Philadelphia's Records to be Digitized

The City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania maintained its vital records separate from the State until around 1915. In the news is a codified agreement with Ancestry to digitize these records.¹ One benefit of this project is that potentially, any word on a document could be searched. You could, for example, find all the people buried at a particular cemetery whose records no longer survive. Or you could find all the babies delivered by a particular midwife.

I rarely have people in Philadelphia. My paternal grandfather was born there in 1915, even though the family lived in Newark, New Jersey.

I'm in favor of public and free access to all governmental records.

The issue is that these terms mean different things to different people.

In my home state of New Jersey, for example, births are available to the public if older than eighty years. Births through the year 1925 are on microfilm at the Archives in Trenton. Not through the year 1945. The Archives are not open around the clock every day. You need to physically and geographically access the collection, which makes it out of reach of most people. Alternatively, you can pay $10 for the birth certificate. This is a pay wall, as we say on the internet. Ordering thousands of records is cost-prohibitive for most people and would create a work-load unattainable by the staff. The result is that such access is not very public, in my opinion.

Current technology of the New Jersey State Archives.
Microfilm reader.
December 1, 2025.

Before the internet and digitization, the above scenario in New Jersey was maybe the best that any State could offer.

It's 2026. We can do so much more.

The technology exists to electronically preserve minute details of paper records; however, the custodians of such records usually do not own this technology. Private companies would perform the digitization process. I'm not a technology expert, but from there, the images would be read and made searchable by a program- not a person. The images and index of words would then need hosting on a website. (Remember when we all came together in 2012 and typed the 1940 census? We didn't have to do this in 2022 for the 1950 census because technological advances enabled the reading and indexing of the handwriting, including script!)

All of this costs money. Who should pay?

Ancestry can digitize the records. Ancestry is a company that needs to realize a profit to stay in business. Ancestry either owns the equipment or leases it. They pay people to perform the service, either contractors or employees. Then there are the steps in between the recording and the appearance on Ancestry's website. Hosting costs money, too. You can read about this process on Ancestry's website.

Ancestry's customers pay a subscription to access such record collections, currently hundreds per year. Seems fair, except this is a pay wall, sort of like New Jersey's $10 per certificate.

Should the government pay for some or all of these services of preservation and access? People not interested in genealogy and history might say no. But our taxpayer dollars are already spent on government services we may not agree with or use. I pay a lot for public schools and Medicare, even though I use neither. I would like certain roads paved, but I have no say in which roads are repaired or when other roads are shut down for servicing.

Another complication is ownership and future use of the digitized records. Once an electronic copy is created, it can be promulgated worldwide quickly. Ancestry would understandably not want to spend money digitizing millions of records for release on its own site, only to have another company copy them. If Ancestry owns the digitized versions of government records, it can probably do as it wishes in terms of access- charging high fees or removing access entirely. 

Asking a private entity to allow you access to its record is different from asking the government to allow you access to a government record.

If Ancestry is allowed to copy the records and sell them, why can't a private individual?

There would be a contract. We have no say in that contract and we may never see its wording. The situation with Philadelphia is that Ancestry would host, not own, the government records.

Someone please weigh in on this. My understanding is that Ancestry would own the images it created from these records. The original pieces of paper would be retained by Philadelphia. What happens to the digital images at the end of the contract?

When Ancestry hosts an image collection, you can see it if you have a subscription that covers that image collection. I'll use Newspapers dot com to demonstrate.

A hint was suggested for Gertrude Barsella (1898-1991). Some of the information is butchered because it was automatically created for fast indexing.

Hint at Ancestry linking to a newspaper on the website Newspapers dot com.
The daughter's name was Georgene Zink, not Ueot Gene Zmk.

I can view the image in the Chicago Tribune because I pay for a subscription to Newspapers dot com. After reviewing the obituary and determining that this is the same person in my tree, I can save the hint to Gertrude's profile in my tree.

Result at Newspapers dot com from hint at Ancestry.
The link, not the actual image, will be saved to the tree.

Here's the difference between hosting and owning. This image does not save to the tree. The link to the image saves to the tree. Ancestry does not own this newspaper. The obituary will not be in the Gallery under Gertrude's profile. If you have Family Tree Maker (owned by MacKiev, not Ancestry) on your computer, the obituary will not appear as an image.

Images saved to Gertrude Lutter (wife of George Barsella 1899-1971)
in Family Tree Maker (2024 version).
Her obituary does not appear here because it is saved as a link.

If you wish to retain this obituary for your files, you would need to copy it yourself as a download or a screen capture. Ancestry's contractual relationship with the owners of the Chicago Tribune may end at any time, thereby cutting off your access to this obituary.

Same idea with the records from Philadelphia. If they ever appear on or through Ancestry, you will probably want to download them to your own computer system separate from Ancestry.

We see a similar battle in New York State. The City of New York has digitized about three quarters of its older births, marriages, and deaths. You can view them and download them for free on the website of the New York City Department of Records and Information Services.

Vital records outside of New York City are in the custody of the New York State Department of Health, which will not fulfill genealogical orders. They cost $22 per certificate. (The State has staff to cash the checks but not to copy the record and mail it.) Unlike in New Jersey, you have no public access in any physical form. There is no repository to enter, view microfilm, and print your own copies.

I ordered three death certificates two years ago and another four years ago. These orders remain unfulfilled, though the checks for $22 were quickly cashed.

Last year, the governor of New York vetoed a bill that would have enabled a third party (Ancestry?) to digitize records. This year, the governor promised in her State of the State speech that she would facilitate making the records electronic.

Three neighboring states with different access to records vital to genealogical and historical research

These three states, as well as other custodians of records, are weighing continued control over information along with costs. Reclaim the Records has had to sue entities to release public records. At this point in history, we have the ability to preserve these old records and make them available to everyone. We should do this now.

1. Chelsea R. Cox, "Philly's Deal with Ancestry Could Reshape Access to Public Records," Technical.ly (https://technical.ly/civics/what-philadelphias-ancestry-deal-means-public-records: published 6 April 2026).

Two Death Certificates for Henry Hennion 1884

Some people have no death certificate. Henry Hennion received two death certificates when he died in 1884 in Montville, Morris County, New Jersey.

Below are the two death certificates. They demonstrate two versions of forms available at the time.

Death certificate of Henry Hennion
Died September 30, 1884 in Montville, Morris County, New Jersey.

Another death certificate of Henry Hennion
Died September 30, 1884 in Montville, Morris County, New Jersey.

You can look up death certificates in the index created by the New Jersey State Archives on their website. This index is free to use. The actual death certificates are not available online. You can order a copy through the Archives' website for $10, which will then be mailed to you. Or you or someone else can visit the Archives in person and retrieve the record yourself for 50 cents per printed page.

There are two entries in the index for Henry Hennion's death on September 30, 1884.

Henry was buried in Greenwood Cemetery in Boonton, Morris County, New Jersey.

We want to view a death certificate whenever possible because this is the primary source of the date and place of death. From there, we can seek an obituary from the local paper and view the burial location. Sometimes the names of parents are given.

For Henry, we have two different first names for his father Henry and John.

Names of Henry's parents on his two death certificates

Based on his age at time of death, age 61 years, Henry Hennion was born in the early 1820s. New Jersey was not recording births at the local or state level at this time; however, there are sometimes church baptismal records that may have recorded the child's name, date of birth, and names of parents.

At the Dutch Reformed Church in Montville, a baby named Henry Hennion was baptized on April 13, 1823. He was born December 4, 1822 to Abraham Hennion and Clarissa Demott.

Baptism of Henry Hennion in 1823
Dutch Reformed Church
Montville, Morris County, New Jersey
Collection at Ancestry

Names of Henry's parents on his baptismal record

Is this the same Henry Hennion? The time of birth aligns, but the father's name is Abraham, not John or Henry. The mother's name, Clarissa, is close enough to Clara. Demott may be a variant of DeMouth, a common name in the area at this time.

Elizabeth Hennion (1818-1890) married Peter I Cook (1814-1889). Elizabeth's death certificate lists her parents as Abraham Henion and Clarissa. She must have been a sister of the Henry Hennion baptized in 1823. 

Death certificate of Elisabeth Cook
died November 20, 1890 in Upper Montville, Morris County, New Jersey

Peter I Cook was my second cousin six times removed. He was the son of John Henry Cook (1773-1859) and Jane Wandle (1778-1849). They were buried at the Pompton Plains First Reformed Church Cemetery.

These lines tangle as we travel back in time through the generations, but the children need to be attached to the correct parents. I'm not sure if we are dealing with two separate people named Henry Hennion or one.

Ledley's Vanderhoef Book

There is another family history book written about the Vanderhoof family. It was written by Wilson V Ledley (1913-1978) and published in 1959. Vanderhoef Family. The First Five Generations.

You can find it on The Internet Archive.

Ledley begins with Generation One, the couple Cornelis Van Der Hoeve and Geertje Van Fulpen. In 1661, Geertje, a widow, arrived in New Amsterdam (now called New York City) with her six children, Generation Two.

Ledley tentatively places Jacob Vanderhoof (1772-1847) as a son of Dirck Vanderhoff (baptized 1746). [Ledley wrote the wrong century for Dirck's baptism.] [Also, the spelling as "Vanderhoof" and "Vanderhoff" were interchanged throughout Ledley's work.] Ledley identified one other son of Dirck Vanderhoff and Catrina, Peter (baptized 1772).

Generation Five: Peter Vanderhoff and Jacob Vanderhoff
Wilson V Ledley. Vanderhoef Family. The First Five Generations. 1959.

175. PETER VANDERHOFF, son of Dirck (#54), was baptised
at Pompton on Sep 20, 1772. In the Census of 1800
at Goshen in Orange County, New York, there is listed a Peter
Van der Hoff, aged 26-45, wife same, son and daughter under
10 and other unidentified females in the household who may
have been his wife's relations. She, from the one baptismal
record at hand, was Jude SMITH and they had:

    250. Elizabeth, b. 9 Feb 1797, pb. Pompton Dutch Church

176. JACOB VANDERHOFF, supposed son of Dirck (#54) was
born 1771-72 from his grave in Morris County (GMNJ
7:7). The only basis of assigning Jacob as a son of Dirck is

the naming of his presumed first son Peter probably after the

boy's uncle above, but this is at best only tentative. He

had been married by the Morris County Clerk (GMNJ 4:31) to

Anne HOPLAR on Jan 23, 1796, who died Feb. 27, 1841 in her

69th year. Their presumed son:

    251. PETER (sup.), b. 1797-98, d. 17 Apr 1847 in his 50th

year; wife Rachael d. 12 Nov 1850 in her 50th

year; their graves listed following those above.

Generation Four: Dirck Vanderhoff

54. DIRCK VANDERHOFF, son of Jacob (#20), was baptised
at Pompton on May 30, 1946[sic]. From the baptism of

Peter below, we know his wife's name was Catrina, but her

surname has not been discovered. The only basis for assign-

ing Jacob as a son of Dirck is the naming of the latter's

presumed son Peter possibly after his uncle, but his is at

best extremely tenuous, particularly since no will nor pro-

bate records have been found. Children were:

    175. PIETER, bp. 20 Sep 1772 Pompton, sp. Pieter & Sara Jongh

    176. JACOB (sup.), b. 1771-72 (grave record)

Ledley referenced two sources for Jacob Vanderhoof: a grave stone transcription and a marriage record to Anne Hoplar. I visited the DeMouth Burial Ground in Boonton, Morris County, New Jersey. Below is a picture of the worn stones. Peter Vanderhoof (1797-1847), the only conjectured child in Ledley's work, is buried next to his parents.

DeMouth Burial Ground
Boonton, Morris County, New Jersey

Morris County, New Jersey Marriages
Jacob Vandroff and Anne Hoplar married January 25, 1796

Ledley did not mention Jacob's baptism. Jacob was baptized in Paramus, Bergen County, New Jersey. His date of birth was written as February 13, 1774. His parents were Dirk Vanderhoef and Catriena.

Jacob, born February 13 [1774],
child of Dirk Vanderhoef and Catriena.
Baptisms at the Dutch Reformed Church in Paramus, New Jersey.

Peter, a definite son of Dirck in Ledley's work, was baptized in the Pompton Church. His date was September 20, 1772. I am not sure if this was a birth date or a baptismal date. Sponsors were Pieter Jongh and Sara. This would help the notion that Catriena was born Jongh, later anglicized to Young.

Pieter, born September 20 [1772],
child of Dirk Vanderhof and Catriena.
Sponsors Pieter Johngh and Sara.
Baptisms at the Dutch Reformed Church in Pompton, New Jersey.

Remember that my in-depth look at the Vanderhoofs was undertaken to confirm the parentage of my fourth great grandmother, Elizabeth Vanderhoof (1799-1878), wife of Stephen H Cook (1797-1853). 

On December 24, 1795, in the Dutch Reformed Church in Pompton, Peter Vanderhoof married Judie Smith. (Judie is a rare name for this time period. Maybe it derives from the biblical name Judith.)

Peter Vanderhoof and Judie Smith married December 24, 1795.
Marriages at the Dutch Reformed Church in Pompton, New Jersey.

In this same Pompton church in 1797 Peter Vanderhoff and Jude Smith baptized Elisabeth, born February 9.

Elisabeth, born February 9 [1797],
child of Peter Vanderhoff and Jude Smith.
Baptisms at the Dutch Reformed Church in Pompton, New Jersey.

In her book Vanderhoof (1991), Louisa Caroline Freeman Hickerson (1921-2018) mentioned Peter and Judy and their two daughters, Elizabeth and Ann. Ann was born about 1815 (died 1894) and married Jacob Decker (1810-1882). There is no further information provided about Elizabeth.

Excerpt from Hickerson's book about Vanderhoofs

When listing the probable children of Jacob Vanderhoof and Ann Hopler, Hickerson listed Elizabeth with a birthdate of August 26, 1799. Hickerson did not even speculate if Elizabeth, wife of Stephen Cook, could have been a daughter of Peter Vanderhoof and Judith Smith instead of a daughter of Jacob and Ann.

Hickerson's writing about Elizabeth, wife of Stephen Cook,
and their children

Further Research:

Where were the children of Jacob and Ann baptized? These records could provide precise birthdates and the names of their parents.

What became of Elizabeth, the daughter born in 1797 to Peter Vanderhoof and Judith Smith?