TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2002-06 > 1023032110


From: "Darrell A. Martin" <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Place of death
Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2002 10:35:10 -0500
In-Reply-To: <16c.e7f9b87.2a2b8558@aol.com>


At 10:27 AM 6/2/02 -0400, wrote:
>So far I have not seen
>an example of a death record in some locality stating that the person
>actually died somewhere else so haven't had to face that problem yet.

Hi:

I think that this single sentence is the crux of the matter. Your earlier
message caused me to think that you had already encountered the situation
described above at least once, and your approach was to use the record
location as the place of death -- *in spite of* the record itself saying
otherwise.

When you *do* run into a death record that specifies a place of death other
than the record location, I strongly suggest that you enter the place
stated in the record as the tag location; don't use the record location
(except as the repository, of course). The record does not "testify" about
its own location -- its meaning does not change if it is moved. Whether it
is correct in what it states is up to you to decide, but if some clerk
fifty years ago packed a box of records at the town level and sent them
twenty miles to the county courthouse, it changes *nothing* about what the
contemporary writer of the record meant. I suspect on reflection you will
agree, in fact you probably already do.

I have no problem with the rest of what you said; you may even explain
things a bit more than I do. I tend to just quote the record and let it
stand on its own, unless doing so might introduce misunderstandings.

Darrell


Darrell A. Martin
a native Vermonter currently in exile in Addison, Illinois



This thread: