related to the condition and operation of railroad corporations, incorporated express companies, and telegraph companies, as well as data related to the condition and operation of life, fire, and marine insurance companies. Corporations who refused to provide the census with "true and complete" answers were subject to fines. In addition, the census superintendent was required to collect and publish data on the population, industries and resources of the District of Alaska. Finally, the 1880 Census consisted of five schedules: Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Social Statistics, and Manufacturing.
The Census of 1890 was authorized by an act modeled after the 1880 enumeration and signed into law on March 1, 1889. The 1890 Census was supervised by 175 employees and enumerators were required to collect all information by personally visiting each household. The 1890 Census included essentially the same inquires from the 1880 Census, with some notable additions, such as questions about home and farm ownership and indebtedness; and the names, units, length of service, and residences of former Union soldiers and sailors, as well as the names of the widows of those who were no longer alive. Racial categorization was expanded to include "Japanese", along with "Chinese", "Negro", "mulatto", "quadroon", "octoroon", and "White". Herman Hollerith, a former employee of the U.S. Census Office, invited the electric tabulating system, which was widely used in the 1890 Census, allowing data to be processed faster and more efficiently. On October 3, 1893, Congress passed a law that transferred census-related work to the direction of the commissioner of labor. Congress passed another act on March 2, 1895, effectively abolishing the U.S. Census Office and transferring the remaining responsibilities to the Office of the Secretary of the Interior.
Congress limited the Census of 1900 to content related to population, mortality, agriculture, and manufacturing. Special census agents were authorized to collect statistics related to incidents of deafness, blindness, insanity, and juvenile delinquency; as well as data on religious bodies, utilities, mining, and transportation. The act authorizing the 1900 Census designated the enumeration of military personally to the U.S. Department of War and the U.S. Department of the Navy, while Indiana Territory was to be enumerated by the commissioner of Indian Affairs. Annexed in 1898, Hawaii was included in the census for the first time. In 1902, the U.S. Census Office was officially established as a permanent organization within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The office became the U.S. Census Bureau in 1903 and was transferred to the Department of Commerce and Labor.
The Census of 1910 was approved by legislation introduced in December of 1907 and enacted in July of 1909. The delay was the result of a disagreement over the appointment of enumerators. President Theodore Roosevelt supported the hiring of enumerators via the civil service system, while Congress supported enumerators as positions of patronage. President Roosevelt successfully won the debate. This census act also changed Census Day from the traditional date of June 1st to April 15th. Additional questions regarding the nationality and native language of foreign-born persons and their parents. Funds for the U.S. Census Bureau were also increased to expand the Census' permanent workforce and created several new full-time positions, including a geographer, a chief statistician, and an assistant director. The assistant director was to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, while all other census employees were hired on the basis of open, competitive examinations administered by the Civil Service Commission. Despite the use of automatic counting machinery, issues with the tabulation process persisted. Finally, with the United States' entrance into World War I in 1917, the U.S. Census Bureau became a source of even more valuable purpose: the Census was able to use population and economic data to report on the populations of draft-age men, as well as information regarding each state's industrial capabilities.
The Census of 1920 changed the date of Census Day from April 15th to January 1st, as requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which argued that farmers' memories and harvest information would be more accurate on this day. The U.S. Census Bureau was also authorized to hire additional employees at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and to create a special field force to collect census data. The legislation authorizing the 1920 Census also allowed for a census of manufacturing to be conducted in 1921, and for such a census to be repeated every two years thereafter, as opposed to the traditional five-year census cycle. Furthermore, a census of agriculture and livestock was to be conducted in 1925 and to be repeated every ten years thereafter. In addition, penalties for those who refused to supply information or those who supplied false information were strengthened. As a result of these changes, census of population, manufacturing, and agriculture and livestock became increasingly independent of one another.
The "usual place of abode", the location where residents regularly slept, instead of where they worked or were visiting, became the new basis for enumeration in the 1920 Census. Those with no permanent or regular residence were listed as residents of the location that they were enumerated at. Enumeration related to institutional inmates and dependent, defective, and delinquent classes were also modified. Unlike the previous census, the 1920 Census did not have inquires related to unemployment, to Union or Confederate Army or Navy service, to the number of children born, or to the length of time that a couple had been married. The Census of 1920, however, did include four additional questions: one regarding year of naturalization and three regarding native languages. Issues also arose as a result of changes in international boundaries following World War I, particularly for persons declaring birth or parental birth in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, or Turkey. In response, enumerators were required to ask said persons for their province, state, or region of birth. Enumerators were not required to ask individuals how to spell their names, nor were respondents required to provide proof of various pieces of information. Race was determined by the enumerator's impressions.
The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for a census of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their territory. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demands and the bureau was accused of present unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.
Congress authorized the 1940 Census in August 1939, providing the Director of the Census the additional authority to conduct a national census of housing in each state, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Alaska. The housing census was conducted separately, though enumerators often collection housing information at the same time that they collected population information. The Census of 1940 was the first time that the U.S. Census Bureau used advanced statistical techniques. In particular, the census used probably sampling, which had only previously been tested in a trial census of unemployment conducted the Civil Works Administration during 1933-1934, in surveys of retail stores in the 1930s, and in an official sample survey of unemployment conducted amongst two percent of American households in 1937. Probability sampling allowed for the inclusion of additional demographic questions without increasing the burden on the collection process or on data processing. Moreover, sampling the U.S. Census Bureau was able to publish preliminary returns eight months before tabulations were completed. Likewise, the census increased its number of published tables, and also was able to complete data processing with higher quality and more efficiency. New census questions focused on employment, unemployment, internal migration, and incomes—reflecting on the concerns of the Great Depression, the country's housing stock, and the need for public housing programs.
The Census of 1950 encompassed every state, Alaska, Hawaii, American Samoa, the Panama Canal Zone, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other small American territories. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau enumerate American living abroad to account for members of the U.S. Armed Forces, vessel crew members, and government employees residing in foreign countries. The U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Maritime Administration, and several other federal agencies were responsible for distributing and collecting census questionnaires in a cooperative effort. Persons living abroad for reasons other than what is listed above had their census information reported by families or neighbors residing in the United States, but such data was criticized as unreliable and were not published in official statistics. The 1950 Census also included a new survey on residential financing collected separately on a sample basis from owners of owner-occupied properties, rental properties, and mortgage lenders. The accuracy of the new census was increased by improved enumerator training, the use of detailed street maps for enumerators, the publication of "Missed Person" forms in local newspapers, and the designation of a specific night to conduct a special enumeration of transient individuals. Moreover, a post-enumeration survey was conducted to further verify the accuracy of the original enumeration. A sample of approximately 3,500 small areas was compared to the original census data to identify households that may have been omitted initially. Likewise, a sample of approximately 22,000 households were re-interviewed to identify persons omitted in the original enumeration count. Though not used for the 1950 Census, the UNIVersal Automatic Computer I (UNIVAC I), the first non-military computer, was used to tabulate some of the statistics for the 1954 census of economy. In August of 1954, Congress codified various census statutes, such as the Fifteenth Census Act of 1929, authorizing the decennial census and other census.
The Census of 1960 was the first to be mailed to respondents. The U.S. Postal Service delivered census questionnaires to households, the head of household was required to complete the questionnaire, and an enumerator was to pick it up. The enumeration process was divided into two stages: first, select data for each person and dwelling unit was collected; and second, more detailed economic and social data was collected from a sample of households and dwelling units. The census questionnaires for the second stage were hand-delivered by enumerators as they were collecting data from the first stage. Households receiving the second census questionnaire were to complete the form and mail it to their local census office. Twenty-five percent of the population was giving additional sample questions. Because of the increased use of sampling, less populated areas were prone to sampling variation; however, this did not significantly decrease the usefulness of census statistics gathered. Moreover, increased use of sampling reduced data processing costs. Additional questions included in the 1960 Census were related to places of works and means of transportation to work. By 1960, nearly all census data was processed using computers. The U.S. Census Bureau used a Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer (FOSDIC) for the first time, thus decreasing the amount of time and money required for data input.
In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.
Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, were an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and used for a 17 percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.
Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in 6 languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100 percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process by instead following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census. Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Mosquito County, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Rights Holder
<span>This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:</span>
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul><span>This resources is provided here by </span><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a><span> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a><span> of </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a><span>.</span>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
<span>United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.</span>
<span>United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.</span>
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/" target="_blank">Through the Decades</a>." United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/.
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
1 table
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census for Central Florida, 1870
Alternative Title
Census, 1870
Subject
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Population--United States
Description
The Ninth United States Census records for Brevard County (including present-day St. Lucie County), Marion County, Orange County (including present-day Seminole County and parts of present-day Lake and Osceola counties), and Volusia County (including present-day Flagler County), Florida, for 1870. The census divides the population by gender, race ("white" and "colored"), native-born vs. foreign-born, and state-born vs. territory-born. Those born outside of Florida are then divided by state or country of origin. This census also collected information on agriculture and on manufacturing.<br /><br />Although the 1870 Census was conducted under the provisions of the Census Act of 1850, a new act was passed on May 6, 1870. The new census legislation required two changes in procedures related to questionnaire return submission dates. Moreover, penalties for refusing to reply to inquires were expanded to apply to all questions and questionnaires. The questionnaires themselves had to be redesigned due to the end of the "slave questionnaire," as slavery had been formally abolished slavery nationwide via the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This left five schedules for the census: General Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Products of Industry, and Social Statistics. In addition, Charles W. Seaton, a U.S. Census Office chief clerk and later superintendent, invented a rudimentary tallying machine that partially alleviated the difficulties of tallying and tabulating questionnaire responses. Finally, the new superintendent for the Ninth Census, General Francis A. Walker (1840-1897), introduced employment examinations to test the qualifications of applicants to the Census Office, allowing for increased efficiency in the process of collecting census data.
Type
Dataset
Source
Original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a>, 1870.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/104" target="_blank">U.S. Census Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a>, 1870.
Coverage
Brevard County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Creator
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a>
Publisher
<a href="http://www.doi.gov/index.cfm/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of the Interior</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Date Created
ca. 1870-06-01
Format
image/jpg
Extent
397 KB
Medium
1 table
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a> and published by the <a href="http://www.doi.gov/index.cfm/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of the Interior</a>.
Rights Holder
This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul>
This resources is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a> of <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a>.
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1870.html" target="_blank">1870 Overview</a>." U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1870.html.
United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.
United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.
Transcript
U.S. Census of 1870
Population
Brevard County* Marion County Orange County** Volusia County***
Population Total 1,216 10,804 2,195 1,723
Males 703 5,507 984 560
Females 513 5,297 1,211 831
Colored Population Total 19 7,878 198 328
Native-Born Population Total 1,216 10,773 2,174 1,695
Foreign-Born Population Total 0 31 21 28
Population Born by State, Territory or Country of Origin Total 437 5,825 1,127 691
Virginia or West Virginia 14 186 16 14
South Carolina 199 2,828 151 288
Alabama 96 276 52 9
Georgia 452 957 663 558
North Carolina 12 453 94 42
Scotland 0 0 0 1
Italy 0 0 0 3
Ireland 0 7 7 4
Great Britain 0 0 0 0
Germany 0 11 1 1
France 0 0 0 0
West Indies 0 0 1 1
British America 0 0 1 2
Cuba 0 0 0 0
England and Wales 0 3 9 15
Sweden and Norway 0 0 1 0
Africa 0 6 0 0
Agriculture
Brevard County* Marion County Orange County** Volusia County***
Farms Total 191 736 220 233
Farms by Acreage Less than 3 0 0 0 0
3-9 0 0 24 75
10-19 90 5 89 77
20-49 70 154 91 71
50-99 23 126 12 7
100-499 8 377 4 3
500-999 0 60 0 0
1000+ 0 14 0 0
Present Cash Value of Farms Farms $21,000 $828,795 $174,900 $146,120
Farming Implements and Machinery $3,895 $87,968 $2,618 $3,450
Agriculture Wages Paid Total $0 $80,897 $4,480 $2,940
Value of Livestock Livestock $386,950 $275,905 $124,845 $87,119
Animals Slaughtered or Sold for Slaughter $48,120 $0 $0 $786
Value of Home Manufactures Total $0 $0 $0 $210
Manufacturing
Brevard County* Marion County Orange County** Volusia County***
Manufacturing Establishments Total N/A 7 6 2
Value of Manufacturing Products Total N/A $8,560 $10,240 $1,570
Value of Materials Used in Manufacturing Total N/A $4,650 $8,200 $1,150
Capital Invested in Manufacturing Total N/A $3,950 $8,000 $1,300
Hands Employed in Manufacturing Total N/A 19 12 2
Males, Aged 16+ N/A 13 12 2
Females, Aged 16+ N/A 2 0 0
Youths N/A 4 0 0
"*Includes present-day St, Lucie County
**Includes present-day Seminole County and parts of present-day Lake and Osceola counties
***Includes present-day Flagler County"
African Americans
agriculture
Anglo Americans
animals
Brevard County
British Americans
capital
census
Census of 1870
employees
employment
English Americans
European Americans
farming implements
farms
females
German Americans
investments
Irish Americans
Italian Americans
labor
laborers
livestock
machinery
males
manufactures
manufacturing
Marion County
Norwegian Americans
orange county
population
Scandinavian Americans
Scotch Americans
Scottish Americans
slaughter
Swedish Americans
U.S. Census
Volusia County
Welsh Americans
West Indian Americans
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/2f2ea119eac56515205242e901f9b1b7.jpg
10197b9be33d1acc880744108368155f
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census Collection
Alternative Title
Census Collection
Subject
Census--United States
Population--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Description
Collection of United States Census population records for various counties in Central Florida from 1840 to 2000.
The Census Act of 1840 was signed into law on March 3, 1839 and later amended on February 26, 1840. This piece of legislation established a centralized census office during each enumeration. Congress designated the census questionnaire designs to the Secretary of State. However, each household received inquiries regarding "the pursuits, industry, education, and resources of the country" and included questions related to school attendance, literacy, and vocation.
In March of 1849, Congress pass legislation that established a census board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Postmaster General. The board was responsible for preparing and printing forms and schedules for enumeration related to population, mining, agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, education, etc. The 1850 Census also increased population inquiries to include every free person's name (as opposed to just the head of the household), as well as information on taxes, schools, crime, wages, estate values, etc.
The Census Act of 1850 authorized the U.S. Census of 1860 and stipulated that its provisions be adhered to for all future decennial censuses should no new legislation be passed by the first of the year of said census. In May of 1865, the U.S. Census Office was abolished and many superintending clerks were transferred to the General Land Office.
Although the 1870 Census was conducted under the provisions of the Census Act of 1850, a new act was passed on May 6, 1870. The new census legislation required two changes in procedures related to questionnaire return submission dates. Moreover, penalties for refusing to reply to inquires were expanded to apply to all questions and questionnaires. The questionnaires themselves had to be redesigned due to the end of the "slave questionnaire", as slavery had been formally abolished slavery nationwide via the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This left five schedules for the census: General Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Products of Industry, and Social Statistics. In addition, the use of a Charles W. Seaton, a U.S. Census Office chief clerk and later superintendent, invited a rudimentary tallying machine that partially alleviated the difficulties of tallying and tabulating questionnaire responses. Finally, the new superintendent for the Ninth Census, General Francis A. Walker, introduced employment examinations to test the qualifications of applicants to the Census Office, allowing for increased efficiency in the process of collecting census data.
The newest act authorizing the Census of 1880 provided for supervision of enumeration by "supervisors of the census", selected exclusively for the collection of census data. All supervisors, as well as the superintendent, were to appointed by the U.S. President and approved by the Senate. Census enumerators were required to personally visit each household and family within his subdivision. The new census act also allowed for the collection of data related to the condition and operation of railroad corporations, incorporated express companies, and telegraph companies, as well as data related to the condition and operation of life, fire, and marine insurance companies. Corporations who refused to provide the census with "true and complete" answers were subject to fines. In addition, the census superintendent was required to collect and publish data on the population, industries and resources of the District of Alaska. Finally, the 1880 Census consisted of five schedules: Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Social Statistics, and Manufacturing.
The Census of 1890 was authorized by an act modeled after the 1880 enumeration and signed into law on March 1, 1889. The 1890 Census was supervised by 175 employees and enumerators were required to collect all information by personally visiting each household. The 1890 Census included essentially the same inquires from the 1880 Census, with some notable additions, such as questions about home and farm ownership and indebtedness; and the names, units, length of service, and residences of former Union soldiers and sailors, as well as the names of the widows of those who were no longer alive. Racial categorization was expanded to include "Japanese", along with "Chinese", "Negro", "mulatto", "quadroon", "octoroon", and "White". Herman Hollerith, a former employee of the U.S. Census Office, invited the electric tabulating system, which was widely used in the 1890 Census, allowing data to be processed faster and more efficiently. On October 3, 1893, Congress passed a law that transferred census-related work to the direction of the commissioner of labor. Congress passed another act on March 2, 1895, effectively abolishing the U.S. Census Office and transferring the remaining responsibilities to the Office of the Secretary of the Interior.
Congress limited the Census of 1900 to content related to population, mortality, agriculture, and manufacturing. Special census agents were authorized to collect statistics related to incidents of deafness, blindness, insanity, and juvenile delinquency; as well as data on religious bodies, utilities, mining, and transportation. The act authorizing the 1900 Census designated the enumeration of military personally to the U.S. Department of War and the U.S. Department of the Navy, while Indiana Territory was to be enumerated by the commissioner of Indian Affairs. Annexed in 1898, Hawaii was included in the census for the first time. In 1902, the U.S. Census Office was officially established as a permanent organization within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The office became the U.S. Census Bureau in 1903 and was transferred to the Department of Commerce and Labor.
The Census of 1910 was approved by legislation introduced in December of 1907 and enacted in July of 1909. The delay was the result of a disagreement over the appointment of enumerators. President Theodore Roosevelt supported the hiring of enumerators via the civil service system, while Congress supported enumerators as positions of patronage. President Roosevelt successfully won the debate. This census act also changed Census Day from the traditional date of June 1st to April 15th. Additional questions regarding the nationality and native language of foreign-born persons and their parents. Funds for the U.S. Census Bureau were also increased to expand the Census' permanent workforce and created several new full-time positions, including a geographer, a chief statistician, and an assistant director. The assistant director was to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, while all other census employees were hired on the basis of open, competitive examinations administered by the Civil Service Commission. Despite the use of automatic counting machinery, issues with the tabulation process persisted. Finally, with the United States' entrance into World War I in 1917, the U.S. Census Bureau became a source of even more valuable purpose: the Census was able to use population and economic data to report on the populations of draft-age men, as well as information regarding each state's industrial capabilities.
The Census of 1920 changed the date of Census Day from April 15th to January 1st, as requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which argued that farmers' memories and harvest information would be more accurate on this day. The U.S. Census Bureau was also authorized to hire additional employees at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and to create a special field force to collect census data. The legislation authorizing the 1920 Census also allowed for a census of manufacturing to be conducted in 1921, and for such a census to be repeated every two years thereafter, as opposed to the traditional five-year census cycle. Furthermore, a census of agriculture and livestock was to be conducted in 1925 and to be repeated every ten years thereafter. In addition, penalties for those who refused to supply information or those who supplied false information were strengthened. As a result of these changes, census of population, manufacturing, and agriculture and livestock became increasingly independent of one another.
The "usual place of abode", the location where residents regularly slept, instead of where they worked or were visiting, became the new basis for enumeration in the 1920 Census. Those with no permanent or regular residence were listed as residents of the location that they were enumerated at. Enumeration related to institutional inmates and dependent, defective, and delinquent classes were also modified. Unlike the previous census, the 1920 Census did not have inquires related to unemployment, to Union or Confederate Army or Navy service, to the number of children born, or to the length of time that a couple had been married. The Census of 1920, however, did include four additional questions: one regarding year of naturalization and three regarding native languages. Issues also arose as a result of changes in international boundaries following World War I, particularly for persons declaring birth or parental birth in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, or Turkey. In response, enumerators were required to ask said persons for their province, state, or region of birth. Enumerators were not required to ask individuals how to spell their names, nor were respondents required to provide proof of various pieces of information. Race was determined by the enumerator's impressions.
The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for a census of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their territory. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demands and the bureau was accused of present unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.
Congress authorized the 1940 Census in August 1939, providing the Director of the Census the additional authority to conduct a national census of housing in each state, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Alaska. The housing census was conducted separately, though enumerators often collection housing information at the same time that they collected population information. The Census of 1940 was the first time that the U.S. Census Bureau used advanced statistical techniques. In particular, the census used probably sampling, which had only previously been tested in a trial census of unemployment conducted the Civil Works Administration during 1933-1934, in surveys of retail stores in the 1930s, and in an official sample survey of unemployment conducted amongst two percent of American households in 1937. Probability sampling allowed for the inclusion of additional demographic questions without increasing the burden on the collection process or on data processing. Moreover, sampling the U.S. Census Bureau was able to publish preliminary returns eight months before tabulations were completed. Likewise, the census increased its number of published tables, and also was able to complete data processing with higher quality and more efficiency. New census questions focused on employment, unemployment, internal migration, and incomes—reflecting on the concerns of the Great Depression, the country's housing stock, and the need for public housing programs.
The Census of 1950 encompassed every state, Alaska, Hawaii, American Samoa, the Panama Canal Zone, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other small American territories. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau enumerate American living abroad to account for members of the U.S. Armed Forces, vessel crew members, and government employees residing in foreign countries. The U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Maritime Administration, and several other federal agencies were responsible for distributing and collecting census questionnaires in a cooperative effort. Persons living abroad for reasons other than what is listed above had their census information reported by families or neighbors residing in the United States, but such data was criticized as unreliable and were not published in official statistics. The 1950 Census also included a new survey on residential financing collected separately on a sample basis from owners of owner-occupied properties, rental properties, and mortgage lenders. The accuracy of the new census was increased by improved enumerator training, the use of detailed street maps for enumerators, the publication of "Missed Person" forms in local newspapers, and the designation of a specific night to conduct a special enumeration of transient individuals. Moreover, a post-enumeration survey was conducted to further verify the accuracy of the original enumeration. A sample of approximately 3,500 small areas was compared to the original census data to identify households that may have been omitted initially. Likewise, a sample of approximately 22,000 households were re-interviewed to identify persons omitted in the original enumeration count. Though not used for the 1950 Census, the UNIVersal Automatic Computer I (UNIVAC I), the first non-military computer, was used to tabulate some of the statistics for the 1954 census of economy. In August of 1954, Congress codified various census statutes, such as the Fifteenth Census Act of 1929, authorizing the decennial census and other census.
The Census of 1960 was the first to be mailed to respondents. The U.S. Postal Service delivered census questionnaires to households, the head of household was required to complete the questionnaire, and an enumerator was to pick it up. The enumeration process was divided into two stages: first, select data for each person and dwelling unit was collected; and second, more detailed economic and social data was collected from a sample of households and dwelling units. The census questionnaires for the second stage were hand-delivered by enumerators as they were collecting data from the first stage. Households receiving the second census questionnaire were to complete the form and mail it to their local census office. Twenty-five percent of the population was giving additional sample questions. Because of the increased use of sampling, less populated areas were prone to sampling variation; however, this did not significantly decrease the usefulness of census statistics gathered. Moreover, increased use of sampling reduced data processing costs. Additional questions included in the 1960 Census were related to places of works and means of transportation to work. By 1960, nearly all census data was processed using computers. The U.S. Census Bureau used a Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer (FOSDIC) for the first time, thus decreasing the amount of time and money required for data input.
In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.
Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, were an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and used for a 17 percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.
Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in 6 languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100 percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process by instead following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census. Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Mosquito County, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Rights Holder
<span>This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:</span>
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul><span>This resources is provided here by </span><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a><span> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a><span> of </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a><span>.</span>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
<span>United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.</span>
<span>United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.</span>
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/" target="_blank">Through the Decades</a>." United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/.
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
1 table
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census for Central Florida, 1860
Alternative Title
Census, 1860
Subject
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Population--United States
Description
The Eighth United States Census records for Brevard County (including present-day St. Lucie County), Marion County, Orange County (including present-day Seminole County and parts of present-day Lake and Osceola counties), and Volusia County (including present-day Flagler County), Florida, for 1860. The census divides the population by race ("white" and "colored"), gender, and native-born vs. foreign-born. The census also documented the number of slaves and slaveholders. The census collected information on agriculture and on manufacturing.<br /><br />The Census Act of 1850 authorized the U.S. Census of 1860 and stipulated that its provisions be adhered to for all future decennial censuses should no new legislation be passed by the first of the year of said census. In May of 1865, the U.S. Census Office was abolished and many superintending clerks were transferred to the General Land Office.
Type
Dataset
Source
Original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a> and the <a href="http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en.html" target="_blank">General Land Office</a>, 1860.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/104" target="_blank">U.S. Census Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a> and the <a href="http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en.html" target="_blank">General Land Office</a>, 1860.
Coverage
Brevard County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Creator
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a>
<a href="http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en.html" target="_blank">General Land Office</a>
Publisher
<a href="http://www.doi.gov/index.cfm/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of the Interior</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Date Created
ca. 1860-06-01
Format
image/jpg
Extent
449 KB
Medium
1 table
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a> and the <a href="http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en.html" target="_blank">General Land Office</a>, and published by the <a href="http://www.doi.gov/index.cfm/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of the Interior</a>.
Rights Holder
This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul>
This resource is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a> of <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a>.
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1860.html" target="_blank">1860 Overview</a>." U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1860.html.
United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.
United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.
Transcript
U.S. Census of 1860
Population
Brevard County* Marion County Orange County** Volusia County***
Population Total 246 8,609 987 1,158
White Population Total 224 3,294 823 861
Males 136 1,796 452 467
Females 88 1,498 371 394
Native-Born White Population Total 217 3,260 819 855
Males 129 1,768 449 462
Females 88 1,492 370 393
Free Colored Population Total 1 1 1 0
Males 1 1 1 0
Females 0 0 0 0
Free Foreign-Born Population Total 7 34 4 6
Foreign-Born White Population Total 7 34 4 6
Males 7 28 3 5
Females 0 6 1 1
Free Native-Born Persons Total 218 3,261 820 855
Slave Population Total 21 5,314 163 297
Males 8 2,689 88 158
Females 13 2,625 75 139
Slave Holders Total 4 345 31 38
Agriculture
Brevard County* Marion County Orange County** Volusia County***
Farms Total 31 408 87 62
Acres of Land of Farms Improved Land 340 54,546 2,768 3,008
Unimproved Land 11,887 129,376 9,435 11,642
Cash Value of Farms Farms $23,340 $1,887,115 $90,555 $99,810
Farming Implements and Machinery $440 $83,790 $48,681 $9,672
Livestock $155,780 $447,268 $58,295 $113,984
Orchard Products $0 $0 $65 $44,150
Homemade Manufactures $0 $500 $372 $60
Market Garden Products $0 $10 $0 $0
Animals Slaughtered $1,900 $73,107 $9,081 6,550
Farms by Acreage 3-9 20 8 17 1
10-19 7 37 23 14
20-49 3 111 32 37
50-99 1 78 9 6
100-499 0 154 6 3
500-999 0 15 0 0
1000+ 0 5 0 1
Manufacturing
Brevard County* Marion County Orange County** Volusia County***
Manufacturing Establishments Total N/A 8 N/A N/A
Population Employed in Manufacturing Males N/A 65 N/A N/A
Female s N/A 0 N/A N/A
Capital Invested in Manufacturing Total N/A $35,500 N/A N/A
Annual Costs in Manufacturing Labor N/A $23,220 N/A N/A
Products N/A $49,400 N/A N/A
"*Includes present-day St, Lucie County
**Includes present-day Seminole County and parts of present-day Lake and Osceola counties
***Includes present-day Flagler County"
agriculture
animals
Brevard County
capital
census
Census of 1860
costs
employees
farming implements
farmland
farms
females
freeman
freemen
gardens
labor
laborers
livestock
machinery
males
manufactures
manufacturing
Marion County
orange county
orchards
population
slaveholders
slavemasters
slaves
U.S. Census
Volusia County
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/3d27e89f15ac83518dc1c0c4e5af908f.JPG
fb5b583fd1520c829e203f4148e9eea1
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census Collection
Alternative Title
Census Collection
Subject
Census--United States
Population--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Description
Collection of United States Census population records for various counties in Central Florida from 1840 to 2000.
The Census Act of 1840 was signed into law on March 3, 1839 and later amended on February 26, 1840. This piece of legislation established a centralized census office during each enumeration. Congress designated the census questionnaire designs to the Secretary of State. However, each household received inquiries regarding "the pursuits, industry, education, and resources of the country" and included questions related to school attendance, literacy, and vocation.
In March of 1849, Congress pass legislation that established a census board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Postmaster General. The board was responsible for preparing and printing forms and schedules for enumeration related to population, mining, agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, education, etc. The 1850 Census also increased population inquiries to include every free person's name (as opposed to just the head of the household), as well as information on taxes, schools, crime, wages, estate values, etc.
The Census Act of 1850 authorized the U.S. Census of 1860 and stipulated that its provisions be adhered to for all future decennial censuses should no new legislation be passed by the first of the year of said census. In May of 1865, the U.S. Census Office was abolished and many superintending clerks were transferred to the General Land Office.
Although the 1870 Census was conducted under the provisions of the Census Act of 1850, a new act was passed on May 6, 1870. The new census legislation required two changes in procedures related to questionnaire return submission dates. Moreover, penalties for refusing to reply to inquires were expanded to apply to all questions and questionnaires. The questionnaires themselves had to be redesigned due to the end of the "slave questionnaire", as slavery had been formally abolished slavery nationwide via the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This left five schedules for the census: General Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Products of Industry, and Social Statistics. In addition, the use of a Charles W. Seaton, a U.S. Census Office chief clerk and later superintendent, invited a rudimentary tallying machine that partially alleviated the difficulties of tallying and tabulating questionnaire responses. Finally, the new superintendent for the Ninth Census, General Francis A. Walker, introduced employment examinations to test the qualifications of applicants to the Census Office, allowing for increased efficiency in the process of collecting census data.
The newest act authorizing the Census of 1880 provided for supervision of enumeration by "supervisors of the census", selected exclusively for the collection of census data. All supervisors, as well as the superintendent, were to appointed by the U.S. President and approved by the Senate. Census enumerators were required to personally visit each household and family within his subdivision. The new census act also allowed for the collection of data related to the condition and operation of railroad corporations, incorporated express companies, and telegraph companies, as well as data related to the condition and operation of life, fire, and marine insurance companies. Corporations who refused to provide the census with "true and complete" answers were subject to fines. In addition, the census superintendent was required to collect and publish data on the population, industries and resources of the District of Alaska. Finally, the 1880 Census consisted of five schedules: Population, Mortality, Agriculture, Social Statistics, and Manufacturing.
The Census of 1890 was authorized by an act modeled after the 1880 enumeration and signed into law on March 1, 1889. The 1890 Census was supervised by 175 employees and enumerators were required to collect all information by personally visiting each household. The 1890 Census included essentially the same inquires from the 1880 Census, with some notable additions, such as questions about home and farm ownership and indebtedness; and the names, units, length of service, and residences of former Union soldiers and sailors, as well as the names of the widows of those who were no longer alive. Racial categorization was expanded to include "Japanese", along with "Chinese", "Negro", "mulatto", "quadroon", "octoroon", and "White". Herman Hollerith, a former employee of the U.S. Census Office, invited the electric tabulating system, which was widely used in the 1890 Census, allowing data to be processed faster and more efficiently. On October 3, 1893, Congress passed a law that transferred census-related work to the direction of the commissioner of labor. Congress passed another act on March 2, 1895, effectively abolishing the U.S. Census Office and transferring the remaining responsibilities to the Office of the Secretary of the Interior.
Congress limited the Census of 1900 to content related to population, mortality, agriculture, and manufacturing. Special census agents were authorized to collect statistics related to incidents of deafness, blindness, insanity, and juvenile delinquency; as well as data on religious bodies, utilities, mining, and transportation. The act authorizing the 1900 Census designated the enumeration of military personally to the U.S. Department of War and the U.S. Department of the Navy, while Indiana Territory was to be enumerated by the commissioner of Indian Affairs. Annexed in 1898, Hawaii was included in the census for the first time. In 1902, the U.S. Census Office was officially established as a permanent organization within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The office became the U.S. Census Bureau in 1903 and was transferred to the Department of Commerce and Labor.
The Census of 1910 was approved by legislation introduced in December of 1907 and enacted in July of 1909. The delay was the result of a disagreement over the appointment of enumerators. President Theodore Roosevelt supported the hiring of enumerators via the civil service system, while Congress supported enumerators as positions of patronage. President Roosevelt successfully won the debate. This census act also changed Census Day from the traditional date of June 1st to April 15th. Additional questions regarding the nationality and native language of foreign-born persons and their parents. Funds for the U.S. Census Bureau were also increased to expand the Census' permanent workforce and created several new full-time positions, including a geographer, a chief statistician, and an assistant director. The assistant director was to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, while all other census employees were hired on the basis of open, competitive examinations administered by the Civil Service Commission. Despite the use of automatic counting machinery, issues with the tabulation process persisted. Finally, with the United States' entrance into World War I in 1917, the U.S. Census Bureau became a source of even more valuable purpose: the Census was able to use population and economic data to report on the populations of draft-age men, as well as information regarding each state's industrial capabilities.
The Census of 1920 changed the date of Census Day from April 15th to January 1st, as requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which argued that farmers' memories and harvest information would be more accurate on this day. The U.S. Census Bureau was also authorized to hire additional employees at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and to create a special field force to collect census data. The legislation authorizing the 1920 Census also allowed for a census of manufacturing to be conducted in 1921, and for such a census to be repeated every two years thereafter, as opposed to the traditional five-year census cycle. Furthermore, a census of agriculture and livestock was to be conducted in 1925 and to be repeated every ten years thereafter. In addition, penalties for those who refused to supply information or those who supplied false information were strengthened. As a result of these changes, census of population, manufacturing, and agriculture and livestock became increasingly independent of one another.
The "usual place of abode", the location where residents regularly slept, instead of where they worked or were visiting, became the new basis for enumeration in the 1920 Census. Those with no permanent or regular residence were listed as residents of the location that they were enumerated at. Enumeration related to institutional inmates and dependent, defective, and delinquent classes were also modified. Unlike the previous census, the 1920 Census did not have inquires related to unemployment, to Union or Confederate Army or Navy service, to the number of children born, or to the length of time that a couple had been married. The Census of 1920, however, did include four additional questions: one regarding year of naturalization and three regarding native languages. Issues also arose as a result of changes in international boundaries following World War I, particularly for persons declaring birth or parental birth in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, or Turkey. In response, enumerators were required to ask said persons for their province, state, or region of birth. Enumerators were not required to ask individuals how to spell their names, nor were respondents required to provide proof of various pieces of information. Race was determined by the enumerator's impressions.
The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for a census of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their territory. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demands and the bureau was accused of present unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.
Congress authorized the 1940 Census in August 1939, providing the Director of the Census the additional authority to conduct a national census of housing in each state, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Alaska. The housing census was conducted separately, though enumerators often collection housing information at the same time that they collected population information. The Census of 1940 was the first time that the U.S. Census Bureau used advanced statistical techniques. In particular, the census used probably sampling, which had only previously been tested in a trial census of unemployment conducted the Civil Works Administration during 1933-1934, in surveys of retail stores in the 1930s, and in an official sample survey of unemployment conducted amongst two percent of American households in 1937. Probability sampling allowed for the inclusion of additional demographic questions without increasing the burden on the collection process or on data processing. Moreover, sampling the U.S. Census Bureau was able to publish preliminary returns eight months before tabulations were completed. Likewise, the census increased its number of published tables, and also was able to complete data processing with higher quality and more efficiency. New census questions focused on employment, unemployment, internal migration, and incomes—reflecting on the concerns of the Great Depression, the country's housing stock, and the need for public housing programs.
The Census of 1950 encompassed every state, Alaska, Hawaii, American Samoa, the Panama Canal Zone, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other small American territories. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau enumerate American living abroad to account for members of the U.S. Armed Forces, vessel crew members, and government employees residing in foreign countries. The U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Maritime Administration, and several other federal agencies were responsible for distributing and collecting census questionnaires in a cooperative effort. Persons living abroad for reasons other than what is listed above had their census information reported by families or neighbors residing in the United States, but such data was criticized as unreliable and were not published in official statistics. The 1950 Census also included a new survey on residential financing collected separately on a sample basis from owners of owner-occupied properties, rental properties, and mortgage lenders. The accuracy of the new census was increased by improved enumerator training, the use of detailed street maps for enumerators, the publication of "Missed Person" forms in local newspapers, and the designation of a specific night to conduct a special enumeration of transient individuals. Moreover, a post-enumeration survey was conducted to further verify the accuracy of the original enumeration. A sample of approximately 3,500 small areas was compared to the original census data to identify households that may have been omitted initially. Likewise, a sample of approximately 22,000 households were re-interviewed to identify persons omitted in the original enumeration count. Though not used for the 1950 Census, the UNIVersal Automatic Computer I (UNIVAC I), the first non-military computer, was used to tabulate some of the statistics for the 1954 census of economy. In August of 1954, Congress codified various census statutes, such as the Fifteenth Census Act of 1929, authorizing the decennial census and other census.
The Census of 1960 was the first to be mailed to respondents. The U.S. Postal Service delivered census questionnaires to households, the head of household was required to complete the questionnaire, and an enumerator was to pick it up. The enumeration process was divided into two stages: first, select data for each person and dwelling unit was collected; and second, more detailed economic and social data was collected from a sample of households and dwelling units. The census questionnaires for the second stage were hand-delivered by enumerators as they were collecting data from the first stage. Households receiving the second census questionnaire were to complete the form and mail it to their local census office. Twenty-five percent of the population was giving additional sample questions. Because of the increased use of sampling, less populated areas were prone to sampling variation; however, this did not significantly decrease the usefulness of census statistics gathered. Moreover, increased use of sampling reduced data processing costs. Additional questions included in the 1960 Census were related to places of works and means of transportation to work. By 1960, nearly all census data was processed using computers. The U.S. Census Bureau used a Film Optical Sensing Device for Input to Computer (FOSDIC) for the first time, thus decreasing the amount of time and money required for data input.
In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.
Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, were an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20 percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compare to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).
The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.
As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the Department of Commerce. A federal district court divided in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and used for a 17 percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.
Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in 6 languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100 percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process by instead following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census. Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Mosquito County, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>.
Rights Holder
<span>This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:</span>
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul><span>This resources is provided here by </span><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a><span> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a><span> of </span><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a><span>.</span>
Source Repository
<a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a>
External Reference
<span>United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.</span>
<span>United States, and Carroll D. Wright. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a></span><span>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.</span>
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/" target="_blank">Through the Decades</a>." United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/.
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
1 table
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
U.S. Census for Central Florida, 1850
Alternative Title
Census, 1850
Subject
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Population--United States
Description
The Seventh United States Census records for Orange County (including present-day Seminole County and part of Lake County and Osceola County) and Marion County for 1850. The census divides the population by race ("White" vs. "Black") and gender. The "Black" population is further divided into slaves and "free blacks." The population is also divided by out-of-state origin and foreign origin. Finally, the census collected information on agriculture, including number of farms, cash value of farms, acres of improved land of farms, acres of unimproved land of farms, and value of livestock.<br /><br />In March of 1849, Congress pass legislation that established a census board consisting of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Postmaster General. The board was responsible for preparing and printing forms and schedules for enumeration related to population, mining, agriculture, commerce, manufacturing, education, etc. The 1850 Census also increased population inquiries to include every free person's name (as opposed to just the head of the household), as well as information on taxes, schools, crime, wages, estate values, etc.
Type
Dataset
Source
Original census data by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a>, 1850.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/104" target="_blank">U.S. Census Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original census data by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a>, 1850.
Coverage
Orange County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Creator
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a>
Publisher
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a>
Contributor
Gibson, Ella
Date Created
ca. 1850-06-01
Format
image/jpg
Extent
209 KB
Medium
1 table
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Office</a> and published by the <a href="http://www.doi.gov/index.cfm/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of the Interior</a>.
Rights Holder
This resource is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
<ul class="one_column_bullet"><li>reproduce the work in print or digital form</li>
<li>create derivative works</li>
<li>perform the work publicly</li>
<li>display the work</li>
<li>distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.</li>
</ul>
This resources is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105" target="_blank">Section 5</a> of <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html" target="_blank">Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code</a>.
Accrual Method
Item Creation
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
External Reference
"<a href="https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1850.html" target="_blank">1850 Overview</a>." U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/overview/1850.html.
United States. <a href="https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1975. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/histstats-colonial-1970.pdf.
United States, and Carroll D. Wright.<a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/166662" target="_blank"><em>The History and Growth of the United States Census</em></a>. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1900. https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/wright-hunt.pdf.
Transcript
U.S. Census of 1850
Population
Marion County Orange County*
White Population
Total 2,068 238
Male 1,147 139
Female 921 99
Free Black Population
Total 1 2
Male 1 2
Female 0 0
Slave Population
Total 1,269 226
Male 633 107
Female 636 66
People Born Out of State
Total 1,358 66
People Born Out of the United States of America
Total 16 6
Agriculture
Marion County Orange County*
Farms
Total 329 19
Cash Value of Farms
Farms $346,695 $60,000
Farming Implements and Machinery $31,885 $14,095
Acres of Farmland
Improved Land 11,451 963
Unimproved Land 44,168 4,083
Value of Livestock
Total $174,703 $27,020
Animals Slaughtered $28,687 $1,475
*Includes present-day Seminole County and parts of present-day Lake and Osceola counties
7th United States Census
African Americans
agriculture
animals
Caucasians
Census of 1850
European Americans
farming implements
farms
females
free black
freedman
freedmen
improved land
livestock
machinery
males
Marion County
men
orange county
population
Seventh United States Census
slaughter
slaves
U.S. Census
women
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/72072818d87fd39cd917c308b92b14d9.pdf
76d5129ccf7510959bc8051004d607aa
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Florida Land Colonization Company Collection
Alternative Title
FLCC Collection
Subject
Sanford, Henry Shelton, 1823-1891
Sanford (Fla.)
Mackinnon, William, 1823-1893
Polk County (Fla.)
Sumter County (Fla.)
Hernando County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Manayunk (Philadelphia, Pa.)
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/107" target="_blank">William MacKinnon Collection</a>, Henry Shelton Sanford Papers Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Sanford, Florida
Manayunk Bank, Manayunk, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
New York City, New York
Washington, D.C.
Brussels, Belgium
Gingelom, Belgium
Hombourg, Belgium
Berlin, Germany
Florida Land and Colonization Company, London, England, United Kingdom
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Fedorka, Drew M.
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
General Henry S. Sanford Memorial Library, <a href="http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.aspx?page=456" target="_blank">Sanford Museum</a>
External Reference
<span>Fry, Joseph A. </span><a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/8475473" target="_blank"><em>Henry S. Sanford: Diplomacy and Business in Nineteenth-Century America</em></a><span>. Reno, NV: University of Nevada Press, 1982.</span>
Tischendorf, Alfred P. "<a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/35894049" target="_blank">Florida and the British Investor: 1880-1914</a>." <em>Florida Historical Quarterly</em> 33, no. 2 (Oct. 1954): 120-129.
Amundson, Richard J. "<a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/4894931414" target="_blank">The Florida Land and Colonization Company</a>." <em>Florida Historical Quarterly</em> 44, no. 3 (Jan. 1966): 153-168.
Munro, J. Forbes. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/57653564"><em>Maritime Enterprise and Empire: Sir William MacKinnon and His Business Network, 1823-1893</em></a>. Rochester, NY: Boydell Press, 2003.
Kendall, John S. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1836396" target="_blank"><em>History of New Orleans</em></a>. Chicago: Lewis Publishing Company, 1922.
Description
The Florida Land and Colonization Company (FLCC) was a joint-stock venture that invested in Florida land development and sales in the 1880s and early 1890s. The company was formed by Henry Shelton Sanford (1823-1891) with help from a group of British investors. The original impetus for the company's formation was Sanford's inability to continue his land acquisition and development efforts in Florida independently. In 1879, faced with financial difficulties, Sanford turned to a trusted associate in the United Kingdom, a Scottish industrialist named Sir William Mackinnon (1823-1893), to help him attract investors. The formation of the company was in large part due to the efforts of MacKinnon, whose reputation and influence helped bring investors on board.<br /><br />Located at 13 Austin Friars, the company was officially registered in London on June 10, 1880. With the formation of the FLCC, all of Henry Sanford's Florida properties were transferred to the company in exchange for a £10,000 cash payment and another £50,000 in company stock. The one-time cash payment was a needed reprieve for Sanford, who faced financial difficulties by the end of the 1870s. The board of directors included Mackinnon, as well as W. C. Gray and Edwyn Sandys Dawes, partners in Gray-Dawes and Company, a London-based banking and investment house. Other directors included Alexander Fraser, Anthony Norris, George A. Thomson, and Eli Lee. Sanford was named President and Chairman of the Board. In 1880, the company owned 26,000 acres scattered across Florida, including in the cities of Jacksonville, St. Augustine, and Sanford, as well as in Alachua County and Marion County. <br /><br />Almost from the outset, there was serious friction between the British board members and Henry Sanford. Disagreements erupted over business strategy, as Sanford frequently proposed initiatives deemed too bold for the cautious British investors. From 1882 to 1892, the company saw steady, if meager, profits. Most of its income came from the sale of lots in the city of Sanford. From 1885 until 1890, the company, while remaining solvent, continued to see declining profits. From 1886 to 1890, the profits were so modest that the company declined to pay dividends on its yearly profits. Needed improvements and developments in the city of Sanford during the late 1880s sapped much of the company's income. Following Henry Sanford's death in 1891, many of the investors lost the motivation to continue. On September 15, 1892, the various directors acted to dissolve the company. Its assets, including roughly 65,000 acres of Florida land, were divided among shareholders.
Contributor
<a href="http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.aspx?page=456" target="_blank">Sanford Museum</a>
Provenance
<span>Collection dontated to the </span><a href="http://www.chs.org/" target="_blank">Connecticut Historical Society</a><span> after 1901.</span>
<span>Collection loaned to the </span><a href="http://www.tn.gov/tsla/" target="_blank">Tennessee State Library and Archives</a><span> for processing until June 1, 1960.</span>
<span>Collection acquired by the General Henry S. Sanford Memorial Library, </span><a href="http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.aspx?page=456" target="_blank">Sanford Museum</a><span> in 1960.</span>
Rights Holder
<span>The displayed collection items are housed at the General Henry S. Sanford Memorial Library, </span><a href="http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.aspx?page=456" target="_blank">Sanford Museum</a><span> in Sanford, Florida. Rights to these items belong to the said institution, and therefore inquiries about items should be directed there. </span><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a><span> has obtained permission from the </span><a href="http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.aspx?page=456" target="_blank">Sanford Museum</a><span> to display this item for educational purposes only.</span>
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
2-page handwritten letter and statement
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Letter and Statement from A. W. Macfarlane to Henry Shelton Sanford (September 29, 1885)
Alternative Title
Letter and Statement from Macfarlane to Sanford (September 29, 1885)
Subject
Sanford, Henry Shelton, 1823-1891
Investments, British--United States
Sanford (Fla.)
Description
A letter from A. W. Macfarlane to Henry Shelton Sanford dated September 29, 1885. Macfarlane was the secretary for the Florida Land and Colonization Company (FLCC) from 1884 until its dissolution in 1892. Presumably, he worked in the company's main office, located at 13 Austin Friars in the business district of London, United Kingdom. Attached to this letter is a statement listing the various acreage and book values of the company's property in Florida. The statement noted that as of September 1885 the company owned some 79,632.72 acres valued collectively at £84,262.12. At the time, the company owned land scattered throughout Florida in Alachua, Brevard, Hernando, Hillsboro, Manatee, Marion, Monroe, Orange, Polk, Sumter, and Volusia counties. It also owned settlements named Middleground and Anclote. Lastly, the company owned large tracts of land, including the Powell Grant and Sanford Grant, as well as the entire town of Sanford. At the time, the largest single property was the Sanford Grant at 7,813.42 acres. The county with the most scattered land held by the company was Polk County at 21,661.84 acres. The county with the smallest amount of land owned by the company was Volusia County, with only 79.91 acres.<br /><br />The Florida Land and Colonization Company (FLCC) was a joint-stock venture that invested in Florida land development and sales in the 1880s and early 1890s. The company was formed by Henry Shelton Sanford (1823-1891) with help from a group of British investors. The original impetus for the company's formation was Sanford's inability to continue his land acquisition and development efforts in Florida independently. In 1879, faced with financial difficulties, Sanford turned to a trusted associate in the United Kingdom, a Scottish industrialist named Sir William Mackinnon (1823-1893), to help him attract investors. The formation of the company was in large part due to the efforts of MacKinnon, whose reputation and influence helped bring investors on board.<br /><br />Located at 13 Austin Friars, the company was officially registered in London on June 10, 1880. With the formation of the FLCC, all of Henry Sanford's Florida properties were transferred to the company in exchange for a £10,000 cash payment and another £50,000 in company stock. The one-time cash payment was a needed reprieve for Sanford, who faced financial difficulties by the end of the 1870s. The board of directors included Mackinnon, as well as W. C. Gray and Edwyn Sandys Dawes, partners in Gray-Dawes and Company, a London-based banking and investment house. Other directors included Alexander Fraser, Anthony Norris, George A. Thomson, and Eli Lee. Sanford was named President and Chairman of the Board. In 1880, the company owned 26,000 acres scattered across Florida, including in the cities of Jacksonville, St. Augustine, and Sanford, as well as in Alachua County and Marion County. <br /><br />Almost from the outset, there was serious friction between the British board members and Henry Sanford. Disagreements erupted over business strategy, as Sanford frequently proposed initiatives deemed too bold for the cautious British investors. From 1882 to 1892, the company saw steady, if meager, profits. Most of its income came from the sale of lots in the city of Sanford. From 1885 until 1890, the company, while remaining solvent, continued to see declining profits. From 1886 to 1890, the profits were so modest that the company declined to pay dividends on its yearly profits. Needed improvements and developments in the city of Sanford during the late 1880s sapped much of the company's income. Following Henry Sanford's death in 1891, many of the investors lost the motivation to continue. On September 15, 1892, the various directors acted to dissolve the company. Its assets, including roughly 65,000 acres of Florida land, were divided among shareholders.
Type
Text
Source
Original letter and statement from A. W. Macfarlane to Henry Shelton Sanford, September 29, 1885: box 54, folder 1, subfolder 54.1.13, Henry Shelton Sanford Papers, General Henry S. Sanford Memorial Library, <a href="http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.aspx?page=456" target="_blank">Sanford Museum</a>, Sanford, Florida.
Requires
<a href="http://www.adobe.com/reader.html" target="_blank">Adobe Acrobat Reader</a>
Is Part Of
Box 54, folder 1, subfolder 1.13, Henry Shelton Sanford Papers, Henry Shelton Sanford Papers, General Henry S. Sanford Memorial Library, <a href="http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.aspx?page=456" target="_blank">Sanford Museum</a>, Sanford, Florida.
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/98" target="_blank">Florida Land Colonization Company Collection</a>, Henry Shelton Sanford Papers Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original letter and statement from A. W. Macfarlane to Henry Shelton Sanford, September 29, 1885.
Coverage
Florida Land and Colonization Company, London, England, United Kingdom
Brussels, Belgium
Alachua County, Florida
Brevard County, Florida
Hernando County, Florida
Hillsborough County, Florida
Manatee County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Monroe County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Polk County, Florida
Sumter County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
Creator
Macfarlane, A. W.
Date Created
1885-09-29
Format
application/pdf
Extent
242 KB
Medium
2-page handwritten letter and statement
Language
eng
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Provenance
Originally created by A. W. Macfarlane.
Donated to the <a href="http://www.chs.org/" target="_blank">Connecticut Historical Society</a> after 1901.
Loaned to the <a href="http://www.tn.gov/tsla/" target="_blank">Tennessee State Library and Archives</a> for processing until June 1, 1960.
Acquired by the General Henry S. Sanford Memorial Library, <a href="http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.aspx?page=456" target="_blank">Sanford Museum</a> in 1960.
Rights Holder
The displayed collection item is housed at the General Henry S. Sanford Memorial Library, <a href="http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.aspx?page=456" target="_blank">Sanford Museum</a> in Sanford, Florida. Rights to this item belong to the said institution, and therefore inquiries about the item should be directed there. RICHES of Central Florida has obtained permission from the <a href="http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.aspx?page=456" target="_blank">Sanford Museum</a> to display this item for educational purposes only.
Accrual Method
Donation
Curator
Fedorka, Drew M.
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
<a href="http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.aspx?page=456" target="_blank">Sanford Museum</a>
External Reference
Fry, Joseph A. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/8475473" target="_blank"><em>Diplomacy and Business in Nineteenth-Century America</em></a>. Reno, NV: University of Nevada Press, 1982.
Tischendorf, Alfred P. "<a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/35894049" target="_blank">Florida and the British Investor: 1880-1914</a>." <em>Florida Historical Quarterly</em> 33, no. 2 (Oct. 1954): 120-129.
Amundson, Richard J. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/5544058697" target="_blank">"The Florida Land and Colonization Company</a>." <em>Florida Historical Quarterly</em> 44, no. 3 (Jan. 1966): 153-168.
Munro, J. Forbes. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/57653564"><em>Maritime Enterprise and Empire: Sir William MacKinnon and His Business Network, 1823-1893</em></a>. Rochester, NY: Boydell Press, 2003.
Alachua County
Austin Friars
Brevard County
FLCC
Florida Land and Colonization Company
Hernando County
Hillsborough County
investment
Macfarlane, A. W.
Manatee County
Marion County
Middleground, Anclote
Monroe County
orange county
Polk County
Powell Grant
property
real estate
Sanford
Sanford Grant
Sanford, Henry Shelton
Sumter County
Volusia County
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/ea43a073a33132f7bb43e7b334acd0bd.pdf
626ed41df569e2256a31a8b9b7ff4d80
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Thomas Cook Collection
Alternative Title
Cook Collection
Subject
Orlando (Fla.)
Orange County (Fla.)
Longwood (Fla.)
Cape Canaveral (Fla.)
Lake Wales (Fla.)
Silver Springs (Fla.)
Weeki Wachee (Fla.)
Winter Haven (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Winter Park (Fla.)
Description
Collection of digital images, postcards, documents, and other records from the private collection of Thomas Cook. Series descriptions are based on special topics, the majority of which students focused their metadata entries around.
Contributor
Cook, Thomas
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Cape Canaveral, Florida
Lake Wales, Florida
Longwood, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Orlando, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Winter Haven, Florida
Winter Park, Florida
Rights Holder
All items in the <a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/102" target="_blank">Thomas Cook Collection</a> are provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only.
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<p><a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a></p>
Source Repository
Private Collection of Thomas Cook
Has Part
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/103" target="_blank">Postcard Collection</a>, Thomas Cook Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
External Reference
<span>Antequino, Stephanie Gaub, and Tana Mosier Porter. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/783150094" target="_blank"><em>Lost Orlando</em></a></span><span> Charleston, S.C.: Arcadia Pub, 2012.</span>
"<a href="http://sanfordhistory.tripod.com/Links/wtour.pdf">Downtown Orlando Historic District Walking Tour</a>." City of Orlando. http://sanfordhistory.tripod.com/Links/wtour.pdf.
<span>Rajtar, Steve. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/70911136" target="_blank"><em>A Guide to Historic Orlando</em></a></span><span>. Charleston, SC: History Press, 2006.</span>
<span>Osborne, Ray. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/253374549" target="_blank"><em>Cape Canaveral</em></a></span><span>. Charleston, SC: Arcadia Pub, 2008.</span>
<span>Smith, Margaret. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/51888803" target="_blank"><em>The Edward Bok Legacy: A History of Bok Tower Gardens: The First Fifty Years</em></a></span><span>. Lake Wales, Fla: Bok Tower Gardens Foundation, 2002.</span>
<span>Pelland, Maryan, and Dan Pelland. </span><a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/67516850" target="_blank"><em>Weeki Wachee Springs</em></a><span>. Charleston, SC: Arcadia, 2005.</span>
<span>Flekke, Mary M., Sarah E. MacDonald, and Randall M. MacDonald. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/85451307" target="_blank"><em>Cypress Gardens</em></a></span><span>. Charleston, SC: Arcadia, 2006.</span>
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
67-page book
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Early Settlers of Orange County, Florida: Reminiscent-Historic-Biographic
Alternative Title
Early Settlers of Orange County Florida
Subject
Orange County (Fla.)
Settlers, First
Orlando (Fla.)
Sanford (Fla.)
Christmas (Fla.)
Winter Park (Fla.)
Winter Garden (Fla.)
Kissimmee (Fla.)
Longwood (Fla.)
Altamonte Springs (Fla.)
Description
<em>Early Settlers of Orange County, Florida</em>, printed in 1915 and published by Clarence E. Howard of Orlando, Florida. The book also includes an article "Early History of Orlando" written by J.N. Whitner of Sanford, Florida. This 68-page book contains the biographies of many of Orange County's early settlers.
Creator
Howard, Clarence E.
Source
<span>Howard, Clarence E. </span><a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1725831" target="_blank"><em>Early Settlers of Orange County, Florida: Reminiscent-Historic-Biographic</em></a><span>. Orlando, Fla: C.E. Howard, 1915.</span>
Publisher
Howard, Clarence E.
Date Created
1915
Contributor
Whitner, J. N.
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original book: Howard, Clarence E. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1725831" target="_blank"><em>Early Settlers of Orange County, Florida: Reminiscent-Historic-Biographic</em></a>. Orlando, Fla: C.E. Howard, 1915.
Is Part Of
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/102" target="_blank">Thomas Cook Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.
Requires
<a href='http://www.adobe.com/reader.html' target='_blank'>Adobe Acrobat Reader</a>
Format
application/pdf
Extent
19.3 KB
Medium
67-page book
Language
eng
Type
Text
Coverage
Orlando, Florida
Sanford, Florida
Winter Park, Florida
Winter Garden, Florida
Longwood, Florida
Altamonte Springs, Florida
Kissimmee, Florida
Christmas, Florida
Spatial Coverage
28.539291\-81.377907
28.803165\-81.26936
28.599896\-81.339026
28.55256\-81.59008
28.702784\-81.338339
28.661972\-81.366177
28.291987\-81.407719
28.529337\-80.999306
Temporal Coverage
1750-01-01/1915-12-31
Accrual Method
Donation
Mediator
History Teacher
Civics/Government Teacher
Economics Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally created by Clarence E. Howard.
Rights Holder
Copyright to this resource is held by Clarence E. Howard and is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only.
Curator
Cook, Thomas
Digital Collection
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/">RICHES MI</a>
Source Repository
Private Collection of Thomas Cook
External Reference
Howard, Clarence E. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1725831" target="_blank"><em>Early Settlers of Orange County, Florida: Reminiscent-Historic-Biographic</em></a>. Orlando, Fla: C.E. Howard, 1915.
Porter, Tana Mosier, Cassandra Fyotek, Stephanie Gaub Antequino, Cynthia Cardona Melendez, Garret Kremer-Wright, and Barbara Knowles.<a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/551205659" target="_blank"><em>Historic Orange County: The Story of Orlando and Orange County</em></a>. San Antonio, Tex: Historical Pub. Network, 2009.
Transcript
Early Settlers of Orange County Florida
1915
OLD WORTHIES OF ORANGE COUNTY
The late Hon. W. L. Palmer
The late Gen. W. H. Jewell
The late Judge J. D. Beggs
The late Capt. L. C. Horn
The late Judge Cecil Butt
The late Will Wallace Harney,
Orange County Poet
The late J. P. Huey
The late Dr. J. N. Butt
Hiram Beasley
Bailiff of Orange County Court from the earliest days to now
EARLY SETTLERS OF ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA
Reminiscent--Historic--Biographic
1915
C. E. HOWARD, ORLANDO, FLA.
PUBLISHER
Date Copyrighted
1915
149th Pennsylvania Volunteer Company D
1st Regiment Florida Volunteer Infantry
2nd Regiment
A. A. Stone and Son
Abrams & Bryan
Addison, Illinois
Alabama
Alachua
Alden
Alexander, Elise
Allen, Edbert
Altamonte
Altamonte Springs
Altamonte Springs Hotel
Amarillo, Texas
American Antiquarian
American Revoluation
Anderson County, South Carolina
Angier, Edna I.
Ansonia, Connecticut
Apopka
Apopka Bank
Apopka Board of Trade
Apopka City
Apopka Drainage Company
Arkansas
Article 19
Astor
Astor Hotel
Athens, Georgia
Atlanta, Georgia
Atlantic City, New Jersey
Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company
Augusta, Georgia
Back to the Soil
Baltimore College
Bank of Oakland
Barber, Andrew J.
Barber, Joseph A.
Barber, Maggie S. Simmons
Battle Creek, Michigan
Battle of Gettysburg
Battle of Shiloh
Battle of Vicksburg
Beck, Nannie Woodruff
Bedford County, Virginia
Beecher, Thomas K.
Beeman, H. L.
Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks
Berry, Jeane V.
Berry, Thomas W.
Berry, W. T.
Bingham School
Bird, Mary A.
Blakely, William P.
Blanchard, Charles
Blitz, J. M.
Board of Trade
Bogy Creek
Boone, C. A.
Boone's Early Orange
Boston, Massachusetts
Bradshaw
Bradshaw, Elise Alexander
Bradshaw, John Neill
Branche's Book Store
Brockton, Massachusetts
Brunswick, Georgia
Buck Horn Academy
Buck Tails
Buffalo, New York
Bullock
Burlington, Indiana
Burritt College
C. A. Boone and Company
Caldwell, C. V.
Calhoun County, Michigan
California
Cameron, Texas
Camp Monroe
Carnell, Willie
Carothers, Alice Bennett
Carson and Newman College
Carter
Center Township, Pennsylvania
Central Avenue
Chalmette, Louisiana
Chapman
Chapman, E. G.
Chapman, Foster
Chapman, John C.
Chapman, John T.
Chapman, Mattie P.
Chapman, R. Ethelyn
Chapman, Thomas A.
Chapman, William A.
Charleston Block
Chase Grove
Chasel Graves, James W.
Cheney & Odlin
Cheney, J. M.
Chicago, Illinois
China Grove
Church Street
Cincinnati Commercial
Citizens' National Bank of Orlando
citrus
Civil War
Clark County, Indiana
Clay Spring
Clay springs
Clerwater, Minnesota
Clouser, C. A.
Clouser, J. B.
Coacoochee
Cobb County, Georgia
Cockney
Coffee, John
Collins, Ailsey
Colorado
Columbia County
Columbia, Mississippi
Comanche, Oklahoma
Commandery
Como, Tennessee
Cones, Elliot
Confederacy
Confederate Army
Congress
Constitution
Conway
Conyers Academy
Conyers, Georgia
Cook's Ferry
Council Oak
County Antrim
county commissioner
Covington, Georgia
Cracker culture
Crawford, George W.
Crawfordville, Georgia
Creek Indians
Creeks
Crisey & Norris
Crown Point
Crown Point, Indiana
Cuba
Curtis & O'Neal
Curtis, Fletcher & O'Neal
Dade County
Dann Real Estate Agency
Dann, R. Edgar
Danville, Pennsylvania
Davidson College
Davis, E. H.
Davis, Frank H.
Davis, Mary
Demans, P. A.
Devlin, Minnie Elizabeth
Dickenson, Cynthia Ann Roberta
Dillard, J. L.
District School Trustees
Dixie
Dolive, W. L.
Dollins, Alice J. Rushing
Dollins, Alice Strickland
Dollins, Carl W.
Dollins, Hugh
Dollins, Hugh D.
Dollins, Kellie Rushing
Dollins, L. J.
Dollins, Mary
Dollins, Thomas A.
Dr. Stark
Dreer's
Dubuque, Iowa
Duke, James K.
Duke, Mary Kerr
Dule West, South Carolina
DuPage County, Illinois
Eastman's Business College
Efurt, Thuringia, Germany
Elizabethtown, New Jersey
Elks Club
Elm Grove Academy
Elmire Female College
Emmett, Michigan
Empire Hotel
England
Erksine College
Eureka
Everglades
Ewing, Earl W.
Ewing, Willie Carnell
Fairfield
Farrel Iron Foundry
FEC
Fernandez, Hallie G.
Fernandez, Henry Gore
Fifth New Hampshire Regiment
Fifth Tennessee Infantry
First Baptist Church of Orlando
First National Bank of Cameron
First Presbyterian Church of Orlando
Fleming
Flemming, Francis P.
Florida
Florida Association of Architects
Florida Board of Architecture
Florida Citrus Exchange
Florida Cracker
Florida Midland Railroad
Florida Railroad Commission
Florida State Legislature
Florida State Senate
Fogg, N. H.
Ford Estate
Forest
Forst house
Fort Christmas
Fort Gatlin
Fort Mellon
Fort Myers
Fort Reed
France
Francis, Margaret M.
Franklin County, Tennessee
freemason
freeze
Fruit Growers' Association
Fudge, James
Gadsen County
Gainesville
Gainesville, Alabama
Galia County, Ohio
Gallowy, Nannie
Gardner, Maine
Garrett, Hardy
General Florida Statutes
Georgia
Georgia University
Giles, Edna Adelima
Giles, James L.
Giles, Leroy B.
Gore, Mahlon
Gotha
Gotha, Germany
Grand Theatre
Grant, Ulysses S.
Graves, Anna L.
Graves, Arthur F
Graves, George T.
Graves, Helen Louise
Graves, I. W.
Graves, James W.
Graves, Minnie M.
Great Freeze
Greek architecture
Greeley
Greensboro, Alabama
Greenwood
Griffin, :Lawrence Jefferson
Griffin, Able
Griffin, Benjamin Luther
Griffin, Helen
Griffin, Henrietta E.
Griffin, Hilda
Griffin, John W.
Griffin, Rebekah Wilcox
Griffin, Samuel S.
Griffin, Stanley S.
Griffin, Willie L. Vick
Griffin, Yancey R.
Grundy County, Illinois
Guilford, Connecticut
Guinnett County, Georgia
Guyette County, Georgia
Gwinnett County, Georgia
Halifax County, North Caroline
Halstead, Murat
Hand, C. M.
Hand, Carey
Hand, Charlie M.
Hand, Elijah
Hand, Harry E.
Hand, Henry
Happersett, S. H.
Happersett, Stella Alcesta Rollins
Harlem, Illinois
Harrisburg High School
Harrison, Minnie Odella
Havana, Illinois
Heard National Bank of Jacksonville
Henck, E. W.
Herd County, Georgia
Hernando County
Hertford County, North Carolina
Hill, Ben
Hill, W. J.
Hillsboro, Tennessee
Hiwassee College
Hoffner, Charles H.
Hoffner, Edna I. Angier
Hoffner, Harry A.
Holshouser, Cynthia Ann Roberta Dickenson
Holshouser, Linnie Wilkins
Home Guards
Homestead
Honduras
Hoole, James L.
Hoosier Springs Grove
House of Representatives
Houston, Texas
Howard, Clarence E.
Howard's Grove, Wisconsin
Hudnal, Edward
Hudson
Hudson Battery
Hudson, Alfred B.
Hughey, J. P.
Hughey, John
Hull, Emily Harriett
Hull, William Benjamin
Hupple, Bernhart
Hupple, Friederika
Hyers, T. G.
Illinois
Indian architecture
Indian River
Indian River, Georgia
Ireland
Irmer, Lillian Maguire
Iron Bridge
Ironton, Ohio
Italy
J. B. Clouser and company
Jackson
Jackson, Helen Augusta
Jackson, Joseph
Jacksonvile
Jefferson City, Tennessee
Jerome, H.
Jerome, R. P.
John Hopkins Hospital
Johnson, Joseph, E.
Jones, John W.
Jones, W. S.
Journegan
Kendrick
Kentucky
Kerr, John P
Kerr, Margaret
Kerr, Mary
Kerr, Sarah Howard
Killingworth, Connecticut
Kilmer, Washington
Kincaid, M. C.
King Philip
King, Murray S.
Kirkwood
Kissimmee
Knights of Pythias
Knights Templar
Krez, Conrad
Kunz, George f.
Lake Apopka
Lake Butler
Lake Charity
Lake Conway
Lake Eola
Lake Faith
Lake Hope
Lake Howell
Lake Jessamine
Lake Monroe
Lake Osceola
Lakeland
Lakeview Cemetery
Laughlin, Frances
Lebanon, Ohio
Lee County, Texas
Lee University
Lee, A.
Lewis, Arthur A.
Lewis, Grace
Lewis, James M.
Lewis, Joseph M.
Lewter, Elva jouett
Lewter, Frederick Augustus
Lewter, Frederick Augustus, Jr.
Lewter, Irma
Lewter, Jewell
Lewter, John T.
Lewter, Laura Louise
Lewter, Linnie Wilkins Holshouser
Lewter, Mary Davis
Lewter, Medora Inex
Lewter, Robert Dickenson
Lewter, Roberta
Lewter, William Ferderick
Lewter, Zelma Kight
Lightwood Camp
Litchfield
Lockhart
Loganville, Georgia
London, England
Longwood
Longwood Hotel
Lord, Charles
Louisville, Kentucky
Loveless, Harry
Lovell House
Lucerne Circle
Lucerne Theatre
Lumsden, H. A.
Luther, E.
Luther, Martin
Lynch, William Brigham
MacDonald, Robert
Macon, Georgia
Madison, James
Magnolia Avenue
Magnolia Hotel
Magruder, C. B.
Magruder, James Bailey
Maguire, Charles Hugh
Maguire, David O.
Maguire, Fred H.
Maguire, J. O.
Maguire, Lillian
Maguire, Margaret M.Francis
Maguire, Rayner F.
Maguire, Thomas C
Maguire, Washington University
Main Street
Maine
Maitland
Manchester High School
Manchester, New Hampshire
Marion County
Marks
Martin, Matthew
Martin, William
Maryland
Mason
Masonic Lodge
Masons
Massey & Warlow
Massey & Willcox
Massey, Keating & Willcox
Massey, L. C.
Massey, Louis C.
Matchett, J. W.
Mathews, Monroe
McAdow, Marian A.
McKinley, William
Meadows
Mecca
Mellen, Charles
Mellonville
Mercer University
Methodist Episcopal Church, South
Metropolitan Museum of Arts
Miles, Elizabeth J.
Miller, A. C.
Mills
Minor, Tyrannus J.
Missionary Baptist Church
Mitchell
Mizell, Joshua
Monroe
Moore County, Tennessee
Moore's Business College
Mosquito County
Mount Olivet Cemetery
Murfreesboro, North Carolina
Murphy, North Carolina
Muscatine, Iowa
Muzzy Eva L.
Muzzy, Eden
Nashville, Tennessee
Nassaua
National Guard of Florida
Native Birds of Song and Beauty
Nehrling, Carl
Nehrling, Elizabeth Ruge
Nehrling, Henry
Neill, John L.
Neill, Sarah Clay
New Mexico
New Orleans, Louisiana
New Smyrna, Florida
New York
Newton, A. B.
Newton, Alice Bennett Carothers
Newton, Isaac
Newton, Minnie Odella Harrison
Niemeyer, F. J.
North Carolina
North Carolina University
Northampton County, North Carolina
O'Neal, William R.
Oak Lodge
Oak Ridge
Oakland
Ocoee
Odd Fellows
Odlin, L.
Ohio
Orange Avenue
Orange Belt Railroad
orange county
Orange County Board of Commissioners
Orange County Board of Public Instruction
Orange County Court
Orange County Criminal Court
Orange County Democratic Executive Committee
Orange County Fair Association
Orange County Pioneers' Association
Orange County School Board
Orange County, North Carolina
oranges
orlando
Orlando Bank and Trust Company
Orlando Board of Trade
Orlando Coast Line Railroad
Orlando Country Club
Orlando Driving Park Association
Orlando Electric Lighting
Orlando High School
Orlando Telephone Company
Orlando Water company
Osborn, L. C.
Osceola
Osceola County
Overstreet Crate Company
Overstreet Turpentine Company
Overstreet, Elizabeth
Overstreet, Hazel
Overstreet, Mildred
Overstreet, Moses M.
Overstreet, R. Ethelyn
Overstreet, Rachel E.
Overstreet, Robert T.
Palatka
Palm Beach
Palm Cottage
Palmer, Jerome
Palmer, W. L.
Palmer, Willis L.
Panola County, Mississippi
Paris, Tennessee
Parramore, Minnie M. Grave
Patrick, W. A.
Pennfeld, Michigan
Pennington Grove
Pennsylvania
People's Party
Peoples Bank of Sanford
Peoples National Bank of Orlando
Perry County, Pennsylvania
Pettus Artillery
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Pickens
Pigue
Pike County, Mississippi
Pine Castle
Pine Street
Plant City
Plymouth
Porter, Dwight D.
Pughkeepsie, New York
R. H. White Dry Goods Company
Randolph Peninsula
Rawlins, Anna L. Grave
Rawls, E. Judson
Reasoner Brothers
Richmond College
Richmond, Virginia
Roanoke, Virginia
Roberts, Alice J.
Robinson Avenue
Robinson Spring
Robinson, Samuel Austin
Rock Ledge, Georgia
Rollins College
Rollins, Florida Estelle
Rollins, Helen
Rollins, Helen Augusta Jackson
Rollins, John H.
Rollins, Stella Alcesta
Roman architecture
Roosevelt, Theodore
Roper
Roper, Alice
Royal and Select Master Masons of Florida
Royal Arch Masons
Rushing, Kellie
Russell County, Alabama
Rutland's Ferry
Sadler, Alice L.
Sadler, Anna E.
Sadler, John H.
Sadler, Minnie M. Tilden
Salem, Michigan
Saline County, Illinois
Sanford
Sanford High School
Saulsbury, North Carolina
Saunders-Massey, Elizabeth M.
Savannah, Georgia
Schohant, New York
Sea Island cotton
Seaboard Coast Air Line Railroad
Searcy, James
Searcy, John Neill
Searcy, Robert
Searcy, Sarah Clay Neill
Secession Convention
Secoffee
Second Seminole War
Seegar, S. J. T.
Seminole County
Seminole County Bank
Seminole County Sheriff
Seminole Hotel Company of Winter Park
Seminole Indians
Seminole Wars
Seminoles
Senate
Sentinel Printing
settlers
Shakespeare, William
Shannon, Mississippi
Sheboggan County, Wiscosin
Shelbyville, Indiana
Sherman
Shiloh
Shine, Elizabeth Agnes
Simmons, Maggie S.
Simpson, William
Sims Grove
Sims, B. M.
Sims, Eugene O.
Sims, J. Walter
Smith, Elizabeth J. Miles
Smith, Walter
Smith, William
South Apopka
South Apopka Supply Company
South Carolina
South Florida Fair Association
South Florida Foundry and Machine Company
South Florida Railroad
South Lake Apopka Citrus Growers' Association
Southern Express Company
Spanish Mission architecture
Spanish-American War
Sparkman
Speer
Speer, A.
Speer, Alice Roper
Speer, Gertrude K.
Speer, J. G.
Speer, James P.
Speer, Jason P.
Speer, Sidney
Speer, William
Spencer County, Tennessee
St. Augustine
St. Johns County
St. Johns River
State Bank of Orlando
Staunton, Virginia
Steinmetz, John B.
Stevens County, Oklahoma
Stewart, J. C.
Stone, A. A.
Stone, Alvord Alonzo
Stone, L. L.
Stone, Lovell Lazell
Strickland, Alice
Strong, Edward Malten
Sub-Tropical Mid-Winter Exposition
Summer Street
Summerlin Hotel
Summerlin House
Swedes
Sweeney, Robert
Switzerland
T. J. Minor and Brother
Taft, William H.
Talbot County, Georgia
Tallahassee
Tampa
Tampa & Gulf Railroad
Taylor Safe Manufacturing Company
Telfair County, Georgia
Tennessee
Texas
Thayer, Jessie M.
The Arcade
The Auk
The Citizen
The Jacksonville Times-Union
The Lodge
The Orange County citizen
The Orange County Reporter
The Orlando Reporter-Star
The Orlando Star
The Reporter-Star
The Seminole
The Sentinel
The Tampa Tribune
Thompson, Albert
Thompson, Dexter C.
Three Graces Lakes
Tiedkie
Tilden
Tilden, L. F.
Tilden, Minnie M.
Titusville
Toronto, Canada
Town Herman, Wisconsin
Trammell, Park
Tullahoma, Tennessee
Turner, Anna Belle
Tuscaloosa County, Alabama
Tyner, C. R.
Union
University Law School
University of Pennsylvania
Vanderbilt
Vermont
Vick, J. H.
Vick, Willie L.
Vicksburg
Virginia
Wakalla, South Carolina
Wallerfield Sarah A.
Walton, Edwin S.
Warlow, T. Picton
Warnell Lumber Company
Warnell Lumber company Millers
Washington Place
Washington, D. C.
Watkins Block
Watson
Weathersbee, Allen
Wekiva River
Wekiwa River
Wekiwa Springs
Welaka
West Virginia
White, W. G.
Whitner, J. N.
Wiggs, Annie B.
Wilcox County, Georgia
Wilcox, Mark
Wilcox, Rebekah
Winter Garden
Winter Garden Water and Light Company
Winter Park
Wisconsin Men of Progress
Witherington, Anna Belle Turner
Witherington, H. H.
Woodruff & Watson
Woodruff, Ailsey Collins
Woodruff, Elizabeth Agnes Shine
Woodruff, Emma
Woodruff, Frank
Woodruff, Frank L.
Woodruff, Minnie Elizabeth Devlin
Woodruff, Nannie Galloway
Woodruff, Seth
Woodruff, Seth W.
Woodruff, W. W. W.
Woodruff, William W.
World's Fair
Yowell-Duckworth Building
Yulee Railroad
Zellwood
-
https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka/files/original/90b048697bb607fd261a0054abafe116.pdf
b6772e80e4db5756cdededc93f26d3f4
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Thomas Cook Collection
Alternative Title
Cook Collection
Subject
Orlando (Fla.)
Orange County (Fla.)
Longwood (Fla.)
Cape Canaveral (Fla.)
Lake Wales (Fla.)
Silver Springs (Fla.)
Weeki Wachee (Fla.)
Winter Haven (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Winter Park (Fla.)
Description
Collection of digital images, postcards, documents, and other records from the private collection of Thomas Cook. Series descriptions are based on special topics, the majority of which students focused their metadata entries around.
Contributor
Cook, Thomas
Language
eng
Type
Collection
Coverage
Cape Canaveral, Florida
Lake Wales, Florida
Longwood, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Orlando, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Winter Haven, Florida
Winter Park, Florida
Rights Holder
All items in the <a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/102" target="_blank">Thomas Cook Collection</a> are provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only.
Curator
Cepero, Laura
Digital Collection
<p><a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a></p>
Source Repository
Private Collection of Thomas Cook
Has Part
<a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/103" target="_blank">Postcard Collection</a>, Thomas Cook Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.
External Reference
<span>Antequino, Stephanie Gaub, and Tana Mosier Porter. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/783150094" target="_blank"><em>Lost Orlando</em></a></span><span> Charleston, S.C.: Arcadia Pub, 2012.</span>
"<a href="http://sanfordhistory.tripod.com/Links/wtour.pdf">Downtown Orlando Historic District Walking Tour</a>." City of Orlando. http://sanfordhistory.tripod.com/Links/wtour.pdf.
<span>Rajtar, Steve. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/70911136" target="_blank"><em>A Guide to Historic Orlando</em></a></span><span>. Charleston, SC: History Press, 2006.</span>
<span>Osborne, Ray. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/253374549" target="_blank"><em>Cape Canaveral</em></a></span><span>. Charleston, SC: Arcadia Pub, 2008.</span>
<span>Smith, Margaret. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/51888803" target="_blank"><em>The Edward Bok Legacy: A History of Bok Tower Gardens: The First Fifty Years</em></a></span><span>. Lake Wales, Fla: Bok Tower Gardens Foundation, 2002.</span>
<span>Pelland, Maryan, and Dan Pelland. </span><a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/67516850" target="_blank"><em>Weeki Wachee Springs</em></a><span>. Charleston, SC: Arcadia, 2005.</span>
<span>Flekke, Mary M., Sarah E. MacDonald, and Randall M. MacDonald. <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/85451307" target="_blank"><em>Cypress Gardens</em></a></span><span>. Charleston, SC: Arcadia, 2006.</span>
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Original Format
1 color map
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
Orange Blossom Trail: The Scenic Route Through Central Florida
Alternative Title
Orange Blossom Trail Pamphlet
Subject
Roads--Florida--Maps
Tourism--Florida
Highways
Orlando (Fla.)
Silver Springs (Fla.)
Clermont (Fla.)
Orange County (Fla.)
Davenport (Fla.)
Winter Haven (Fla.)
Miami (Fla.)
Sebring (Fla.)
Jennings (Fla.)
Jasper (Fla.)
White Springs (Fla.)
McIntosh (Fla.)
Lake City (Fla.)
Belleview, Fla. (Marion Co.)
Oklawaha River (Fla.)
Weirsdale (Fla.)
Leesburg (Fla.)
Tavares (Fla.)
Winter Garden (Fla.)
Haines City (Fla.)
Winter Haven (Fla.)
Lake Placid (Fla.)
Moore Haven (Fla.)
High Springs (Fla.)
Gainesville (Fla.)
Ocala (Fla.)
Minneola (Fla.)
Mount Dora (Fla.)
Zellwood (Fla.)
Plymouth (Fla.)
Apopka (Fla.)
Kissimmee (Fla.)
Lake Wales (Fla.)
Avon Park (Fla.)
South Bay (Fla.)
Coral Gables (Fla.)
Key West (Fla.)
Description
Pamphlet on the scenic route of Orange Blossom Trail north from the Georgia-Florida border to Key West. The pamphlet lists roadside attractions near or on OBT, in an era before the construction of I-95, I-75 and I-4 nearly ended the traditional roadside attraction.
Creator
Orange Blossom Trail Association
Source
Original pamphlet by the Orange Blossom Trail Association: Vaughan & Co., Orlando, Florida: Private Collection of Thomas Cook.
Publisher
Vaughan & Co.
Date Created
ca. 1959
Is Format Of
Digital reproduction of original pamphlet by the Orange Blossom Trail Association: Vaughan & Co., Orlando, Florida.
Is Part Of
Private Collection of Thomas Cook.
<p><a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/omeka2/collections/show/102" target="_blank">Thomas Cook Collection</a>, RICHES of Central Florida.</p>
Requires
<a href='http://www.adobe.com/reader.html' target='_blank'>Adobe Acrobat Reader</a>
Format
application/pdf
Extent
7.53 MB
Medium
1 color map
Language
eng
Type
Text
Coverage
Orlando, Florida
Silver Springs, Florida
Clermont, Florida
Davenport, Florida
Winter Haven, Florida
Miami, Florida
Sebring, Florida
Jennings, Florida
Jasper, Florida
White Springs, Florida
McIntosh, Florida
Lake City, Florida
Belleview, Florida
Oklawaha River, Florida
Weirsdale, Florida
Leesburg, Florida
Tavares, Florida
Winter Garden, Florida
Haines City, Florida
Winter Haven, Florida
Lake Placid, Florida
Moore Haven, Florida
High Springs, Florida
Gainesville, Florida
Ocala, Florida
Minneola, Florida
Mount Dora, Florida
Zellwood, Florida
Plymouth, Florida
Apopka, Florida
Kissimmee, Florida
Lake Wales, Florida
Avon Park , Florida
South Bay, Florida
Coral Gables, Florida
Key West, Florida
Spatial Coverage
28.539291, -81.377907
29.216643,-82.057589
28.555576, -81.772842
28.161308, -81.601653
28.021985, -81.732502
25.789381, -80.226345
27.473621, -81.530419
30.604231, -83.09824
30.517907, -82.951641
30.330213, -82.758007
29.449015, -82.222223
30.191431, -82.638588
29.059471, -82.059345
29.043264, -81.929197
28.982315, -81.924219
28.810987, -81.877041
28.809332, -81.734705
28.55256, -81.59008
28.114837, -81.617975
28.021985, -81.732502
27.293689, -81.358624
29.826944, -82.596989
29.652256, -82.312031
29.187386, -82.140169
28.573894, -81.747308
28.824072,-81.643896
28.729733, -81.604757
28.692225,-81.547213
28.673118, -81.512046
28.304381, -81.403942
27.901559, -81.586368
27.595631, -81.514363
26.664335, -80.716238
25.721354, -80.26823
24.555086, -81.780367
Temporal Coverage
1959-01-01/1959-12-31
Accrual Method
Donation
Mediator
History Teacher
Economics Teacher
Geography Teacher
Provenance
Originally created by the Orange Blossom Trail Association and published by the Brewton Company.
Rights Holder
Copyright to this resource is held by the Orange Blossom Trail Association and is provided here by <a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/" target="_blank">RICHES of Central Florida</a> for educational purposes only.
Contributing Project
<p><a href="http://riches.cah.ucf.edu/buildingblocks.php" target="_blank">Building Blocks</a></p>
Curator
Cook, Thomas
Digital Collection
<p><a href="https://richesmi.cah.ucf.edu/map/" target="_blank">RICHES MI</a></p>
Source Repository
Private Collection of Thomas Cook
External Reference
Antequino, Stephanie Gaub, and Tana Mosier Porter. <em>Lost Orlando</em>. Charleston, S.C.: Arcadia Pub, 2012
Dickinson, Joy Wallace. <em>A Guide to Historic Orlando</em>. Charleston, SC: Arcadia Pub, 2003.
External Reference Title
<a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/783150094" target="_blank"><em>Lost Orlando</em></a>
<a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/70911136" target="_blank"><em>A Guide to Historic Orlando</em></a>
Transcript
Orange Blossom Trail
THE Scenic ROUTE THROUGH CENTRAL FLORIDA
1934 - 1959
Twenty Fifth Anniversary
"Beauty abounds at Florida's Silver Springs"
"Centennial Fountain"
Eola Park, Orlando
"Aqua Maids at Beautiful Cypress Gardens"
Date Copyrighted
ca. 1959
Contributor
Cook, Thomas
13th Street
4th Street
AAA
Abshier, A. E.
Allardice, James
Allen, Ross
Alrmina Drive-In Restaurant
Amazing Howell Glassblowers
America's Tropical Wonderland
American Automobile Association
American Express
Anderson, F.
Angebilt Hotel
Apopka Motor Courts
Aqua-Maids
Arrow Head Lodge
Avon Motel
Baby Animal Nursery
Bambi Motel
Banister, Fred
Bank of Tavares
Barney's Park Avenue
Bartlett, Tommy
Bates, Beryl
Bates, Kitten
Beachfront Tourist Court
Beacon Light Motel
Belleview Motor Court
Ben White Raceway
Bennie's Service Station
Bentley's Motel
Bibleland
Big "D" Steer-In Restaurant
Black Hills Passion Play
Black Swan Park
Blanche Hotel
Blue Lake
Blue Lake Villa
Bob's Shell Service
Bok Tower
Bok Tower Gardens
Bownman & Brown, Inc.
Bradley, Otis
Bragdon, J. A.
Brahma cattle
Brewton Company
Buliman, J. H.
Burgess, Jack
Carillon Tower
Casa Loma Lodge
Centennial Fountain
Center of Arcade
Central Boulevard
Central Florida Motel
chamber of commerce
Chimp Farm
Christy, Howard Chandler
Citizen's Bank of Clermont
Citizen's National Bank of Lessburg
Citizen's National Bank of Orlando
Citrus Tower Restaurant and Cocktail Lounge
Clayton Waters Service
Clements, Frank
Clermont Fruit Service
Clewiston Inn
Clewiston Motel
Cloister Courts
Coats, Royal M.
Coleman, Grace
Colonial Drive
Colonial Hotel
Columbia County
conestoga wagon
Cook, Thomas
Cooks Farm
Craft Court
Crossroads Motel
Cunningham, T. Archie
Cypress Gardens
Da Vinci, Leonardo
Davenport Chamber of Commerce
Davis Park Motel
Delux Motel
Dempsey, Jack
Dickson and Ives, Inc.
Dietrich, Charles
Dietrich, Elsie
Diner's Club
Dirlam, K. M.
Dirlam's Dawn Villa
Douglas, A. R. D.
downtown Kissimmee
downtown Leesburg
Downtown Miami
Downtown Orlando
Duncan Hines
Dundee
E. S. Marsell Fernery
Edgar Roberts Apartments
Edwards, A. C.
El Patio Motel
El Rancho Motel
Emerald Motel
Ernie's Lakeside Motel
Everglades
Everglades Tropical Gardens
Fairview Park
Fairway's Motel
Famous Shell Emporium
Famous Silver Spurs
Fifth Street
First Federal Building
First Federal Savings and Loan Association
First National Bank
First National Bank at Orlando
Florida Angler's Resort
Florida Citrus Tower
Florida National Bank
Florida Nursery and Landscape Company
Florida Orange Packers
Florida Watermelon Festival
Florida's Biggest Little Town
Florida's Cow Country
Ford's Shell Service Station
Fort Clinch
Foster, Stephen Collins
Fosteriana
Fountain, J. M.
French Realtors
Fulton's Citrus Groves
G&S Packing Company
Gahr, Lloyd
Gardner's Restaurant
Gardos, E.
Gary's Duck Inn
Gateway to the Ridge
Gellerman, Harvey
glass-bottom boats
Glouser, Zack
Great Masterpiece
Greater Orlando Chamber of Commerce
Green's Fuel
Gulf Oil
Gulf Oil Corporation
Haines City Motor Court
Hambletonian
Hamilton County
Harlan, Montie
Hart, E. B.
Hart's Sundry Store
Harvey's Service
Harwell, E. K.
Harwell, Mary P.
Hi-Lander Motel
Highland Hammock State Park
Highland Lake Apartments
Highland Park Estates
Highland Parks Estates
Highlander Restaurant
Highlands County
Highlands Lake
Hil-Top Motor Court
Hinson Avenue
Home Exhibit
Hotel Jacaranda
Hotel Thomas and Dining Room
House of Glass
Howard Johnson Restaurant, Johnson, Howard
Hunt Brothers
Hunter's Nash Motors
International Grand Prix Endurance Race
Isbell, Jim
Isbell, Sue
Ivey's of Orlando
J. Hillis Miller Health Center
J. L. Parris Jr. Laundry
Jarvis Motel
Johnson, Evelyn
Johnson, John
Johnson's Beach
Johnson's Beach & Cottages
Jones, Meredith
Jordan, Carl
Jordan, Carolyn
Kahler, F. H.
Kahler, R. N.
Keene Realty Company, Inc.
Kelly Park
King's Garage and Service Station
King's Grove
Kissimmee Live Stock Market
Kissimmee River Valley
Koch, Harry A.
Koss Manor Motel
Koss, Delma
Lake Alfred
Lake Alfred Motel and Restaurant
Lake and Hills Restaurant
Lake Apopka
Lake Blue Motel
Lake Bowers
Lake Brentwood Court
Lake Clay
Lake County
Lake Eola
Lake Eola Park
Lake Highland
Lake Istokpoga
Lake Ivanhoe
Lake Josephine
Lake Josephine Tourist Court
Lake Mabel Motel
Lake Minneola
Lake Okeechobee
Lake Ola
Lake Placid
Lake Weir
Lake Weir Chamber of Commerce
Lake Weir Gift Fruit Company
Lake Weir Key Cottages
Lakeside Villa
Lakeview Motel
Lakewood Bar & Package Store
Lakewood Estates
Last Supper
Law, Leo
Lee Motel
Leesburg Community Center
Leesburg Kiwanis Club
Leesburg Lion's club
Leesburg Rotary Club
Lilly, L. M.
Lilly's Motel
Lloyd's Furniture
Main Street
Mann, Leone
Mann, Paul
Manor Motel
Marie's Motel and Restaurant
Marion County
Marion County Citrus Company
Marion Street
Marks Street
Marsell, E. S.
Master Hosts
McGuire's Standard Station
McIntosh
Meier, Josef
Melton, G. T.
Metal Products Company
Miami Hotel
Miami's Fabulous Seaquarium
Mid-Lakes Motel
Miller Motel
Miller, Henry
Millican & Beseke, Inc.
Mineral Springs
Minneola Gift Shop
Minute Maid
Monarchik, Helen
Monarchik, John
Montrose Street
Monument of States
Moose Head Fishing Camp
Moses Rexall Drugs
Motel AL-Jl Mid-Town Motel
Motel Midget Mansions
Mozert's Photo Shop
Mrs. Mac's Restaurant
Mt. Vernon Motel
Musseua, A. A.
Nascar Auto Association
National Fresh Water Tournament
National Pee Wee Championship
Nature's Underwater Fairyland
New Morrison Cafeteria
Nicodemus, Charles
Nicodemus, Irene
North Avenue
North Boulevard
North City Motel
North Marion County Chamber of Commerce
North Marion High School
O'Sada, Stanley
O'Sada's Gulf Service Station
OBT
Ocala
Ocala National Forest
Oklawaha
Oklawaha River
Ola-Beach Motel
Old South Motel
Orange Avenue
Orange blossom Motel
Orange Blossom Trail
Orange Blossom Trail Association
orange county
Orange Lake
Orange Lake Citrus Shop
Orlando Evening Star
Orlando Morning Sentinel
Palm Garden Fishing Camp
Palm Knoll Motell
Palm Motel
Palm Terrace
Palomino Motel
Pan-American Motel
Parrish, J. L., Jr.
Passion Play Amphitheatre
Peacock, Arthur S.
Peacock's Motel
Phillips Place
Plantation Inn
Poinsettia Motel
Polk County
Pope, Dick, Sr.
Pope, Richard Downing
Preu, Frank J.
Preu, Jeanette
Pure Oil Company
Quality Courts United
Ranch Motel
Ray's Smoke House Pit-Bar-B-Q
Red Barn Restaurant
Reddick
Reese, Candler C.
Rest-A-Nite Motel
Rex Beach Lake
Rexall
Richenbacker Causeway
Rilean, W. W.
Riley's Trailer Park and Miniature Home
Rock Springs
Rod'n Reel Court
Roosevelt Boulevard
Ross Allen's Reptile Institute
Ross Allen's Reptile Institute and Wildlife Show
Sabal Motel
San Juan de Ulloa Hotel
San Juan Hotel
Scenic Highway
Schnieder, John W.
Seaquariam
Seminoles
Shady Lake
Shalimar Motor Court
shell
Shell Emporium
Shipley, Grace E.
Shipley, Lewis
Silver Lake Country Club and Golf Course
Silver Palms Motel
Silver Springs
Silver Springs Boulevard
Silver Springs Cafeteria and Restaurant
Silver Spurs Rodeo
Sinclair Gas and Oil
Singing Tower
Skyline Motel
Slaughter, A. C.
Smigel's Auto Clinic
Smith, A. W.
South Bay Service Station
South Lake Realty company
Southernaire Motel
Spinning Wheel Motel
Spook Hill
Sportsman's cottages and Fishing Resort
Spring Side Motel
Squire Restaurant
SR-200
SR-25
SR-40
SR-50
SR-540
SR-80
STAPLES' Cottages
Starling Motel
State Bank
State Road 50
State Road 80
Steak House
Stephen Foster Memorial
Sue and Jim Isbell's Motel with Restaurant
Sue's Motel
Sugar Bowl
Sun Plaza Motor Manor
Sunoco
Suwannee River
Suwannee River Court
Tall Pines Motel
Talton, William G.
Targonski, Benjamin
Taylor's Citrus Candy Factory
Terra Ceia Court and Restaurant
Texaco Products
The Belle of Suwannee
The Brahma
The Carriage Cavalcade
The City Beautiful
The Fern City of Florida
The Jacaranda City
The Jungle Cruise
The Key Wester
The Prince of Peace Memorial
Thibault, Alyce
Thomas, P. E.
Tom Sawyer Motor Inns
Tommy Bartlett's Deer Ranch
Topical Wind Motel
Tower View Motel
Trade Winds Cafeteria
Tradewins Motel and Restaurant
Trailer city
Tropical Motor Hotel & Frazer's Steak House
Tucker, O. J.
tupperware
Tupperware Home Parties, Inc.
Tupperware Museum of Dishes
U.S. Highway 27
U.S. Sugar Mill
UF
University Court Motel
University of Florida
US 92
US-17-
US-25
US-27
US-27A
US-301
US-441
US-441-27
US-98
Ustler Brothers
Vaughan & Co.
Venetian Court
Vo-Mac Groves
W. W. Rilea Cottages
Wall Streetl Empire Hotel
Walt Wellman Groves
Waverly
Waverly Citrus Growers Cooperative
Wayside Motel
Webb, J. L.
Webb's Drive-In Restaurant
Wellman, Walt
White House Hotel
William G. Talton and Sons
Williams, E. L.