The images of those records are on Ancestry, if you belong or if your local library does. You don't have to send away for them. The database is called "NEW YORK, NATURALIZATION PETITIONS, 1794-1906".  Most people have two records--the Declaration of Intent and the Naturalization Petition.  If you click on a name and all you get is the Declaration of Intent, just click on the arrow for the next page and the Naturalization Petition should be right there. The images are white on black but under 'Tools' there is an 'Invert Image' button. Click that and you will get black print on a white background--much easier to read. Don't forget to create an Ancestry page for the witness.  They often offer key clues to your person--relative, friend from home, etc. Virginia   From: Frances Brunner via <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2015 3:12 PM Subject: [NYC-ROOTS] Naturalization records-Local Court I found two guys either of whom could be the great-great-great grandfather I am looking for, among the Naturalization records from the Court of Common Pleas in New York. One is more likely than the other to be my man, because he lived in the neighborhood where he and his wife seem to have lived since coming to New York. This having been said, you could walk between the two addresses in ten or fifteen minutes. They're not so far apart. I have three questions:One, what information would I get from the file, assuming that the petition was filed in the local court, and not Federal District Court? Second, can I get the complete file on a FHL film, or do I have to send it to the relevant court/jurisdiction? Third,  is it even worthwhile to research the wife, as I believe she would have received derivative citizenship when her husband naturalized? Thanks,Frances                         ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Yes, this is exactly what I meant when I responded to the original post a couple of days ago. Also, the questioner's person turned out to be around 1870 for the birth and death. The earlier you go, the fewer the birth records. Elizabeth On 4/21/2015 6:23 PM, [email protected] wrote: > I wonder if the birth record for that child was recorded BECAUSE s/he only > lived for a day? Recording deaths was taken much more seriously than births > for some time, and if you're already filling out certificates, maybe you > just do both because of the opportunity? Or perhaps this was the time > period when births were supposed to be recorded but weren't always, and the > parents would have had to file a birth certificate when filing the death > certificate to avoid a citation or fine?

Hi Frances, You are correct about the wife getting derivative citizenship.  That was true up to 1922.  There are very, very  few naturalization records for women.  The records for the Court of Common Pleas before 1900 have the name of the party and his witness, their addresses, occupations, and signatures. I would look for them anyway. You could always research the witness.  Immigrants tended to live near other immigrants from the old country. Bobbi On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 03:12 PM, Frances Brunner via wrote: > I found two guys either of whom could be the great-great-great > grandfather I am looking for, among the Naturalization records from > the Court of Common Pleas in New York. > > One is more likely than the other to be my man, because he lived in > the neighborhood where he and his wife seem to have lived since coming > to New York. This having been said, you could walk between the two > addresses in ten or fifteen minutes. They're not so far apart. > I have three questions:One, what information would I get from the > file, assuming that the petition was filed in the local court, and not > Federal District Court? >   > Third, is it even worthwhile to research the wife, as I believe she > would have received derivative citizenship when her husband > naturalized? > Thanks,Frances

I found two guys either of whom could be the great-great-great grandfather I am looking for, among the Naturalization records from the Court of Common Pleas in New York. One is more likely than the other to be my man, because he lived in the neighborhood where he and his wife seem to have lived since coming to New York. This having been said, you could walk between the two addresses in ten or fifteen minutes. They're not so far apart. I have three questions:One, what information would I get from the file, assuming that the petition was filed in the local court, and not Federal District Court? Second, can I get the complete file on a FHL film, or do I have to send it to the relevant court/jurisdiction? Third, is it even worthwhile to research the wife, as I believe she would have received derivative citizenship when her husband naturalized? Thanks,Frances

Kathleen: I think you've hit the nail on the head. They had to file a death certificate, and so they filed the birth certificate at the same time. This would explain why I haven't found any birth certificates for her siblings. If you are trolling the New York City death certificates, you will see a lot of certificates where it just lists the surname, and the age of the deceased is 0. Because the parents' names were listed, I was able to identify this baby, and it seemed they had time to name her. I have found this same Christian name among some records that might possibly be the previous generation from the parents, for example, the baby was Rose Ann, and found some records of a family in which there is a sister named Rose Ann and a sister named Margaret, which was the name of the baby's mother. I have put those on the back burner for further consideration in the future, once I have received all my certificates and I can narrow down dates and locations. But for sure, that's why there is a birth certificate for that baby. Thanks!Frances Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 09:15:11 -0400 Subject: Re: [NYC-ROOTS] NY Long Form Birth Certs From: [email protected] To: [email protected]; [email protected] I wonder if the birth record for that child was recorded BECAUSE s/he only lived for a day? Recording deaths was taken much more seriously than births for some time, and if you're already filling out certificates, maybe you just do both because of the opportunity? Or perhaps this was the time period when births were supposed to be recorded but weren't always, and the parents would have had to file a birth certificate when filing the death certificate to avoid a citation or fine? I have no idea what if any enforcement measures were in place at the time - they don't seem to have been terribly effective - but since you HAD to file a DC, it eliminated the possibility of flying under the radar with regard to the birth. (This is all pure speculation, but it's where my mind went.) Kathleen On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Frances Brunner via <[email protected]> wrote: Interesting to note is that I have found a birth record for a child who seems to have only lived for a day. Why that child, and not the others?

Birth certificates around the turn of the century are a random thing. My grandfather, born in Maspeth at home in 1908, had one. My grandmother, born in Maspeth at home in 1913, did not. (They were required at the time, but I have been told that the law was not strictly enforced.) My grandmother's sister, who was born in 1911 and only lived 2 days, has a death certificate but not a birth certifcate. (And the death certificate has the last name misspelled. If not for the fact that Nana had held on to a clipping of the obit all of her life, I never would've found her sister.) Lisa On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 8:15 AM, Kathleen Scarlett O'Hara Naylor via < [email protected]> wrote: > I wonder if the birth record for that child was recorded BECAUSE s/he only > lived for a day? Recording deaths was taken much more seriously than births > for some time, and if you're already filling out certificates, maybe you > just do both because of the opportunity?

I wonder if the birth record for that child was recorded BECAUSE s/he only lived for a day? Recording deaths was taken much more seriously than births for some time, and if you're already filling out certificates, maybe you just do both because of the opportunity? Or perhaps this was the time period when births were supposed to be recorded but weren't always, and the parents would have had to file a birth certificate when filing the death certificate to avoid a citation or fine? I have no idea what if any enforcement measures were in place at the time - they don't seem to have been terribly effective - but since you HAD to file a DC, it eliminated the possibility of flying under the radar with regard to the birth. (This is all pure speculation, but it's where my mind went.) Kathleen On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Frances Brunner via <[email protected] > wrote: > Interesting to note is that I have found a birth record for a child who > seems to have only lived for a day. Why that child, and not the others?

thanks never did it so I thought I would ask. Thanks again Linda On 4/20/2015 4:20 PM, VLB wrote: > The microfilm reels are sent to the location you specify--a library > with a microfilm reader machine. For many people, it will be the > nearest FHL center. In my case, my local public library is an > affiliate. I think you enter your zip code and they show you the > nearest libraries. It is well worth a trip, if you have to make > one.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > It is $7.50 for a short-term rental which I think is a couple of > months so not that short. Then the library returns the reels unless > you renew. Or you can opt for a long-term rental. See their site for > the > details.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Virginia > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Linda <[email protected]> > *To:* VLB <[email protected]>; [email protected] > *Sent:* Monday, April 20, 2015 5:00 PM > *Subject:* Re: [NYC-ROOTS] NYC marriage records-1860s-info they contain > > these reels are to be returned to the Family History Library? And how do > you read them? > Linda > > > >

I'm sorry I was grouchy! Virginia From: Frances Brunner via <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 4:51 PM Subject: Re: [NYC-ROOTS] NY Long Form Birth Certs Virginia, I was not blaming the Church for anything, and I'm sorry if you took it like that. Sincerely,Frances Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:24:10 +0000 From: [email protected] To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [NYC-ROOTS] NY Long Form Birth Certs Is it necessary to blame the Catholic church for everything, especially with no evidence?  The church was the champion of the people, both in Ireland and in New York.  Read a few of Archbishop Hughes' speeches in period newspapers, for example.  And letters from desperate parish priests in Irish newspapers during the Famine, for another.  Or their fiery sermons for land reform later in the 19c.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Irish came from a land where the government was their enemy and their oppressor.  The less they told the government, the better.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In fact, many people, not just the Irish, did not register their birth and marriage events.  Consuelo Vanderbilt, one of the richest women in America, lost her citizenship when she married the Duke of Marlborough.  After divorcing him years later, she tried to regain her citizenship but had problems because her NYC birth had not been recorded by her parents.  This is from her own autobiography, 'The Glitter and the Gold'.------------------------------------------------------Virginia         From: Frances Brunner via <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 2:35 PM Subject: Re: [NYC-ROOTS] NY Long Form Birth Certs   I have found some records that I can't identify for sure because of the lack of information in the record. I hope to pinpoint more once I get some certificates. I also know, from family lore and reading history, that what you say about the Church is true. We may dealing with a bunch of people who were subservient to the Church in a way that we can't understand today, and also, a bunch of people for whom the word "authority" of any kind meant trouble, not assistance.                             ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

The microfilm reels are sent to the location you specify--a library with a microfilm reader machine.  For many people, it will be the nearest FHL center.  In my case, my local public library is an affiliate.  I think you enter your zip code and they show you the nearest libraries.  It is well worth a trip, if you have to make one.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is $7.50 for a short-term rental which I think is a couple of months so not that short.  Then the library returns the reels unless you renew.  Or you can opt for a long-term rental. See their site for the details.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Virginia   From: Linda <[email protected]> To: VLB <[email protected]>; [email protected] Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 5:00 PM Subject: Re: [NYC-ROOTS] NYC marriage records-1860s-info they contain these reels are to be returned to the Family History Library? And how do you read them? Linda

I love reading these stories. You are so lucky! Julie -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of VLB via Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 3:50 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [NYC-ROOTS] NYC marriage records-1860s-info they contain Two days ago, I received the microfilm of my great-great grandparents' 1863 marriage in NYC from the Family History Library.  It contained more info than I expected and I thought I'd list it here as we are on the subject of NYC birth, marriage, death records. The image of the original record--not a transcription--contained: DATE--day, month, year--and place (Manhattan) of marriage GROOM's name, exact address, age, race, marital condition (single or widowed), place of birth (country only in this case; more specific in others I saw). BRIDE--all of the same info as for the groom BY WHOM MARRIED and his exact address.  This allowed me to research him on Ancestry and elsewhere.  I found him, a priest, and the name of his church.  The church was closed a long time ago but I was able to find the church now holding the records.  I called them first thing this morning. They were very nice and told me to email the details so they could look up the marriage for me and send the info. They did not ask for a donation but I will send one.  I'm hoping for more details such as the witnesses etc. It's worth noting that the records were very carefully written and as easy to read as if they were typewritten.  They are organized by year, tho two years might be lumped together. Within the year, they are listed by the letters of the alphabet under the groom's surname, and within each letter, they are listed by month of the year.  It was very, very easy to find my ancestors. I found the right microfilm to order by searching my ancestors' names on www.familysearch.org Hope this helps.Virginia ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Two days ago, I received the microfilm of my great-great grandparents' 1863 marriage in NYC from the Family History Library.  It contained more info than I expected and I thought I'd list it here as we are on the subject of NYC birth, marriage, death records. The image of the original record--not a transcription--contained: DATE--day, month, year--and place (Manhattan) of marriage GROOM's name, exact address, age, race, marital condition (single or widowed), place of birth (country only in this case; more specific in others I saw). BRIDE--all of the same info as for the groom BY WHOM MARRIED and his exact address.  This allowed me to research him on Ancestry and elsewhere.  I found him, a priest, and the name of his church.  The church was closed a long time ago but I was able to find the church now holding the records.  I called them first thing this morning. They were very nice and told me to email the details so they could look up the marriage for me and send the info. They did not ask for a donation but I will send one.  I'm hoping for more details such as the witnesses etc. It's worth noting that the records were very carefully written and as easy to read as if they were typewritten.  They are organized by year, tho two years might be lumped together. Within the year, they are listed by the letters of the alphabet under the groom's surname, and within each letter, they are listed by month of the year.  It was very, very easy to find my ancestors. I found the right microfilm to order by searching my ancestors' names on www.familysearch.org  Hope this helps.Virginia

Is it necessary to blame the Catholic church for everything, especially with no evidence?  The church was the champion of the people, both in Ireland and in New York.  Read a few of Archbishop Hughes' speeches in period newspapers, for example.  And letters from desperate parish priests in Irish newspapers during the Famine, for another.  Or their fiery sermons for land reform later in the 19c.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Irish came from a land where the government was their enemy and their oppressor.  The less they told the government, the better.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In fact, many people, not just the Irish, did not register their birth and marriage events.  Consuelo Vanderbilt, one of the richest women in America, lost her citizenship when she married the Duke of Marlborough.  After divorcing him years later, she tried to regain her citizenship but had problems because her NYC birth had not been recorded by her parents.  This is from her own autobiography, 'The Glitter and the Gold'.------------------------------------------------------Virginia   From: Frances Brunner via <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 2:35 PM Subject: Re: [NYC-ROOTS] NY Long Form Birth Certs I have found some records that I can't identify for sure because of the lack of information in the record. I hope to pinpoint more once I get some certificates. I also know, from family lore and reading history, that what you say about the Church is true. We may dealing with a bunch of people who were subservient to the Church in a way that we can't understand today, and also, a bunch of people for whom the word "authority" of any kind meant trouble, not assistance.

Dear Virginia, Not grouchy! I just don't want to offend anyone! Frances Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 21:22:53 +0000 From: [email protected] To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [NYC-ROOTS] NY Long Form Birth Certs I'm sorry I was grouchy! Virginia From: Frances Brunner via <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 4:51 PM Subject: Re: [NYC-ROOTS] NY Long Form Birth Certs Virginia,I was not blaming the Church for anything, and I'm sorry if you took it like that.Sincerely,Frances Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:24:10 +0000From: [email protected]: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]: Re: [NYC-ROOTS] NY Long Form Birth CertsIs it necessary to blame the Catholic church for everything, especially with no evidence? The church was the champion of the people, both in Ireland and in New York. Read a few of Archbishop Hughes' speeches in period newspapers, for example. And letters from desperate parish priests in Irish newspapers during the Famine, for another. Or their fiery sermons for land reform later in the 19c.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The Irish came from a land where the government was their enemy and their oppressor. The less they told the government, the better.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------In fact, many people, not just the Irish, did not register their birth and marriage events. Consuelo Vanderbilt, one of the richest women in America, lost her citizenship when she married the Duke of Marlborough. After divorcing him years later, she tried to regain her citizenship but had problems because her NYC birth had not been recorded by her parents. This is from her own autobiography, 'The Glitter and the Gold'.------------------------------------------------------Virginia From: Frances Brunner via <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 2:35 PM Subject: Re: [NYC-ROOTS] NY Long Form Birth Certs I have found some records that I can't identify for sure because of the lack of information in the record. I hope to pinpoint more once I get some certificates. I also know, from family lore and reading history, that what you say about the Church is true. We may dealing with a bunch of people who were subservient to the Church in a way that we can't understand today, and also, a bunch of people for whom the word "authority" of any kind meant trouble, not assistance. -------------------------------To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Yes, do read the Church of the Latter Day Saints' familyhistory.org site first for all the particulars. Many things have changed in the past few years. First search for the films you want on line. Then order and pay for their rental on line, choosing your Family History Center the way Virginia says below. They will notify you when the films come in from Salt Lake City. What is so different now is that you do everything on line from your own computer EXCEPT reading the microfilm. So there is no need to travel to the FHC UNTIL your film arrives there. These centers are usually small places with very few films (out of the millions available) kept there permanently. So there is no need to show up there before ordering your film. I will say that many if not all FHCs have computers where you may use Ancestry and other subscription databases for free, so you may wish to use a convenient center for that purpose too. Elizabeth On 4/20/2015 5:22 PM, [email protected] wrote: > The microfilm reels are sent to the location you specify--a library with a microfilm reader machine.? For many people, it will be the nearest FHL center.? In my case, my local public library is an affiliate.? I think you enter your zip code and they show you the nearest libraries.? It is well worth a trip, if you have to make one.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > It is $7.50 for a short-term rental which I think is a couple of months so not that short.? Then the library returns the reels unless you renew.? Or you can opt for a long-term rental. See their site for the details.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Virginia

Virginia, You have an interesting point which I had not considered-that the marriage record would contain the name of the officiant, and the place. Until now, I have been unable to find Municipal records for those relatives I consider "problematic" due to lack of data, but perhaps I will be able to narrow it down once I can fill in some gaps. Then, as you said, I may get lucky with the parish registers. I want to throw it out there to the group: If you go to "Italiangen.org", they have a search engine that will allow you to search marriage records using either bride or groom, for New York City. It's worthwhile to read the page first, and find out if your relatives might be covered in that search engine, but it has helped me out quite a bit. Frances > Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:50:03 +0000 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [NYC-ROOTS] NYC marriage records-1860s-info they contain > From: [email protected] > > Two days ago, I received the microfilm of my great-great grandparents' 1863 marriage in NYC from the Family History Library. It contained more info than I expected and I thought I'd list it here as we are on the subject of NYC birth, marriage, death records. > The image of the original record--not a transcription--contained: > DATE--day, month, year--and place (Manhattan) of marriage > GROOM's name, exact address, age, race, marital condition (single or widowed), place of birth (country only in this case; more specific in others I saw). > BRIDE--all of the same info as for the groom > BY WHOM MARRIED and his exact address. This allowed me to research him on Ancestry and elsewhere. I found him, a priest, and the name of his church. The church was closed a long time ago but I was able to find the church now holding the records. I called them first thing this morning. They were very nice and told me to email the details so they could look up the marriage for me and send the info. They did not ask for a donation but I will send one. I'm hoping for more details such as the witnesses etc. > It's worth noting that the records were very carefully written and as easy to read as if they were typewritten. They are organized by year, tho two years might be lumped together. Within the year, they are listed by the letters of the alphabet under the groom's surname, and within each letter, they are listed by month of the year. It was very, very easy to find my ancestors. > I found the right microfilm to order by searching my ancestors' names on www.familysearch.org > Hope this helps.Virginia > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Thank you for that very helpful info.  I have my own birth cert from the hospital and it doesn't even have all that info.  Very useful post. Thanks again.Virginia   From: Frances Brunner via <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 12:00 PM Subject: Re: [NYC-ROOTS] NY Long Form Birth Certs Hi, My name is Frances, and I'm new to this list. I didn't know how to send an introductory message, so here it is, I guess! My family have been born in NYC since the first immigrants came ca. 1835. Most were born in Manhattan, but some in Brooklyn and the Bronx.I have birth certificates back till my grandmother's generation, which would date about 1900. I haven't gotten any yet that go further back. However, I would say that, when I hear "long form", I consider this to be the certificate that was filled up by the hospital and sent into the Department of Health. I don't have one in front of me, but I know that the ones I do have contain the names and ages of the parents, their address (because a copy of the filed certificate would be sent to them), father's occupation, place where the birth occurred, and the name and signature of the attendant. The most recent example I have is my daughter's, from 1984. In the case of my grandmother, her mother had chosen the name Margaret, but whoever filed up the certificate had written "Magdalena",  There had been some kind of family dispute going on regarding the name. It took some time to discover this, because my great grandmother was illiterate. When they made the name correction, someone actually crossed out "Magdalena" on the original document, and wrote in "Margaret,"  and this is how the official amendment was recorded. So, in documents of this era, I imagine that if there were any amendments, you would see this on the long form, too. I hope to pay a visit to the Municipal Archives in the near future. I have identified some birth records that date back to the 1880s. I have a crop of relatives that were born in Manhattan in the 1860s, and can't find any birth records for them. I think I will be more likely to find baptismal records for those people. Their parish churches are still operating. But due to the fact that I have one generation in which some people have birth records and some don't, I can see that registering of births was not strictly required or enforced until more modern times.

Virginia, I was not blaming the Church for anything, and I'm sorry if you took it like that. Sincerely,Frances Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:24:10 +0000 From: [email protected] To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [NYC-ROOTS] NY Long Form Birth Certs Is it necessary to blame the Catholic church for everything, especially with no evidence? The church was the champion of the people, both in Ireland and in New York. Read a few of Archbishop Hughes' speeches in period newspapers, for example. And letters from desperate parish priests in Irish newspapers during the Famine, for another. Or their fiery sermons for land reform later in the 19c.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Irish came from a land where the government was their enemy and their oppressor. The less they told the government, the better.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In fact, many people, not just the Irish, did not register their birth and marriage events. Consuelo Vanderbilt, one of the richest women in America, lost her citizenship when she married the Duke of Marlborough. After divorcing him years later, she tried to regain her citizenship but had problems because her NYC birth had not been recorded by her parents. This is from her own autobiography, 'The Glitter and the Gold'.------------------------------------------------------Virginia From: Frances Brunner via <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 2:35 PM Subject: Re: [NYC-ROOTS] NY Long Form Birth Certs I have found some records that I can't identify for sure because of the lack of information in the record. I hope to pinpoint more once I get some certificates. I also know, from family lore and reading history, that what you say about the Church is true. We may dealing with a bunch of people who were subservient to the Church in a way that we can't understand today, and also, a bunch of people for whom the word "authority" of any kind meant trouble, not assistance.

these reels are to be returned to the Family History Library? And how do you read them? Linda On 4/20/2015 3:50 PM, VLB via wrote: > Two days ago, I received the microfilm of my great-great grandparents' 1863 marriage in NYC from the Family History Library. It contained more info than I expected and I thought I'd list it here as we are on the subject of NYC birth, marriage, death records. > The image of the original record--not a transcription--contained: > DATE--day, month, year--and place (Manhattan) of marriage > GROOM's name, exact address, age, race, marital condition (single or widowed), place of birth (country only in this case; more specific in others I saw). > BRIDE--all of the same info as for the groom > BY WHOM MARRIED and his exact address. This allowed me to research him on Ancestry and elsewhere. I found him, a priest, and the name of his church. The church was closed a long time ago but I was able to find the church now holding the records. I called them first thing this morning. They were very nice and told me to email the details so they could look up the marriage for me and send the info. They did not ask for a donation but I will send one. I'm hoping for more details such as the witnesses etc. > It's worth noting that the records were very carefully written and as easy to read as if they were typewritten. They are organized by year, tho two years might be lumped together. Within the year, they are listed by the letters of the alphabet under the groom's surname, and within each letter, they are listed by month of the year. It was very, very easy to find my ancestors. > I found the right microfilm to order by searching my ancestors' names on www.familysearch.org > Hope this helps.Virginia > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >

Elizabeth, I know what you mean, but in this case, I have found a certificate number for her birth on March 24, 1870, and another one for her death on March 25, 1870. While I haven't gotten the actual certificates yet-I'm working on it-I take this as an example of how you never know, in records from that era, if you will find Municipal information or not. It makes it all that much more interesting-and frustrating! Frances > Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 15:31:42 -0400 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [NYC-ROOTS] NY Long Form Birth Certs > From: [email protected] > > Frances, I suggest that what you were seeing was the record of the death > of the child, not really a birth certificate. Death records were > important to show the deaths were not murders. > Elizabeth > Note I am answering Frances' email below, not asking the question. > Please do not send any replies to me but just to the list. > thanks > > On 4/20/2015 3:12 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > The earliest Municipal birth record I can find is from 1862, that guy's brother. In addition, I have been able to find records for some of his siblings, but not all. Interesting to note is that I have found a birth record for a child who seems to have only lived for a day. Why that child, and not the others? > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message