Read up around the first few pages and look at the collection system. (I think we are talking about the same REPORT) Read 5-8 or 5-9 maybe where they talk about the microfilm records, and keypunch. Prior to input, error correction would take place.
There WAS, and IS, no BCP (Birth Certificate Police) who made sure all bcs were filled in properly. Each state could also modify and use the standard forms to fit their own needs. For example, somewhere in that REPORT (cause it wasn’t a printout of LAW), you will note some states did not report “illegitimate” status while some did.
Somewhere around page 231, as I recall and if we are talking about the same report, you get your “race” discussion where Chinese and japanese are “races”. This was hardly rocket science stuff. As I pointed out to someone, I forget who, there is no way to determine what each state’s dept. of health, or dept. of vital statistics did or what their internal control systems were.
I think Louisiana continued to use “colored” “mulatto” and “octaroon” for a long time. Not sure when it ended. Not worth researching.
parsy
Thanks for showing you didn’t read again. Chinese and Japanese were part of the standard race classifications I just quoted. Those aren’t the names dervied from continents like Afican is. You also glazed right over the part that said Hawaiian and part-Hawaiian were part of the standard categories ... meaning they were specifically accounting for Hawaiian birth practices.
Parse, you can’t score points when you keep dropping the ball. That’s like Obama and how he describes his bowling skills.