> Hello. > Compiling such a central index for the entire Archdiocese since its > inception > for all Births Marriages and Deaths would be an exercise of > enormous scale > (if feasible at all) and require major funding which the > Archdiocese is not > likely to commit for such a project. There is a death index at the IGG site that includes everyone who died between 1891-1948 in boros listed. Many of these dead people were Jews or Protestants. I think it is feasible. I would think there is several methods to get funding for such a project. > > Even if completed a central index would not solve the problems of then > getting the local parishes to respond to requests for searches. > Parish staffs these > days struggle just to provide the essential services to > parishioners, even > $20.00 per search wouldn't be cost effective and they couldn't use > volunteers > without getting back to the privacy issue! Asking them to search from 1882-1888 for a marriage that might have taken place there is a lot more time than asking them to turn to page 192 in the register and send the marriage certificate for X and Y on 12 Feb 1885. That takes seconds, SECONDS to complete. For $20? If only I could make $20 so easily for doing so little. > > To create the Index, every parish register would have to be > accessed and > transcribed in which case it would make more sense to enter every > record in its > entirety into the database and simply create the master index from > that. I agree completely. But since the powers that be put up a roadblock to that, the index is being floated as trial balloon. > > The Archdiocese would then have access to not only the Index but > the actual > record data so that requesting a search and content of the record > if found > could be "one stop shopping" for the researcher. Amen. This makes too much sense. Maybe that is why they are not inclined to implement it. > > The cost per search/record and the effort to establish one's > relationship and > therefore "right" to get a copy of the private record would > probably be > significant but perhaps worth it for researchers otherwise"stuck". Clearly most Irish researchers in NY have this issue. My great grandfather married THREE times in NYC between 1878-1892. NO CIVIL record was created for any of them. I have the 1878 and the 1892 wedding certificates from the parishes. A great-grandmother was widowed in 1897 and remarried in 1903 in NYC. I have the church certificate but there was no civil record filed. Her sister married twice in NYC and the c. 1900 has no civil record and I can't find the right parish. The second marriage in 1920 had a City Clerk license but no Health Department certificate. I have church records for weddings from 1878, 1881, 1882, 1892 and 1903 with no civil record. I have civil records for 1872, 1902 and 1905. I have not gotten the church records because they provide less information. I am still searching for 5 weddings I know took place in NYC because of the census and vital records: c.1881, c. 1885, c.1890, c. 1897 and c. 1900. I know they must be Catholic weddings because both parties were Catholic and if they married civilly there would be a CIVIL record. Ten out thirteen weddings I am searching have NO CIVIL record. I doubt others on the list have a much different story. I think the first thing to establish for the chancery is just how many marriages went unreported. I think they think it was a few. I think it was a minimum of 66% went unrecorded and possibly a lot more. If they think it is a few thousand they are not inclined to bother with this. I wish we could get a random sample of 25 parishes at 10-50 marriages per parish and check them against the IGG website index between 1866-1900 or so. Would that be too much to ask? If my numbers are way off and 90% were recorded than I would gladly drop this. I am willing to test my theory and be exposed as a fool if wrong. This would be a great college statistics project. > > I'm not sure that preservation of extremely old records from long > defunct > parishes would be a focus for the Archdiocese anyway, what use > would they be to > them beyond the life span of the individuals concerned and any need > to report > to the civil authority? Again you are right but why not make them public through a microfilming and an archive at Chambers Street, Dunwoodie or dare I say the FHL? I have not been given a single plausible excuse for the current situation. This is the type of stuff that causes most people that leave to leave the Church. The Church should go to the mat on the Trinity, the Real Presence but not when my wanting to find an 1890 marriage record is the issue. Shame on me for leaving if I did but why be so rigid when Chicago and Ireland have filmed their records? > > G. McC > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ************************************** > See AOL's top rated recipes > (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004) > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to IRISH-NEW- > YORK-CITY-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message