The Marriage Return
- StephAnne
- Mar 31, 2022
- 7 min read
Updated: May 1, 2022
If you read my prior blog post about Ernesta Casazza, my great grandmother, then you may think I have chosen a catchy title to highlight the fact that I am going to discuss her second marriage. But the reason for the title "The Marriage Return" is much more mundane.
In King County, Washington from 1891 to 1947 the county recorded information about each bride and groom on a form called a "Marriage Return." The form was filled out by the person who officiated at the wedding and was then "returned" to the county and filed with the County Auditor after the ceremony. Unfortunately, very few returns exist for weddings occurring after 1916.
The good news for my family is that Ernesta married her second husband, my great grandfather John Balzarini, on April 20, 1901. This means that I was able to locate a copy of their Marriage Return in the state digital archives and on ancestry.com. Happily, it is chock-full of interesting information! Let's take a look at the details.
The Marriage Return identifies John using the Italian version of his first name, Giovanni. This is interesting because by 1901 he was already commonly known as John in census records, city directories and his naturalization papers. Perhaps he felt he needed to use his Italian birth name for such a solemn occasion as marriage?
At the time of his marriage to Ernesta, John was forty-two years old, never married, and a miner in Black Diamond, WA, a coal mining town about twenty-six miles south of Seattle. He was born in Italy, as was Ernesta. Ernesta was twenty-eight and a housekeeper also living in Black Diamond. This was her second marriage, and her prior married name was also Casazza (please refer to my previous blog post for an explanation of this fact!). The Marriage Return indicates that they obtained their marriage license on the same day as their wedding.
When I found the Marriage Return a few years ago, it was an exciting moment for me. A breakthrough moment because until then I did not know the names of John's parents! The Marriage Return is the only document I have found so far that includes their names.
Despite some undocumented family stories, John's background prior to immigration, his ancestors, and his early years in California, remain largely a mystery. DNA testing of my father has helped me identify several of John's relatives and create what I call a "DNA matches tree." This work, based on DNA test results combined with genealogical records like the Marriage Return, is pointing me in the direction of John's family history. Knowing his parents' names is significant and extremely helpful for this effort. (I plan to write a future post about the process of creating the DNA matches tree and my search for confirmation of John's ancestors).
The Marriage Return tells us that John's father was Peter Balzarini (or Pietro in Italian). This is interesting because "Pete" is a family name that has been handed down to three generations of John and Ernesta's descendants. In fact, the couple liked the name so much that they named their twin boys born in 1906 Pete Joseph and Joseph Pete. Unfortunately, Joseph Pete passed away at the age of three, but twin Pete Joseph survived to carry on the given name and pass it along, father to son, in his family line. I've also found that one of Ernesta's brothers was named Pietro, as was a relative of John's that carried the same surname and lived in Seattle starting in about 1912.
The Marriage Return also tells us that John's mother was Kati Zolesin. Now this one causes me to pause. I have a theory that the Zolesin last name is a misspelling. My "guess" is that the surname is possibly "Zolezzi" because of DNA matches that have no other clear tie. Unfortunately, while there are more and more good opportunities to research Italian records online, so far, I have not found John's parents on the available databases. It may simply be my lack of time, or a lack of records. In any event, as always, I have confidence that given time, I will sort this out.
As to Ernesta's parents, I knew their names prior to finding the Marriage Return. Her father was Niccolo Casazza, and her mother was Chiara Barbieri. The Marriage Return includes her father's name correctly, but her mother's name appears to have been transcribed incorrectly. It reads: "Casazza Barbaiera." This error tends to support the idea that the person transcribing these Italian names, while doing their best, may have made some spelling errors.
An interesting bit of information contained on the Marriage Return is that the couple was married on April 20, 1901, at 10:15 am, in Seattle, at the residence of Reverend John F. Damon. The residence of the reverend.
I was so curious about why they were married at the home of a clergyman that I researched Reverend John F. Damon. To my surprise, he was quite well known in the Puget Sound area. Reverend Damon was a pioneer clergyman who founded the Plymouth Congregational Church in Seattle and drew large crowds to his Sunday services. He was famously referred to as the "Marrying Parson" because he officiated at many wedding ceremonies. In fact, in January of 1904, while he lay in his death bed, the Seattle Daily Times reported daily on his condition and noted that "[t]here is perhaps not a better known minister in the Northwest." By that time at age 77 he had married nearly 3,000 thousand couples, which was said to be a record in the United States. After learning about Reverend Damon, I started noticing in my research how common it is to find reference to a happy couple being married by him at his residence in Seattle. It appears John and Ernesta were simply on trend!
The final piece of information that I found interesting on the Marriage Return is that one of the witnesses was William Lombardini. The Lombardini name caught my eye because William was a witness on John's naturalization petition filed in 1896 in the Superior Court of King County. The petition was John's "second papers," following his initial declaration of intention to become a citizen in 1890. The petition required John to have two witnesses who were "well acquainted" with him and who could attest that John had lived in the United States for the necessary waiting period following his declaration of intention. The witnesses needed to know John well enough to swear that John "behaved as a man of good moral character." William Lombardini was one of those witnesses for John. Five years later, in 1901, he was a witness at John and Ernesta's wedding ceremony. I can only assume that he and John had a close relationship, either family or friends. I may never know for sure the exact connection.
Of course, like any good family history researcher, I looked William up. I also searched for information on the other witnesses listed on these records. You never know what you are going to find, but often witnesses on marriage records can lead you to more discoveries. Were they cousins? In-laws? A friend or a neighbor? It's always worth checking out names on records related to your ancestors.
In this case, I did find that there was a man named William Lombardini living in Seattle at the time of the wedding. It was widely reported in the newspaper that he died five years later, in January 1906, in a dramatic shipwreck involving the Valencia off the coast of Vancouver Island on his way back from California. His despondent wife later committed suicide by drowning herself in Seattle's Green Lake in October of 1907.
Was this the William that signed as a witness on John's two records? The connection remains unclear to me, and as a cautious genealogist I will refrain from jumping to any conclusions. The 1901 Marriage Record indicates that the witness William Lombardini lived in Black Diamond. If that notation is accurate, then it seems unlikely that he was the man who died in the shipwreck as that man lived in Seattle in 1901 according to the city directory and newspaper articles. That said, we also know that sometimes vital records have errors, including this very Marriage Record. Whether I will ever be able to confirm the identity of the William Lombardini that appears as a witness on John's naturalization and wedding records, remains to be seen, but what an interesting story!
The point that I want to emphasize is that all this information is inspired by a single piece of paper. This includes vital facts about the bride and groom; John's parents' names; the Marrying Parson; and a friend who stepped up as a witness twice. Just think about what I have learned about my family and about history from this one genealogical record.
John and Ernesta's 1901 Marriage Return is not actually that unique in its wealth of information and clues. There are a lot of records out there that, if read deliberately and with a curious mind, will lead you to discoveries you did not anticipate. I have learned to read records carefully, slowly, and even at times backwards! I regularly re-read records, even years later, and often find something new in them.
In fact, that is what happened here. When I first found the Marriage Return, I was so excited to discover the names of my 2x great grandparents that I didn’t “see” much of the rest of the information offered by the document. It was a year or two later, when I picked it back up and read it again with fresh eyes that I realized how much more information was provided. So, take another look at the records you have collected – even the ones you think you know. Look for details and names. Do some additional research. You might be surprised at what you learn.
Sources:
History of King County marriage returns, 1891-1947 - King County
Washington State Archives, Digital Archives - Title Info: King County Marriage Records, 1855-2018
Washington State Archives, Naturalization Case Files
City Directories and Census Records
