Calculating with holes

Appar­ent­ly ever­ything began with a gim­mick used by US Ame­ri­can rail­way ticket coll­ec­tors. In the second half of the 19th cen­tu­ry they pun­ched tickets at spe­ci­fic points in order to make a record of a passenger´s spe­cial cha­rac­te­ri­stics: gen­der, skin colour, and so on. This was to pre­vent dif­fe­rent per­sons from using the tickets num­e­rous times. This prac­ti­ce prompt­ed the engi­neer Her­man Hol­le­rith to come up with the idea to use the same method – in stan­dar­di­zed and auto­ma­ted form – for the US cen­sus taken every ten years. Hol­le­rith had work­ed on the tenth US cen­sus in 1880 and knew the dif­fi­cul­ties being faced by the Cen­sus Bureau: The ana­ly­sis of mil­li­ons of que­sti­on­n­aires was in the mean­ti­me taking seve­ral years. But what would be the effect if part of that work were to be done with machi­nes? Wouldn’t that redu­ce the ana­ly­sis to a frac­tion of the time? And wouldn’t much more dif­fe­ren­tia­ted results be pos­si­ble with the use of the punch-recor­ded cha­rac­te­ri­stics?

The Cen­sus Bureau lost no time in initia­ting a com­pe­ti­ti­on addres­sing the que­sti­on of how to impro­ve the eva­lua­ti­on of cen­sus data. And the win­ner was: Her­man Hol­le­rith. His paten­ted punch­card was at the core of his pro­po­sal. At that time punch­cards were not real­ly new: They had alre­a­dy been used in the 19th cen­tu­ry to ope­ra­te looms, bar­rel organs or mecha­ni­cal pia­nos. What made Hollerith´s punch­cards dif­fe­rent, howe­ver, was that they stored data instead of con­trol com­mands. The rail­way ticket collector´s gim­mick was to be used on all the inha­bi­tants of the USA – pro­du­cing con­cre­te infor­ma­ti­on and attri­bu­tes in the form of punch­cards. The punch­card system that he deve­lo­ped, as well as the com­ple­men­ta­ry coun­ting machi­ne, was thereu­pon uti­li­zed in the ele­venth US cen­sus of 1890, but its impact was not limi­t­ed to cen­sus pro­ce­du­res.

Counting with holes

Fema­le workers used hole pun­ches to trans­fer the infor­ma­ti­on from the com­pi­led fami­ly que­sti­on­n­aires onto mil­li­ons of punch­cards – one card for each per­son. The strong card­board was divi­ded into 24 colum­ns and 12 rows. Each hole pun­ched in a field meant »yes«, every miss­ing hole meant »no«. Is the per­son fema­le? Mar­ried? Can he or she read? Is the skin colour black? Ent­ries like age – for exam­p­le bet­ween 20 and 30 – were pun­ched into fields cove­ring groups of ten. The coun­ting of the punch­cards was per­for­med by an elec­t­ro-mecha­ni­cal appa­ra­tus that was like­wi­se devi­sed by Hol­le­rith, a tabu­la­ting machi­ne, 43 of which were put into ope­ra­ti­on. And the popu­la­ti­on figu­res were inde­ed available in a few weeks. The­re were 62,947,714 peo­p­le coun­ted.

The inge­nious fea­ture of Hollerith´s coun­ting machi­ne, howe­ver, was some­thing else. Through its use, not only the total num­ber of cards could be coun­ted but the cards could also be sor­ted into groups accor­ding to seve­ral cri­te­ria and tho­se groups coun­ted in turn. This enab­led dif­fe­ren­tia­ted sta­tis­ti­cal data to be coll­ec­ted. If someone wan­ted to know, for exam­p­le, how many white, unmar­ried men bet­ween 20 and 30 years of age live in New Jer­sey, that info was rea­di­ly available – at a speed that see­med uni­ma­gi­nable. For this, each punch­card was slid into a sens­ing device, a rea­der. Whe­re the­re was a hole in the card a spring-loa­ded pin would dip into a well of mer­cury and ther­eby com­ple­te an elec­tri­cal cir­cuit that acti­va­ted a swit­ching device and the poin­ter of a recor­ding dial. The working con­di­ti­ons, which ent­ail­ed cau­st­ic mer­cury vapour, paper dust and pie­ce­work, were unfort­u­n­a­te­ly anything but healt­hy. The fema­le workers were known to blow some paper dust into the mer­cury bowl on pur­po­se: The elec­tri­cal cur­rent would be dis­rupt­ed; the main­ten­an­ce man for the machi­ne would have to come and refill the bowl. Looks like a good time for a brea­ther!

Hollerith machines on the advance

Despi­te such inci­dents all the sta­tis­ti­cal ana­ly­ses was com­ple­ted in only a few months. Her­man Hol­le­rith had brought about a gre­at suc­cess. He con­tin­ued to make impro­ve­ments on his machi­nes. Soon enough, the pro­cess of inser­ting the punch­cards was no lon­ger done by hand but was instead auto­ma­ted. Renow­ned for his cho­le­ric dis­po­si­ti­on, Hol­le­rith began quar­rel­ling with the Cen­sus Bureau almost imme­dia­te­ly. Word of his suc­cess, howe­ver, had quick­ly spread. Other count­ries now wan­ted to use his sort­ing method for their own popu­lace. Cus­to­mers from the busi­ness world were also stan­ding in line. In 1896 he foun­ded the Tabu­la­ting Machi­ne Com­pa­ny. His busi­ness plan work­ed out: The machi­nes were ren­ted out at a rela­tively low pri­ce as the real pro­fits came from sel­ling the punch­cards.

In 1911 Hol­le­rith with­drew from his busi­ness and sold his com­pa­ny. It was amal­ga­ma­ted with other com­pa­nies to form the Com­pu­ting Tabu­la­ting Recor­ding com­pa­ny (CTR), which was ren­a­med Inter­na­tio­nal Busi­ness Machi­nes (IBM) in 1924. The Deut­sche Hol­le­rith-Maschi­nen Gesell­schaft mbH (DEHOMAG), which initi­al­ly lea­sed Hol­le­rith machi­nes and sold punch­cards as a licen­see, had been estab­lished in Ber­lin as ear­ly as 1910. During the Ger­man infla­ti­on of 1922 its licen­se fees increa­sed to an unaf­forda­ble level and CTR, or later IBM, con­se­quent­ly took over nine­ty per­cent of the com­pa­ny. DEHOMAG remain­ed a sub­si­dia­ry com­pa­ny and in the fol­lo­wing years enjoy­ed the grea­test pos­si­ble auto­no­my. In the 1920s and 1930s it was espe­ci­al­ly suc­cessful in the are­as of rese­arch and deve­lo­p­ment.

Calculating with holes

The func­tion­al demands being made on the tabu­la­ting machi­nes ste­adi­ly grew. It was alre­a­dy clear in Hollerith´s time that com­mer­cial enter­pri­ses were inte­re­sted not only in tal­ly­ing, but to an even grea­ter ext­ent cal­cu­la­ting: Account manage­ment as well as book­kee­ping and inven­to­ry manage­ment requi­re addi­ti­on and sub­trac­tion pro­ce­s­ses. Invoi­cing, payroll accoun­ting and inte­rest cal­cu­la­ti­on are not pos­si­ble wit­hout mul­ti­pli­ca­ti­on and divi­si­on. Litt­le by litt­le the tabu­la­ting machi­nes were equip­ped with new func­tions. In the 1920s and 1930s they were alre­a­dy a long way from Hollerith´s pro­to­ty­pe: No more toxic mer­cury, but instead auto­ma­ted card rea­ders, elec­tro­ma­gne­tic arith­me­tic-logic units, exch­an­geable switch panels and data out­put by means of line prin­ters. Even the punch­cards had chan­ged. They now had more rows and colum­ns so that more holes could be pun­ched, which meant they could car­ry more data.

The D11 tabu­la­ting machi­ne, which DEHOMAG first intro­du­ced onto the mar­ket in 1935, repre­sen­ted a true mile­stone in the histo­ry of punch­card tech­no­lo­gy. In Ger­ma­ny alo­ne around 1,100 of the­se machi­nes were pro­du­ced by 1945. By means of so-cal­led »inter­me­dia­te ope­ra­ti­ons« the cour­se of the sequen­ti­al cal­cu­la­ting steps – a pro­gram – could be deter­mi­ned by varia­ble elec­tro­nic wirings on a plug board. But the most impres­si­ve fea­tures of the D11 were its abili­ty to per­form all four basic arith­me­tic ope­ra­ti­ons and its arith­me­tic-logic unit being equip­ped with balan­ce con­trol. The­se made it attrac­ti­ve for the most diver­se fields of appli­ca­ti­on inclu­ding, for exam­p­le, the ban­king and cre­dit sec­tors, com­mer­ce, indu­stry and insu­rance. The pie­ce exhi­bi­ted at the Deut­sches Tech­nik­mu­se­um had thus still been com­pe­tent enough to be in use at the GDR Sta­te Insu­rance so many years later. The last ver­si­on of this tabu­la­tor was sold under the name IBM D11 Type 450.

Shadows and light

In the first half of the 20th cen­tu­ry, tabu­la­tors like the D11 ratio­na­li­zed the admi­ni­stra­ti­ve pro­cess of the sta­te and the eco­no­my to a huge ext­ent. The high speed and pre­cis­i­on of the coun­ting and cal­cu­la­ting pro­ce­s­ses enab­led copious amounts of data to be hand­led while at the same time lowe­ring costs. Thus com­pa­nies estab­lished their own »Hol­le­rith depart­ments« from ear­ly on. Apart from that, the tabu­la­tors and puch­cards con­tin­ued to be indis­pen­si­ble for cen­sus taking. In the 1930s DEHOMAG had a mono­po­ly on the machi­ne data pro­ce­s­sing busi­ness in Ger­ma­ny. The com­pa­ny enjoy­ed the sup­port of the Natio­nal Socia­list regime. It was thus more than hap­py to sup­p­ly the machi­nes, per­son­nel and know-how for the 1933 and 1939 cen­su­s­es – with the sup­port and direc­tion of its Ame­ri­can parent com­pa­ny IBM. Tabu­la­tors from the IBM sub­si­dia­ry were also in use in the Depart­ments for Auto­ma­ted Report­ing Systems inclu­ding, for exam­p­le, the NSDAP´s office of racial poli­tics, the so-cal­led »Juden­re­fe­rat« (Jewish bureau) of the Reich Main Secu­ri­ty Office respon­si­ble for the »Final Solu­ti­on for the Jewish Que­sti­on« and in con­cen­tra­ti­on camps. They thus par­ti­ci­pa­ted in the »total regi­stra­ti­on« of the Jewish peo­p­le and the orga­nizati­on of the Holo­caust.

It wasn´t long after 1945 that DEHOMAG went back into pro­duc­tion. Demand for office and punch­card machi­nes grew in the post-war years. The West Ger­man eco­no­mic mira­cle kept the cash regi­sters rin­ging even for DEHOMAG, which was ren­a­med »IBM« after 1949. Pro­duc­tion of the D11 wasn´t dis­con­tin­ued until 1960. As ear­ly as the begin­ning of the 1950s it beca­me appa­rent that auto­ma­ted data pro­ce­s­sing was deve­lo­ping in ano­ther direc­tion: The digi­tal com­pu­ter was poi­sed to replace the elec­t­ro-mecha­ni­cal machi­nes. Punch­cards, howe­ver, con­tin­ued to be used even in the coming digi­tal age of main­frame com­pu­ters. It was the hig­her sto­rage capa­ci­ty of magne­tic tapes that final­ly spel­led the demi­se of the punch­card around the mid-1960s.


Published in: Stif­tung Deut­sches Tech­nik­mu­se­um Ber­lin (Ed.): Net Mat­ters. 30 Sto­ries. From Tele­graph Cables to Data Glas­ses, Ber­lin 2018.
Trans­la­ti­on: Bar­ry Fay, Lost in Trans­la­ti­on
Object pho­to­gra­phy: Cle­mens Kirch­ner, Stif­tung Deut­sches Tech­nik­mu­se­um Ber­lin


Lite­ra­tu­re:

Black, Edwin: IBM and the Holo­caust. The stra­te­gic Alli­ance bet­ween Nazi Ger­ma­ny and America’s Most Powerful Cor­po­ra­ti­on, Lon­don 2001.

da Cruz, Frank: Hol­le­rith 1890 Cen­sus Tabu­la­tor, 2011. (acce­s­sed 17.10.2017)

Götz, Aly/Roth, Karl Heinz: The Nazi Cen­sus: Iden­ti­ca­ti­on and Con­trol in the Third Reich, Phil­adel­phia 2004.

Pet­zold, Hart­mut: Moder­ne Rechen­künst­ler. Die Indu­stria­li­sie­rung der Rechen­tech­nik in Deutsch­land, Mün­chen 1992.