An Analysis of the Ackley Surname in U.S. Census Records

One of the tools that genealogists rely heavily upon is census records. Along with birth, marriage, and death records and wills, census records can provide important clues in the timelines of our ancestors' lives. Although the Framers weren't thinking about helping us with our genealogy research when they included the requirement in Article 1, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution to conduct an enumeration of the population every 10 years, we are fortunate that such a rich set of data exists and is made available to us.

Theoretically we should be able to use U.S. Census records to compile a list of every Ackley who has lived in the United States from 1850 to 1950, and at least the heads of households with the Ackley surname between 1790 and 1840 (more on that below). As we all know, theory and practice don't always match up -- I'm sure we all have examples of not being able to find specific family members in some census year (I still haven't found my paternal grandmother and uncle in the 1930 census!). While we might have some individual frustrations with missing census data, taken as a whole U.S. Census data can provide valuable information for our research. I am on a quest to enter all of the Ackleys appearing in the U.S. Census for all years into a public tree on Ancestry (which will also be uploaded to the Ackley Family Genealogy website) so that anyone researching the surname can find them all in one place. Although I have a lot of work to do to get all of the data entered into a tree, I have learned enough that I thought it would be worth writing a post about what I know so far. 

Methodology

I am using the U.S. Census records on Ancestry for this project. I searched for the Ackley surname in the "Last Name" box on the search screen, spelling it the usual way and allowed Ancestry to look for variations in the name (i.e., I did not select the "Exact" option underneath the last name). I'm not sure what type of logic Ancestry uses to look for variations, but the alternate spellings that turn up in this search included Ackley, Acklie, Ackly, Acla, Acly, Akley, Akkley, Achley, Acheley, Achly, Auckley, Aukley, Augley, Aakley, Acaley, Aockley, Aokley, Achle, Achlei, Aackley, Acklea, and Aukley. Also included in the search results were any names for which a user has submitted a correction to Ackley. For example, one of the records included in the search results for 1950 was the following for Charlotte Akkley:

The small dialogue box next to her last name indicates that a user has submitted a correction for that record. If you click on "View Record" you will see the following:

The Ackley in square brackets indicates that a user has submitted an update, and if you click on [Ackley] you will get an explanation of that update:

In this case, user PReace states that there was a transcription error on this record, and a look at the actual census image shows that this is a good call:

The handwriting is a little squirrelly, but it does look like "Ackley" to me rather than "Akkley". I'm not sure if transcription/indexing on Ancestry is done by humans or Artificial Intelligence (AI) (or a combination), but there were some examples that make me believe that AI may be in use, and that it isn't quite ready for prime time. For example, there was an Ackley family in Mount Pleasant, Wisconsin that had the following search results:

The first three records seem reasonable - all three individuals have other household members reported, an estimated birth year and birth place, and their relationship to the head of the household. But the last two seem suspect; Ander Conster Ackley doesn't really sound like a name, and the relationship to head of household is "Pruction". Leo Ackley could be a person, but his relationship to head of household is "Steet". The actual census sheet looks like this:

You can see that the first three records are indeed people, but the next line states that the next house after the Ackley household is "Vacant (Under Construction)". This became a new family member in the indexing (Ander Conster Ackley). The line after that says "No one home See Sheet"  in the name and relationship columns, with the sheet numbers and lines in the next few columns. This became Leo Ackley. Whatever technology was used to index this information wasn't able to discern that those last two lines were not part of the Ackley family, and ended up making some stuff up to make them fit. I can't imagine a human making that mistake; Ancestry needs to do better with the technology they are using to index this data.

The good news is that in normal genealogy research you'll probably never run into this situation. I encountered it because I was trying to summarize large amounts of data related to the Ackley surname and wasn't interested in the individual records at this time. However, my project doesn't stop there; as mentioned above I am working on a project to enter all Ackleys found in all U.S. Census records into a public tree on Ancestry, so I will eventually look at all of the records Ancestry has indexed as Ackley. This is a long, tedious process. So far I have entered all Ackleys from the 1950 Census (over 5,000 people), and  I am now reviewing each one of these people to make sure they belong since some of them were variations of Ackley as discussed above. I am also trying to connect families together; Ancestry hints have been very helpful in suggesting parents for each individual, and that has helped tremendously in this process. Of course I am exercising caution in doing this; as many of you have experienced, hints can sometimes lead one astray if you blindly follow them. Next I will add the 1940 Census and continue to work my way back until all Ackleys from all census years have been put into the tree.

Data Overview

Although I have a long way to go to capture all of the Ackley records in the U.S. Census, I have already learned a great deal about Ackleys in the census at the macro level. The chart below shows the number of Ackley individuals counted in the U.S. census each year versus the total population count of the U.S. during those years.

Ackley count data in the chart and table above came from Ancestry.com.
See references [17]-[32] below. Total population figures are from [33].

Not surprisingly, the increase in the number of Ackleys counted mirrors the increase in the total population during those years. However, I think the Ackley bars would look a little flatter in the more recent censuses after 1950. The table below shows the data used to create the chart above; you can see that the % of the U.S. population that has the Ackley surname has been between .00353% and .01135% for the years for which detailed census data are publicly available. Put another way, over time, somewhere between 3 in 100,000 and 11 in 100,000 Americans have been recorded with the surname Ackley in the census data between 1790 and 1950. In 2000, the Ackley surname represented .00167% of the population, or less than 2 in 100,000 Americans, and the figure for 2010 is .0023%, or slightly more than 2 in 100,000 Americans.

Years highlighted in yellow only counted heads of household. Figures given for
 those years are estimated using total number of individuals in each household
having an Ackley as the head of household. Ackley count data comes from
 Ancestry.com, see references [17]-[32] below. Total population data from [33].

There have been 44,406 or so Ackleys recorded in the U.S. Census from 1790 to 1950. I use the qualifier "or so" because from 1790 to 1840, only heads of household were recorded by name; the rest of the individuals living in each household were recorded just as numbers. In 1790, there were 75 heads of household recorded with the Ackley surname or the variations discussed above. If you add up all of the individuals reported living in those 75 Ackley households, i.e., count everyone in the household as an Ackley, there were 446 Ackleys, which is probably an overcount. On the other hand, there are likely Ackley individuals living in households headed by non-Ackley individuals, which would result in an undercount. So the figures for 1790 to 1840 in the table above are just an estimate of the total number of Ackleys living in the states for which census records still exist, and we can't really determine if they are an overestimate or underestimate.  Finally, there are records that are known to be missing, especially for the earlier years. For example, in 1790 the census was taken in 17 states; the data for Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Vermont is available, but the data for Delaware, Georgia, Kentucky, New Jersey, Tennessee, and Virginia no longer exists. Records for these states were lost or destroyed for various reasons. Undoubtedly there were Ackley families living in some of these states, so the total counts are underestimates. The table below shows which states each census counted and which records are extant today. Note that all 1890 Census records were destroyed in a 1921 fire at the Department of Commerce.

Data for this table was found on the National Archives website and Wikipedia. See references [1]-[16] below.

Surname Distribution Maps

I thought it would be interesting to use the census data to examine the distribution of Ackley families throughout the United States over time. Several years ago, I went through a similar exercise with the Ackley surname and associated names in England. The goal of that exercise was mainly to see if I could gain any insights into the origins of our ancestors in England. The goal of the current exercise is quite different; we know our surname originated in England, and we even know where the first Ackley in the United States settled, so this is mostly an attempt to examine the migration of Ackleys across the country as the frontier moved west.

For each map, the color scheme is the same: red indicates no Ackleys were counted in a state because the state was not counted. Yellow indicates the state was counted, but the data is no longer available. White indicates the state was counted, data is available, but no Ackleys were counted. Green colors indicate the number of Ackleys that were counted; the lightest color green indicates 1-100, while the darkest green indicates 801-900. Note that West Virginia was a part of Virginia until 1863, but since the mapping application I am using is for the current 50 states, West Virginia will be colored red until 1870, the first time it was counted separately. Figures for what is now West Virginia are included in the Virginia count for all censuses before that.

Ackley Locations in 1790 U.S. Census

In 1790, there were 75 Ackley households counted in the census, with an estimated 446 individuals in those households. Ackleys were found in 9 of the 18 states that were counted. Note that there were 6 states counted for which the records are no longer available (in yellow above). 1790 was 140 years after Nicholas Ackley's estimated arrival in Connecticut, and almost 50% of the Ackley households in the census were still in Connecticut. Another 31% lived in the neighboring state of New York.

Ackley Locations in 1800 U.S. Census

By 1800, the number of Ackley households counted had grown to 82, about a 10% increase. In contrast, the total population of the United States increased by about 35%. Connecticut (41%) and New York (41%) again account for the vast majority of Ackley households counted in 1800. Once again there are several states that were counted for which records no longer exist.

Ackley Locations in 1810 U.S. Census

The number of Ackley households increased to 106 in 1810, a 23% increase over 1800. The U.S. population increased by 36% during that time. Connecticut and New York still accounted for over 75% of the Ackley households, but Maine now has 6% of the Ackley households, an inordinately high proportion given Maine's relative overall population. This trend continues, and will be discussed in greater detail later in another post.

Ackley Locations in 1820 U.S. Census

Data quality is getting better; data from only three states is missing for 1820. New York still accounts for almost 50% of Ackley households, but Connecticut's share has decreased to 17%. Maine is up to 8%, and Ohio and Pennsylvania are at about the same level. 1820 is the first year that data is available for Ohio. The 1820 data shows Ohio had a large number of Ackley households (68), so it is probable that Ohio actually had a sizeable share of Ackley households in previous years, but there is no data to prove it. The number of Ackley households has grown by about 39%, but some portion of this is due to the availability of Ohio data that wasn't available for 1810.

Ackley Locations in 1830 U.S. Census

Data from all states that were counted in 1830 is available. There was a 52% increase in the number of Ackley households between 1820 and 1830, while the population of the United States increased only 33%. Some of the discrepancy in growth rates can be explained by the availability of data for New Jersey in 1830 that was not available in 1820. New Jersey's Ackley households made up about 20% of the increase between 1820 and 1830. However, New York was responsible for a legitimate increase from 66 to 102 Ackley households, which accounts for 47% of the total increase in Ackley households. Connecticut had a net loss of 6 Ackley households, dropping from 17% of the total to 8%. Ohio and Pennsylvania both had significant increases.

Ackley Locations in 1840 U.S. Census

New York still leads the way in Ackley households with 40% of the total. The number of Ackley households has increased by 39% since 1830, and Ackleys are found in 19 of the 30 states counted in this census.

Ackley Locations in 1850 U.S. Census

1850 is the first census year where the name of every individual counted was reported, so the counts given above are actual counts, not estimates as reported in previous years. Note that Ackleys have reached California by 1850. Interestingly, the Ackley individuals found in California appear to have been drawn there by the California Gold Rush. All of them live in Calaveras and El Dorado counties, which was the center of Mother Lode Country where gold was discovered in 1848. Two of the men were miners presumably hoping to strike it rich, and the others were merchants, likely hoping to make their own fortunes selling supplies to the miners.

Ackley Locations in 1860 U.S. Census

Forty-one states were counted in the 1860 Census, and Ackleys were found in 27 of them. New York still has almost twice as many Ackleys as the second-place state, Ohio, but New York has actually declined slightly since 1850. The number of Ackleys in the Midwestern states of Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin has more than doubled.

Ackley Locations in 1870 U.S. Census

Oklahoma, Alaska, and Hawaii are the only states that were not counted in 1870, although as in previous census years some of the 48 that were counted are still territories. Ackleys were present in 41 of the 48 states counted.

Ackley Locations in 1880 U.S. Census

The"Big 4" states of New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Ohio still account for a majority of the Ackleys in the United States, with 55% of the total. The total number of Ackleys has grown only about 13%, while the U.S. population has grown 30%.

Ackley Locations in 1900 U.S. Census

1900 is the first year Ackleys were counted in Alaska, although Alaska would not become a state until 1959. One of the two people counted in Alaska may not have been an Ackley (his name was spelled Acale and he was from France), but the other one was named William H. Ackley. William was originally from Maine, and was working as a fisherman in Wrangell Narrows. William was also the only Ackley counted in Alaska in both the 1910 and 1920 Censuses. In 1910 he was still in Wrangell and was still a fisherman, but by 1920 he was working at a cannery in Sitka.

The states of New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Ohio account for 46% of the Ackleys counted in the 1900 Census. Only five states (Arizona, Georgia, Hawaii, Mississippi, and Nevada) did not have Ackleys living in them.

Ackley Locations in 1910 U.S. Census

In 1910, 72% of the Ackleys in the U.S. live east of the Mississippi river, while 70% of the total population lives east of the Mississippi, suggesting migration patterns for Ackleys were not much different than the population in general.

Ackley Locations in 1920 U.S. Census

Ackleys are everywhere! 1920 is the first (and so far only) census year where an Ackley was counted in all 50 states plus Washington, DC.

Ackley Locations in 1930 U.S. Census

The Ackley population only grew 5% between 1920 and 1930, while the U.S. population grew by 16%.

Ackley Locations in 1940 U.S. Census

The only state that had no Ackleys counted in 1940 was Alaska. The lone Ackley resident of Hawaii was Ray Ackley from Pennsylvania, who was an Army private in the Quartermaster Corps at Fort Armstrong in Honolulu. He must have just arrived in Hawaii; the census was taken on April 1, 1940 and military records indicate he entered service on March 1, 1940.

Ackley Locations in 1950 U.S. Census

Hawaii was the only state that did not have an Ackley living there in 1950. Ray Ackley was discharged from the Army in August, 1945 and was back home in Pennsylvania in 1950. There are now 4 Ackleys living in Alaska; they are a military family living in Anchorage.

One interesting phenomenon in the 1950 data is that the states of Michigan, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania still account for 40% of the Ackleys counted even though they make up only 26% of the total U.S. population. By 1950 the United States was highly mobile, and moving anywhere in the country was available to most people, yet many Ackleys tended to still be living near where their ancestors lived.

How Can We Use This Information?

Certainly looking at the data at this level is not necessarily helpful for individual genealogy research. However, knowing where Ackley families are concentrated over the census years can be useful in narrowing the search to fewer locations. Also, knowing that the entire population of Ackleys in the United States up through 1950 is less than 50,000 is useful in that it establishes a somewhat reasonable upper bound on the number of people we need to concern ourselves with in our research. Fifty-thousand people is obviously still a big number, but given that an estimated 550 to 600 million people have lived in the United States since its founding in 1776, 50,000 doesn't seem so bad.

As I continue to add people to the tree I am building in this project, I am sure I will discover more information that will be useful to Ackley researchers. As mentioned above, the concentration of Ackleys in Maine is an interesting tidbit I have already discovered, and I will report on it and other interesting items in subsequent posts.

Link of the Day

This is a link to the main census page at the National Archives, which has a lot of good information about the data available in each of the censuses conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau:

https://www.archives.gov/research/census

Quote of the Day

“The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool.”

― William Shakespeare, As You Like It

Sources

1. National Archives and Records Administration, "1790 Census Records." https://www.archives.gov/research/census/1790. 

2. National Archives and Records Administration, "1800 Census Records." https://www.archives.gov/research/census/1800. 

3. National Archives and Records Administration, "1810 Census Records." https://www.archives.gov/research/census/1810. 

4. National Archives and Records Administration, "1820 Census Records." https://www.archives.gov/research/census/1820.

5. National Archives and Records Administration, "1300 Census Records."  https://www.archives.gov/research/census/1830.

6. National Archives and Records Administration, "1840 Census Records." https://www.archives.gov/research/census/1840.

7. National Archives and Records Administration, "1850 Census Records."  https://www.archives.gov/research/census/1850. 

8. National Archives and Records Administration, "1860 Census Records."  https://www.archives.gov/research/census/1860. 

9. National Archives and Records Administration, "1870 Census Records."  https://www.archives.gov/research/census/1870.

10. Wikipedia contributors, "1880 United States census," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1880_United_States_census&oldid=1325355106 (accessed March 12, 2026).

11. Wikipedia contributors, "1900 United States census," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1900_United_States_census&oldid=1343150783 (accessed March 12, 2026).

12. Wikipedia contributors, "1910 United States census," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1910_United_States_census&oldid=1343150969 (accessed March 12, 2026).

13. Wikipedia contributors, "1920 United States census," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1920_United_States_census&oldid=1343151079 (accessed March 12, 2026).

14. Wikipedia contributors, "1930 United States census," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1930_United_States_census&oldid=1343151169 (accessed March 12, 2026).

15. Wikipedia contributors, "1940 United States census," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1940_United_States_census&oldid=1339294004 (accessed March 12, 2026).

16. Wikipedia contributors, "1950 United States census," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1950_United_States_census&oldid=1329262279 (accessed March 12, 2026).

17. Ancestry.com. 1790 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010.

18. Ancestry.com. 1800 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2010.

19. Ancestry.com. 1810 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Lehi, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010.

20. Ancestry.com. 1820 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010.

21. Ancestry.com. 1830 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010.

22. Ancestry.com. 1840 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Lehi, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010.

23. Ancestry.com. 1850 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Lehi, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2009. 

24. Ancestry.com. 1860 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Lehi, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2009. 

25. Ancestry.com. 1870 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Lehi, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2009.

26. Ancestry.com and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 1880 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Lehi, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2010.

27. Ancestry.com. 1900 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Lehi, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2004.

28. Ancestry.com. 1910 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Lehi, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2006.

29. Ancestry.com. 1920 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010.

30. Ancestry.com. 1930 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2002.

31. Ancestry.com. 1940 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012.

32. Ancestry.com. 1950 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Lehi, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2022.

33. Wikipedia contributors, "List of U.S. states and territories by historical population," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_historical_population&oldid=1338153151 (accessed April 1, 2026)