Census forms are great for many reasons. One is that when researching distant cousins you know less about, it provides the names of all the children for further research.
Of course, one should always be wary of that word 'all'. The thing with children is they tend to move out of the house when they reach a certain age. Ten year snapshots will usually catch children before they move out of the home, but if there's a child that is already full grown when they arrive on the shores of the US, you might not see them.
I've talked at length before about my Dudelsack lineage. My second great grandfather Selig had a brother named Julius. Previously I thought Julius had four children - Pearl, Louis, Harry and Sarah. Those were the names that appeared on the 1900 census. Luckily, I recently found Pearl's obituary, and it mentioned a brother named Samuel. I realized he had to be older, so I started the basic Ancestry searches.
As I found them in the census reports, surname only slightly misspelled, my mouth began to drop. 1910 - 5 children. 1920 - 11 children. 1930 - 13 children! I found the name of one of the children on an Ancestry Public Family Tree, and contacted the owner. She said her family was familiar with the 'Dudelsack' story, but most of them thought it was a joke! (I can't imagine why.)
I have learned three of Samuel's children are still alive, and they, along with Samuel's grandchildren and great-grandchildren have an annual reunion with an approximate attendance of 100 every Memorial Day Weekend. They're opening the invitation, though with the short notice, I'm not sure how many of our branch will make it this year.
In the future I might be able to make it, but unfortunately, I won't be able to say much here. Because WHIVSIV.
There is no question in my mind that my subscription to Ancestry.com is worth it.