Draft registration cards

By Anonymous on Wed, 10/14/2015 - 13:51

Forums

The examples that you have provided for draft registration cards include in the reference notes something like "Local Draft Board 1."  There are a lot of cards that don't say "Local Draft Board" or "Draft Board" on them.  For example, the one of Irwin Skolly, at Ancestry, serial no. 9227, order no. 150, has Precinct, which is crossed out, and 17 E.D. - 8 H.D. written in, followed by City or County N.Y., and State N.Y.

Does a registration card mean a local draft board?  If so, can we add those words to the reference note? Of should we not and simply go with the other information?

Submitted byEEon Wed, 10/14/2015 - 22:08

Newonash,

It would be wonderful if every government agency and every clerk, everywhere, followed the same conventions. Neither of us will live long enough to see that happen--but, if it ever did, the old inconsistent records would still be there to plague new researchers. EE gives an example for one typical locale, to identify essential elements for that example. Researchers who use the records of a draft board that followed a different practice just have to adapt.  As EE 2.1 ("Art vs. Science") puts it:

Once we have learned the principles of citation, we have both an artistic license and a researcher's responsibility to adapt those principles to fit materials that do not match any standard model.

Have fun adapting!

Submitted byBrian Gon Thu, 10/15/2015 - 13:00

The local boards usually stamped the back of the card, where this one has the "True Copy" stamp.  I've never seen that before!

The local board is the "39-1-109" stamped on the card, which is the local board for division number 109 of the city of New York, state of New York.  That's the local board number if you want to find the board's jurisdiction, etc.  (This board was in Manhattan, near the Williamsburg Bridge.)

All cards (should) have the local board number on them.  The first number is the state, second is the district board, third is the local board (in that district).  ("Districts" are federal judicial districts, there may be more than one district board in a given federal judicial district.)

My guess is that the jurisdiction for this local board didn't correspond to a city election precinct, so the clerk modified the form and entered the appropriate election and assembly district numbers.

I hope that helps!

Brian

 

Submitted byBrian Gon Thu, 10/15/2015 - 13:24

I realize that what I wrote ended up coming across as an assertion of "fact".

In "fact", while the number is the correct format for a local board number, I don't know who stamped the card, and if it's stamped with the correct local board number.  (Or even worse, whether *this* number represents a local board number at all.)

FWIW, local board numbers and the jurisdiction of those boards was recorded, so I suppose you can treat those almost as historical facts.

Everything else I wrote about this particular card makes sense, but it's not a "fact"!  So, as always in evaluating records, you should read my email as "one might logically presume...".

Hope that helps even more than my first posting!  :-)

Brian