Glysner, Mary

[Ratty2]

Most databased website family trees I have checked show Marie/Mary Glisner/Glisner (spelling is irrelevant at this point) born c1836 Prussia Germany married to Joseph Hanke (see my entry in the Hanke, Joseph Forum). In all US Census data she gives her birth place as Germany,  even Prussia Germany.  So far so good.  But I would love to see the Marriage License for this marriage.  So far, not so good.  What I do have is a Marriage Certificate from Manistee Michigan (Family Search) for 1857. Image is attached. BUT this is between Joseph Hanke and Mary Gleason. Did Glysner become Gleason by any chance? Or did Hanke and Mary Glysner marry somewhere else? Your assistance would be gratefully received.
The “Michigan Marriages 1822-1995” database from ‘FamilySearch’ has: "State of Michigan, County of Manistee. S.G. Smith; Hugh McGuinnie (Witnesses) I hereby certify that on the sixth day of June A.D. 1857 I joined in marriage Joseph Hunkey and Mary Gleason aged 25 years both. Hiram Walker Justice of the Peace. Manistee June 18th."
Who was Mary Gleason? Is this surname also an American version of Glysner, or is there some better evidence for Mary Glysner’s marriage to Joseph?
Mary Gleason may have been the daughter of Jonathan R Gleason, born at Massachusetts; his daughter was born at New York and not in Prussia Germany. (1860 Census, Paris Kent, Michigan page 42.)
Another document is found in the marriage record of Frank M. Dillon who married Theodora A. McQuillan, 23 Oct 1907 at Detroit, Wayne, Michigan. Mary Gleason and her husband Joseph H (not spelled out, ?Hanke?) were witnesses. (“Michigan Marriages 1822-1995” FamilySearch.)
My question is to find a document for Mary Glysner to marry Joseph Hanke between 1858 (birth of first child) and 1854 (arrival of Joseph from Le Havre) at New York.
Your assistance is gratefully appreciated.

[oldohiohome]

I would not be surprised at all if Glisner turned into Gleason depending on who spoke the name and who was writing down the records.

Manistee County and Paris, Michigan, are 200 miles apart, and we are talking the 1850s. It's unlikely Jonathan's daughter Mary married someone on the other side of Michigan. Also, did you say Jonathan Gleason's daughter Mary was on the 1860 Census as Gleason? If so, she didn't marry in 1857. Do you know what happened to Jonathan's daughter? Can you account for her in 1870 or later, when you know where Mary Glisner was? That would eliminate Jonathan's daughter as being Joseph Hanke's wife.

Or maybe her family changed the name to Gleason, officially or otherwise, because it fit in better. Especially since it shows up on the record in 1907. But on the other hand, are you sure the witness to Frank Dillon's marriage was your Mary Glisner? Most, if not all, US records would have used the woman's current name, not her maiden name. In other words, if the witness was known as Mary Gleason in 1907, it is unlikely she was Mary (Glisner) Hanke, despite being linked to a Joseph H. And if she had gone back to her maiden name, she probably wouldn't be in the same room with Joseph Hanke.

[Ratty2]

Hi Oldohiohome,
Thanks for those considerations. I tend to agree with you. Yes, the 1860 Census has her with her father at Paris Kent, Michigan; so can't be her as my Joseph Hanke and his Mary had two children by then.
Back to search for a marriage between Joshua and Maria Glysner/Glisner.
Thanks again

[oldohiohome]

The one you have already almost has to be them.
This is them in 1860 in Manistee Co, I think:
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MWDL-CFZ

And they were married in a 3 year window, Joseph's arrival to Lucy's conception. So the record is in the right place at the right time. I don't think you will find another one.

Remember the situation. you have a German speaking couple talking to probably a Yankee or Scots-Irish clerk. He is used to hearing English spoken and may have heard the name Gleason before. He hears "Gleesner" and says to himself "oh, they must mean 'Gleason'". Whether out of good intentions or arrogance, who can say.

Or the situation is that no one in the room knows how to spell English very well, including the clerk himself, and he is too ashamed or polite to ask them to spell the surname. And if he did, they wouldn't have one definitive answer, even in German. A lot of surnames were spelled as they sounded, even if everyone was literate, and differed from record to record. I can't count the number of different spellings I have seen for O'Rourke, a surname in my family. And most were with fellow Irishmen writing it down. 

I read somewhere that surname spelling didn't stabilize in the US until the Social Security Act of 1937, when once you gave the Govt. your name you had to keep it the same for your benefits to be recorded. - Although they don't change too much from census to census after 1900, at least for the English and Irish names I have seen.

I hope I didn't come across as preachy or know-it-all, I'm just trying to save you some work and frustration. File the record away as a 'very likely' and move on to immigration or land records, or whatever.

[Ratty2]

Thanks very much. Yes I have reached the same conclusion, but nice to have a second opinion.
Thanks too for the clue about the 1937 date to fix surnames. I was sure there must be such a date, but had no idea how to find it.
In Germany the same scenario was supposed to be in 1871 with the Prussian Empire.
Many thanks
Cheers

[Ratty2]

In England, marriagable age was normally 23, I believe. At or after age 23 the couple could mary without parental permission. Was the situation in Michigan similar?
On the MC for this couple their ages are given as 25 - but would this be more of a generality than a specific age?
I ask because the age of Joseph on his Immigration manifest is 33 years of age from Hesse.
Cheers
David