NYKINGS-L Archives

Archiver > NYKINGS > 2006-07 > 1151992627


From:
Subject: assumptions about Thomas CONDE marriage
Date: 3 Jul 2006 23:57:07 -0600


This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.

Classification: Query

Message Board URL:

http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/RUB.2ACI/5365.2.1.1

Message Board Post:

Paul wrote, "We have now discovered that Thomas married Paul Gabler's wife, Mary Lenhardt, and adopted her four children."

Be careful with your assumptions about the marriage record!

Gabler Anna Jul 26 1934 11939 Kings
Conde Thomas Jul 26 1934 11939

Notice that Thomas CONDE and Mary already are living together as husband and wife in the 1930 census, which is inconsistent with the 1934 marriage date. In addition, one of Mary's daughters is named Anna.

It's entirely possible, of course, that May/Mary's name was Anna Maria or Mary Ann, and that she lived as Thomas's wife before legally marrying him.

In any event, I would order the record to see if it indicates whether either party was married before, and perhaps how old the bride and groom were, and their address(es) at the time of the marriage.


"it seems Paul died fighting in WWI as we do not seem to be able to find a record of his death."

Maybe, but there are many other possibilities. The fact that there is a WWI draft card for him DOES NOT mean that he served. The fact that he's not easily located in the death index does not mean that he died outside of the greater NYC area; and even if he did, he could have died in another city or another state--not necessarily overseas. Or he may not have died; he might have abandoned the family.

"We know they did not divorce because Mary married Tom under the surname Gabler rather than her maiden name."

A woman with children would retain the use of her married surname after she was divorced, so the fact that GABLER is listed as the surname for Thomas CONDE's bride in 1934 doesn't mean that she was necessarily widowed, any more than the fact that the bride's name was Anna indicates that it wasn't actually Mary.



This thread: