GenMassachusetts-L ArchivesArchiver > GenMassachusetts > 2003-11 > 1068312831
Subject: Re: [GM-L] An elementary question !!
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 12:33:51 EST
I might add that when I was married in 1986, I lived in Hull (MA), worked in
Boston and got married in New Bedford. My marriage was registered in City
Hall in Boston, on my lunch hour. I was married at a church in New Bedford
shortly after, near where I grew up. My marriage license shows New Bedford. All
of the records which I had to change (due to my marriage) show Hull as my
address. 100 years from now, they might have a hard time figuring out why I had
three towns listed in my records.
(now) Middleboro, MA
<<In a message dated 11/07/2003 3:43:34 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Another reasion is sometimes the wife and husband ware from diferant
towns so they had there marrage and childrens births registered in both
Sometimes a couple would move from one town to another, and they would
re register things in the new town. I have seen some where a minister
was traveling and performed some marriages, so when he got home he
registered them all there, anything to make the search harder if
location not listed.
This makes things easier to find as long as the record has the correct
locaton of where the event occured. This stil happens to some extent but
a lof less than in past times.
People did and some still do register there intentions in one town than
get married in another. I know of one small town in Berkshire County
where there was about 24 intentions in 2000, and only about 10 of them
had marriages registered, any place between there and Cape Cod. A lot of
those were for people from New York and New Jersey who stopped over the
border to get there int's. recorded than get married in another location
while on the honeymone. Why not start the trip first? Those records
could make some interesting research in another hundred years when
someone tries to find them where they lived.