Question

Shared Photo: Ever had an incorrect Social Security Card dated before 1900? If so, which date do you go by?

I wanted to share this family photo of Earl Altaman Weaver with the community. Location: Winchester, Franklin, Tennessee, United States. Date: .17 July 1898 yet he was born in 1897.

There are actual Census records in 1900 showing he was age 3. How can he have gotten a false SS card saying he was born in 1898?

Click here for the image details page or here for the full-sized version (1125 x 622).

We have always had him listed as born in 1897 per census records, but my mom had this copy at her house of his SS record.

Plus, his DOB was incorrectly put on his tombstone, and never corrected my mom said.

Please help!

Comments

Birthdates weren't particularly important to people in most of the United States until well into the 20th century (many people had no record of their birth until they wanted to apply for Social Security or enlist in the military). I have seen lots of records that have varying birth years for people born in the 19th century.  Most states didn't require birth certificates until the 19 teens, and even then people didn't always bother to register births.   Earl was 2 when the 1900 census was taken and 12 on the 1910.  It would be easy to assume he was born in 1898 instead of 1897.

---

Ok interesting.

Thanks

---

I have frequently found both many instances of the 1900 US Census and Social Security records mistakes of a year +/-. I often think the 1900 US Census should have accurate birth info because it has month & year, but I trust the month given more than year.

---

The 1939 UK Register has the birthdate, but I have quite  often found the year to be incorrect -- sometimes by as much as 12 years.  (You cannot have your birth registered before you are born.)  Generally, in those cases, I will go with the date and month, and ignore the year.

Same with some US census records.  You can't be 3 months old in 1900, and later have a "delayed" birth certificate issued stating you were born in 1911.   It just doesn't add up.

---

I agree with you I have seen many instances that one year off in Census records seems to be very common, but in SS records- that’s usually not common.

Answer 1

Terri, I just took the liberty of searching the Ancestry library edition for records on Earl.  I notice that he is in the age group of men who have both WWI and WWII draft registration cards.  I personally like those as sources, because they appear to have been completed by the subject himself, in his own hand, and I am inclined to give people credit for being able to spell their own name correctly and know their birth date.  In this case, however, in the WWI card Earl reports his DoB as 17 Jul 1897, and in the WWII card as 7/17/1898.  I also see that in the SSN application in your image, Earl gives his DoB as 1898, but in the Social Security Death Index, it's shown as 1897. The Social Security records themselves have two different years.  So I don't think you'll be able to resolve this without an actual birth record.

I am going to speculate that Earl probably grew up believing he was born in 1897, and his family and friends all committed to 1897 as well.  Then at some point he discovered it was an error, and the real year of birth was 1898.  So the later records that he helped to create (SSN application, dated 1955, and WWII draft card, dated 1942) say 1898.  The earlier WWI draft card, dated 1918, and both the SSDI and the tombstone inscription, created from data provided by the family after his death, say 1897.

I think the best thing you can do at this point is pick one date to list in his profile, but include a full explanation of the inconsistent records in the Bio.  Someday you may be able to find an actual birth record, or perhaps a newspaper report of the birth that will resolve the conflict.  Good luck!

Comments

Good job, Dennis!  

I agree about looking for things the people themselves filled in and / or signed.   Someone's signature on their marriage record (for example) is going to be more correct than the various spellings used by census enumerators, or even church/civil clerks.

---

Thanks Melanie.

---

Dennis -- would the difference of a year have any effect on his WWII draft status?  As in, if he were born in 1897 would he be too old?

I know I have seen other males who have falsified their year of birth in order to avoid being drafted.

---

I don't think so, but I could be wrong.  I agree, some men falsified their age, but both ways, in both World Wars and the U.S. Civil War.  I.e., some who would have been eligible for draft wanted to be too old, but there were also some who were too young but wanted to serve.  I don't think we were drafting men in their 40s in WWII, but perhaps somebody knows what rules were being followed in Tennessee at the time.

---

Thanks for the star Terri.

---

I've also seen some who were too old, alter their year of birth so they were young enough.

And that works for Australia, as well as the US.

Not about age -- but, I recently had one guy get discharged (no reason I could find except unsuitability (I think it was)) travelled the width of the continent, re-enlisted under a false name, then get himself a bravery award and have to admit his real name.

There are some people who do things for obvious reasons, and some who do things for reasons only they know.

If this guy's year of birth in the earlier records was given by a parent, I'd go with that rather than a year he gave much later himself.   People's "knowledge" of themselves on some dates isn't always any more accurate than a clerk writing down what they hear.   If the date and the month are consistent, then that is better than all three being different.  I've seen that, too.  (The information in my "delayed birth certificate" example from earlier was given by the mother of the child, who would be expected to know when she gave birth.  Except, for their own reasons, she lied.)

Answer 2

One thing to remember about census records...they represent the whole family's enumeration info from just one person who answered the door that day. 

I remember a big group researching a Slave plantation, and the enumeration appeared to be given one decade perfectly, then the next horribly inaccurate. The conclusion was that a servant gave names and ages to the census taker.

All the best -Chris

Comments

When I conducted the Census a few years back in our area, people had the right of refusal to complete the Census. It wasn't like we had the Census police with us to round them up and interrogate them if they refused to answer the questions. However, we were responsible for attempting to gather the information multiple times and to attempt to explain it to them, if we felt we could safely do so. I did have one guy who avoided me multiple times until I explained that all I needed from him was a count of how many in the household. I also told him that if he refused, I would have to estimate and then I would never be back. He was nice at that point, and gave me a number in the household, told me he would refuse to answer other questions, I thanked him for his time, and moved on.

Sad that some people just don't want to even be counted, but I get that there may be something going on behind the scenes that isn't really any of my business, and that as far as the Census is concerned, the primary goal is to "count" people and not to capture every tidbit of information as accurately as possible.

---

Thanks.

---

A great point Scott...In early days (e.g. 16th century England) it was illegal to move somewhere other than by settlement rules, so hiding was perhaps necessary. Likewise, in the Tennessee mountains abt 1788, folks were hiding out to avoid conscription into the war. Context is key.