NSW historic marriage certificates with blanks

[majm]

I am unsure where to post the following info, ie on which of the many threads that I have mentioned these "blanks" issues.

But I have now received a transcript copy of a NSW marriage cert that gives me reason to believe that marriages in the late 1880's at St Lawrence O'Toole Roman Catholic Church  (part of the Coonamble parish)  have been reconciled.

I have ALL the details in the transcript,  , NONE OF THE DREADED BLANKS ....  this time    ....  I won't need to contact any parish or family history group, and I now have confirmation of my research through Electoral Rolls, Oral History, private family papers etc. So I can now confidently validate and update my family history tree. 

....................................
UNDER THE GROOM's details
both given names of the groom, his surname, his place of birth, his occupation, his age at marriage, his status (a bachelor), his usual residence, both given names for his father, (and surname of course),  father's occupation, mother's given and nee name (and noted she was deceased)

UNDER THE BRIDE's details
her three given names, her surname, her place of birth, her occupation, her age at marriage, her status (a spinster), her usual address, all three of the given names for her father (and surname), her father's occupation, her mother's two given names and nee name

UNDER THE MARRIAGE details
the date of the marriage, the place (naming the church, town etc), the religion, the witnesses (given and surnames), and the minister (given and and surname).

The Consent of (the three given names and surname), being the Father of the Bride, was given in writing to the marriage of (full names for bride and groom), the said (full names of the bride) being under the age of 21 years. 


The transcriber has made a note re one of the witnesses ... confirming the spelling of one of the given names of one of the witnesses (ie confirming that they have checked carefully, and it reads "Margret")

.......................................

So to me, this is indicating that NSW BDM has at least reconciled the parish records for that period in that rural location. (1880's Coonamble district, )

SO, if you meet with a "decline" to permit access to parish records due to it being confidential to the parish members or similar  (that has not happened to me personally, but I have heard it can happen), then please gently smile and suggest that the  Coonamble RC parish (at that time I think it was changing over from Maitland to Bathurst Diocese) permitted their records to be reconciled with NSW BDM and then quietly wait for a convenient time for access or for the archivist to obtain the details/give you the contact details for unlocking the access....

Cheers,  JM

[cocksie]

With all this fantastic info some of my brick walls in Australia may crumble somewhat! Thank you.

[majm]

Hi Cocksie, 

I am not sure how the systems work in the other states of Australia, my comments relate to New South Wales. 

If you are stuck, and it is a NSW mc that is lacking the info,  then simply DO NOT panic, and work through all the suggestions.

I wish you every success,

Cheers,  JM

[cocksie]

To add to jm's very good information (and provide evidence about blanks & holes") - in front of me as I type I have 3 documents (2 of which were collated by others over the past 15 plus years) all pertaining to the same NSW marriage in 1837

1.  NSW BDM certificate listing bride & groom's name and abode, minister's name and 2 witnesses listed: being bride & groom's name again.

2.  Transcript of marriage (obtained 1999 through well known & recognised transcriber) listing bride & groom's name and abode and 2 witnesses listed (not bride & groom!).  No minister listed.

3.  Copy of actual parish register record listing bride & groom's name and abode AND 2, possibly 3, witnesses (last listing impossible to read although it could be stating parish name) AND minister's name.

Neither certificate or transcript were completely correct and true representations of the actual register and each missing bit provides a small clue. 

It certainly is worth persisting and getting hold of a copy or viewing the actual parish register

[majm]

I am so very pleased for you Cocksie. 

The Primary Records are in my opinion, always the best option if available, and I am simply so very pleased that you persisted and were able to get to them.    Now, ummm .....      You don't have the actual certificate that the clergyman handed to the bride, do you 

I guess the NSW BDM certificate would be based on the summary of that 1837 m.c. that had been transmitted to one of the NSW Chaplains as part of a quarterly return and indexed in the years around 1930's (relying on memory and oral history info) .  . . 
I presume the Transcript would be based on the entry at NSW BDM that was made available in 1999 to the transcriber and also the then terms of their licence to transcribe; and of course, the parish register well that depends on your own skills at transcribing, and comparing what you can already verify when comparing that parish register.   

Thank you for updating this thread.  I hope many other RChatters will benefit from reading this thread too. 

Many Cheers,  JM
 

[dated connections]

Thank you so much for all that detailed information majm.  This information is of vital importance to the uninitiated NSW based rootschatters like myself.  It is like a handbook that will hopefully help you pass through an obvious dead end.  It is so full of information in the various posts and so easy to understand that I have spent some time absorbing it, and as I have all the ministers and places where the various  members of the family got married 160 years ago, I will now get in touch with their
archivists and try my luck there.  This is something that I probably wouldnt have thought of and thought that the transcriber and the BDM was the "b" all and "end" all of certificate information.  Glad  that you put us all straight.  I am happy   that your love of family history has not waned in all those years, and that you are happy to help others find their way.  All the best, Camelot

[majm]

Many thanks for your kind words,

It is all about sharing, and that's what is so very special about RChat, we are all sharing.

Cheers,  JM

[majm]

I have received quite a number of PMs about this topic,  and in the past several weeks some of those PMs are asking about the familysearch website currently displaying some of the elusive blanks.   I do not know anything about where that organisation has sourced the information, but I do recognise it seems to be the work of volunteer transcribers as it is uploaded to the Historic Records section of the website, which I think would be akin to the IGI extracted records from their earlier website.   The Historic Records do not seem to include any submitted entries.   I can see there are submitted entries on a different section of that website.

If anyone has further details or can confirm/contradict/add to/tell me I am wrong/etc,  please do, afterall RChat is about sharing, and I willingly admit that I can be mistooken.

https://www.familysearch.org/   

Cheers,  JM.

[Billyblue]

Hi JM et al
I haven't looked at the FamilySearch site, but I do know that for years, the LDS church (who own that site) have endeavoured to film actual parish registers of all churches.  Of course, some churches won't allow this and others will.  As it is an ongoing project for the LDS, to provide genalogical information for their church members and thus, luckily, for us, I guess they are still doing this.

So it's always worthwhile going back to their website periodically, 'just in case'

Happy New Year everyone

Dawn M