Wednesday, September 17, 2008

St. Louis County Marriage Records

When you get most of your news online, like I do, it's easy to miss a local story. Thankfully David at OakvilleBlackWalnut blogged about St. Louis County opening up internet access to marriage records (and property deeds) for a reasonable fee ($5.95 +50 cents/page). Access to the marriage and real estate indexes will be free, and it is supposed to go online October 1st.

The newspaper article doesn't state whether there will be any privacy window on the marriage records, or how far back the records go.


David said...

The County marriage index is already available for free ... at a library on microfilm. I recall that it goes up to the 1960s, if not beyond (1980s?).

I'm more interested in the deeds and can't wait to test this out. I hope this goes live at 12:01 on the 1st so I don't have think about it all day at work while waiting until I get home that night to place an order. Yes, I'm a dork.

Anonymous said...

I too am anxious to test it.

I've been through the microfilm at the county library headquarters. I think it is organized by year first, so you have to know when someone got married. The City Index is organized by surname, so you can easily print out the index for everyone from the 1880s to the most recent date on microfilm who were married with that surname.

Not only should it be easier to search, I suspect their online index could contain more recent information than the microfilm.

David said...

Hmmm... my recollection is that the County index is alphabetical, and that once you find the surname you'll see entries from numerous decades lumped all together. And the one good thing about this microfilm index is that it lists the name of the spouse.

The City index is chopped up chronologically, and then alphabetically within those year ranges. And unlike the County, this index makes no reference to the spouse, so you almost have to purchase the copy from City Hall to get the other name if you do not know it or cannot find it elsewhere.

Anonymous said...

I must have switched the two sets in my mind.