Tombstone Tuesday: Joseph and Rose Kraslow, Montefiore Cemetery, Queens, New York

I've been nursing this post for a while. It's taken a little time to acquire the records for Joseph and Rose Kraslow. In this case, I needed to acquire a few more records than usual because handwriting was poor on some records and I needed another record to check the information. In addition, the town of origin for both Joe and Rose seemed like a moving target (or at least a missed target).

So, for example, I not only acquired their 1916 Manhattan marriage certificate, but also their Affidavit for License to Marry. But, hey, we ought to be acquiring both NYC marriage records, where they exist, as part of our reasonably exhaustive search. I am glad I did, because the marriage certificate did not have Rose's mother's maiden name. Her marriage license did.

KRASLOW

--------------------

Here lies

Yosef son of Levi Yitzchak haKohein

JOSEPH

BELOVED HUSBAND

FATHER

GRANDFATHER

GREAT GRANDFATHER

DIED APR. 21, 1981

AGE 87 YEARS

--------------------

Here lies

Rachel daughter of Tzvi Pinchas

ROSE

BELOVED WIFE

MOTHER

GRANDMOTHER

GREAT GRANDMOTHER

DIED SEPT. 3, 1977

AGE 79 YEARS

--------------------

REST IN PEACE

--------------------

I believe that both Rose and Joe were from Lubin (aka Labun), the town associated with the First Lubiner Progressive Benevolent Association landsmanshaft plots in Montefiore Cemetery and Beth Moses Cemetery. But there are several records that provide conflicting information.

Twenty-one year old tailor Jossel Krasileski arrived at Ellis Island aboard the S.S. Neckar on 15 February 1913.[1] He had departed Bremen, Germany with fellow Lubiner Iczrok [likely, Itzchak] Beimelmann, a 22 year old bookbinder.[2] Jossel last residence had been in Lubin and he'd left his father Lewi behind in Lubin, Volhynia gubernia. He was headed to his cousin, Jankel Halperin at 273 E. 106th Street, New York, New York.[3]

Chaje Banwell (later, Rose), left Hamburg with her brother Srul aboard the S.S. Amerika on 6 August 1913 and arrived in New York on 16 August.[4] They had been born and resided in Hesczow or Herczow. This was likely the community Hritsiv, 8 miles southeast of Lubin. Their father Hessel Banwell lived in the same town.

When Joe and Rose married on 15 September 1916, Joe's parents were listed as Lewis and Ethel with no surname. Rose's surname was written as Binvel.[5] Her father was listed as Harry and her mother as Bechae or Bechal with no surname. From their marriage license affidavit, however, I learned that her mother was Beckie Feldhandler. 

There are several Feldman family members 's from Polonnoye (a town 10 miles northeast of Lubin) who are interred in the First Lubiner Progressive Benevolent Association plot at Beth Moses cemetery. My research shows that their original surname was Feldhandler.[6] So, there may be a link, yet unexplored, between Rose Binvel Kraslow and the Feldman's in Beth Moses cemetery.

Both the marriage certificate and the license indicated that Rose was from Lublein (likely a misinterpretation of the town name Lubin) and Joe from Russia Volina (Volhynia Gubernia, Russian Empire). Lubin was in Volhynia Gubernia.

When they married, Joe lived at 161 Essex Street and worked as an installment merchant and Rose lived at 398 E. 8th Street. I have checked the 1915 New York State Census for their names and those addresses (via Steve Morse's New York States Census AD/ED tool) and did not find either Joe or Rose enumerated in those buildings.

In January 1920, Joe and Rose were enumerated at 380 E. 8th Street, New York, NY.[7] By that time they had two daughters: Etta/Ethel and Sylvia. Joe sold general merchandise.

Joe filed his intention to naturalize in February 1920. He completed the process on 3 October 1922.[8] He reported he was born on 15 October 1892 in Volin, Russia.

The 1925 New York State census found the family at the same address (380 E. 8th Street).[9] Joe was a salesman.

By 1930, the family lived at 1543 W. 87th Street, Brooklyn, NY, renting half of a two-family home. They'd added another daughter, Anita, who was 2. Joe was a salesman selling general merchandise.[10]

Rose naturalized on 29 December 1936.[11] Interestingly, her naturalization petition notes that it was filed under Section 2 of the Act of September 22, 1922 (the Cable Act). The Cable Act was seen as righting a wrong that had been in effect since 1907. At that time, the federal government changed naturalization laws such that a woman, regardless of her citizenship status, would take the status of her husband. U.S. born women lost their citizenship if they married an alien. If Joe had naturalized a couple of weeks earlier, before the passage of the Cable Act, Rose would have acquired citizenship with Joe. But, Joe naturalized in October, Rose had to acquire citizenship on her own.

Rose's petition indicated she'd been born on 1 May 1898 in "Lublin" (likely another mistake identifying the well-known city of Lublin as the less well-known, but correct community, of Lubin/Labun). Rose and her family lived in Brooklyn at 2137 Coney island Avenue.

They were found at the same location in the April 1940 U.S. census enumeration. The census indicated that they owned the four-family building. Joe was an installment merchant for household goods.[12] 

Joe's 1942 World War II draft registration card indicated that his business name was Kraslow Outfitting Company, located at 28 E. Broadway, NY, NY.[13] Joe reported his birth date as 4 October 1894 in "Laboon, Russia."

Rose's Social Security information indicated that she was born on 15 November 1894. If that was true, she was 82 at death, not 79.[14]

Joe's Social Security information showed a birth date of 4 October 1892. If true, Joe would have been 88 years old when he passed away. However, his records seem to vary between birth in 1894 and 1892.[15]

Joe and Rose provided conflicting birth dates for daughters Ethel and Sylvia in their naturalization records. Ethel was listed as born 10 May 1917 in Joe's petition and 27 April 1917 in Rose's. A death notice for Ethel (Kraslow) Blum confirmed the 27 April date.[16] Joe's petition for naturalization indicated that Sylvia was born 5 Apr 1919. Rose said 8 May 1919. We have not determined which is accurate.

Ethel's obituary provided married names for her sisters: Sylvia Tankel and Anita Ben Josef. We also know from 1949 newspaper article that Anita was married first to Gerald D. Zimmerman.[17]

Rose and Joe are buried in graves 3 and 4, Block 5, gate 567W, line 9R, in Montefiore Cemetery, Queens, New York.

---------------------------

Notes:

1. Manifest, S.S. Neckar, 15 February 1913, list 10, line 16, Jossel Kraselewski, age 21; images, "New York, Passenger Lists, 1820-1957," Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 21 November 2010). 
2. Beimelmann later became Isidore Bauman and married fellow Lubiner Ida Malzmann (Molthman).
3. This was likely glazier Jacob Alperin, also from Lubin, who married Dora Waxenberg Myers, divorced wife of Louis Myers (also a Lubiner, a glazier and my great grandmother's brother - a tangled web we weave!). I have not been able to find a record for Jacob with that house number, but at his own marriage to Dora in April 1913, Jacob reported living at 232 E. 106th Street. New York County, New York, marriage certificate no. 9282 (1913), Jacob Halperin and Dora Myers,  12 April 1913; Municipal Archives, New York City.
4. Manifest, S.S. Amerika, 16 August 1913, list 27, line 6, Chaje Banwell, age 18; images, "New York, Passenger Lists, 1820-1957," Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 17 December 2010). I also located the Hamburg passenger manifest on Ancestry but, due to ink bleed through it is very difficult to read. The Banwels are entry 534 and 535 on the left-hand page.
5. On their marriage license, it is clearly Binvel. New York County, New York, Affidavit for License to Marry no. 25117, Joe Kraslow and Rosie Binvel, 11 September 1916 (application date); Municipal Archives, New York City. Ancestry indexed Rose's surname as Binvef in their "New York City, Marriages Indexes, 1907-1995" license database (accessed 26 August 2017). On their marriage certificate, Rose's surname is a mystery. New York County, New York, marriage certificate no. 22472 (1916), Joe Kroslow and Rosie Binvel, 15 September 1916; Municipal Archives, New York City. Indices ItalianGen, Ancestry and FamilySearch all show her surname as "Brurel."  
6. The only Tombstone Tuesday post for any Feldman (so far) is for Abraham and Lillian Feldman.
7. 1920 U.S. census, New York Co., NY, population schedule, Manhattan, e.d. 501, sheet 9A, dwelling 10, family 174, Joseph and Rose Kraslow family; images, Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 7 December 2010); citing NARA microfilm publication T625, roll 1196.
8. Joseph Kraslow, naturalization file no. 134533, Supreme Court, New York County, New York, vol. 564, p. 183, 3 October 1922; images, "New York, County Naturalization records, 1791-1980," FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org : access 26 August 2017),  New York > Petitions for naturalization and petition evidence 1922 vol 564, no 134351-134600 > image 554 of 764.
9. 1925 New York State Census, New York Co., NY, enumeration of inhabitants, Manhattan, A.D. 6, E.D. 19, p. 18, no. 36-39, Joe and Rose Kraslow family; images, Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 26 August 2017); citing New York State Archives, Albany. 
10. 1930 U.S. census, Kings Co., NY, population schedule, Brooklyn, e.d. 24-1927, sheet 4A, dwell. 70, fam. 174, Joseph and Rose Kraslow family; images, Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 7 December 2010); citing NARA microfilm publication T626, roll 1522. 
11. Rose Kraslow, naturalization file no. 222214, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York, 29 December 1936.
12. 1940 U.S. census, Kings Co., NY, population schedule, Brooklyn, e.d. 24-353, sheet 12B, household 251, Joseph and Rose Kraslow family; images, Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 26 September 2017); citing NARA microfilm publication T627, roll 2555. 
13. "U.S., World War II Draft Registration Cards, 1942," Images, Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 7 December 2010), card for Joe Kraslow, serial no. U 2701.
14. "U.S., Social Security Death Index, 1935-2014," index, Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 26 September 2017), entry for Rose Kraslow, September 1977, SSN 085-40-2775, Brooklyn, NY.
15. "U.S., Social Security Death Index, 1935-2014," index, Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 26 September 2017), entry for Joseph Kraslow, April 1981, SSN 065-28-0022, Long Beach, Nassau Co., NY.
16. "Blum, Ethel (Kraslow)," New York Times (New York, NY), 13 February 2009; transcription, New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com : accessed 26 September 2017).
17. "Marriage Licenses," Daily Eagle (Brooklyn, NY), 17 June 1949, p. 14; images, Newspapers.com (http://www.newspapers.com : accessed 26 September 2017.

Let's make Our Response to the NYC Vital Records Access Proposal Go Viral!

The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene has posted notice of a proposal to change its rule for access to the vital records under its care: New York City birth and death records. I have to admit my favorite part of the posting is their insistence (it must be insistence since it is repeated several times on the page and is codified in the URL) that they are considering viral statistics provisions. 

That got me thinking this is our chance to make the genealogy community's response go viral. Let's do it!

Here's the scoop:

New York City is considering changing its rules for making birth and death records publicly available via the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. They are taking comments through 24 October 2017. Dick Eastman noted this on his blog at https://blog.eogn.com/2017/09/19/new-york-city-department-of-health-proposes-adoption-of-125-years-for-birth-records-50-years-for-death-records-embargoes/.

Laws of the State of New York restrict public access to birth records less than 100 years old and death records less than 50 years old. Currently, the New York City Municipal Archives has birth records available for viewing and purchase through 1909, death records through 1948 (they have marriage records, too, but later ones are maintained by the City Clerk and are not under consideration in this new rule). By the standards set by New York State, the Municipal Archives ought to also hold birth records through 1916 and death records through 1966. But, the State grants New York City discretion in setting its own rules for vital records access.

Current NYC rule 207 (which may be seen here), is not very specific. Yet, the keeper of later records, the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOH), has set much more stringent requirements than the State.

Regardless of the time that has passed since a death event, death certificates in possession of the DOH (even if 100 years since birth or 50 years since death) are only accessible to spouses, domestic partners, parents, children, grandparents, grandchildren of the deceased or those with legal rights to the records.

In a recent response to a record request, I received a letter outlining additional DOH requirements.

Required information for Death Certificates:

• Decedents first and last name
• Date of Death - or provide 3-year range
• Mother's first and maiden name
• Father's first and last name
• Social Security number

If the information is not available, please provide at last 3 of the items below AND include the entitled party's email address so that we may contact him or her for additional information:

• Decedent's date of birth
• Borough of death
• Last known address
• Place of birth: home birth address, hospital, etc.
• Birthplace: (City, State, Country)
• name of informant
• Name of cemetery or crematory
• Funeral director/address of funeral home
• Date of burial or creation

Quite obviously, genealogists have not been a consideration here. Many of the information items required are the items we are trying to determine through acquisition of these records. This has been a sore point with those researching in New York City for some time. That, plus the fact that unless one is a direct descendant, forget about acquiring a death record from about 1950 to the present. This is a bit arbitrary considering that death records from before then are readily and easily available to all via the Municipal Archives. And, of course, if the person died anytime between about 1962 and 2014 we should be able to find out their Social Security number and death date via the Social Security Death Index (freely available on many websites).

Now, DOH is proposing a new rule 207 to set a regular schedule for transfer of records to the Municipal Archives. Hallelujah! 

Oh wait ... one issue: this new schedule would come with increased restrictions on records access.

• a birth record would become a public record on January 31st of the year following 125 years after the date of birth [a 25% increase], and
• a death record would become a public record on January 31st of the year following 75 years after the date of death [a 50% increase].

They also mention that they are considering death record access of 50 years rather than 75 for genealogical purposes. It is a little difficult to see how that fits into all of this. The mention of this consideration in the proposed rule seems like something thrown in as an afterthought. 

One has to assume that access for "genealogical purposes" would be maintained with the same restrictions we now see, despite the fact that those restrictions are not codified in existing rule 207 nor in proposed rule 207. That is, no access to records unless one is a spouse, domestic partner, parent, child, grandparent, grandchild of the deceased or has legal rights to the record.

The City is taking comments through 24 October 2017 when there will be a public hearing. I suggest that all genealogists with interest in more recent NYC vital records submit comments. Those in the NYC area should attend their public hearing - in force!

I am working on the following draft comment for submission. Over the next day or so I will, as any good genealogist would, edit the text and add some citations for my contentions (23 Oct 2017, my submitted comment is here). I urge you to write your own comments and send them in to NYC DOH. Let them know we are listening and we care - a great deal!

I urge New York City to make birth and death records public and transfer them, on a fixed schedule, from The Department of Health and Mental Hygiene to DORIS (i.e., the Municipal Archives). I also urge New York City not to adopt further restrictions on when vital records will become publicly available. With regard to potential identity theft, this proposed rule is applying a sledge hammer to facilitate installation of a thumb tack. The tool will do the job, but there will be extraordinary collateral damage with little gain.

For death records, I urge you to adopt New York State’s 50-year rule without restriction or, even better, adopt an open records option (similar to some other states).

The stated privacy issue is moot. The federal Privacy Act does not apply to those who have died. Probate law requires public access to probate records so that potential heirs may be fully informed. As a result, for many, basic death information is known.

The vast majority of stolen identities are from living people made vulnerable via their use of social media, use of credit cards or response to email spam. Identity theft using names of the dead is an extraordinarily small percentage of identity theft cases.

I believe open records, rather than restricted ones, are more likely to be helpful with regard to the dead. For example, if companies had accessible death databases and records, they would be less likely to accept credit applications using names of dead people. That was the original concept behind the Death Master Index (Social Security Death Index). A few years ago,changes to availability of the updated index were made supposedly for protection of PII, but even then, the restriction is only for a few years after death - not 125 years after birth!

While the proposed rule's story of protecting a living mother’s dead child’s record, may tug at the heart strings, I urge you to also think about an equally compelling and much more common situation: there are many more people who die without issue. Under current NYC restrictions imposed by the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, no relatives but parents, grandparents, direct descendants or siblings may acquire death records even if those records are more than 50 years old. It is impossible for anyone, including caring relatives, to acquire the records necessary to allow adequate remembrance of their dearly loved aunts, uncles and cousins. This is not only ridiculous, but also unconscionable. Certainly, there are many more records for people in this category than for the child and mother in the proposal's hypothetical example.

With regard to the proposal to increase birth record restrictions, it is important to note that nearly all of the Personally Identifiable Information (PII) on birth records is readily available for everyone to find via the Internet. Birth records, themselves, are not the reason this information is available online. This information is available because it has been required by many government and private organizations for credit and land transactions and is available publicly. Or, the information may have been stolen during any one of many recent company and government agency data breaches. The PII DOH is proposing to protect via vital record access restrictions is already publicly available. Restricting birth records up to 100 years in New York City will not change this situation in any way.

It is also important to note that, by the statistics provided in the proposed rule regarding birth records, those over 100 years old make up but 0.4 % of the New York City population. This  NYC-led sledge hammer-like approach to a miniscule issue is stunning. It, like the proposal for death records, indicates a callous disregard for public access and government accountability.

Perhaps a better solution that would address both DOH and open records concerns would be to make death records open to the public (or only closed for 5 years) and birth records for those under 100 publicly available without restriction to those who can show with a death record, an obituary, a gravestone photo or a Social Security Death Index record that the subject of the birth record is deceased.

Many jurisdictions throughout the United States have open records laws, much more liberal that New York City. New York City has been more restrictive than New York State for some time with little or no explanation to the public for this difference and with no discernible advantage for PII protection. Unlike New York City, New York State and many other jurisdictions do not seem to view further restriction on public access in the public interest.

I would hope that actions with regard to further public record restrictions would be weighed seriously and considered with regard to whether the solutions proposed will have any impact on the problems identified. I suggest the solutions are draconian and unwarranted and, most importantly, will have no effect on the identified issue of privacy.

Tombstone Tuesday: Rose Blumenfeld, Montefiore Cemetery, Queens, New York

In discussing the First Lubiner Progressive Benevolent Association [the community association for NYC immigrants from Lubin (aka Labun, Russian Empire)], I have mentioned Rose Blumenfeld previously in three posts: 19 February 2015, 21 May 2015, and 28 May 2015.

Rose served as President of the First Lubiner Ladies Auxiliary in, at least, 1949.

Here lies

A modest and important woman

Mrs. Raizel daughter of Tzvi

Died 28 Nisan 5716

May her soul be bound in the bonds of the living

----------

ROSE

BLUMENFELD

BELOVED MOTHER

GRANDMOTHER

AND GREAT

GRANDMOTHER

DIED APR. 9, 1956

AGE 79 YEARS 

Rose Levy was born in Labun in about 1876 to Isaac Levy and Mollie Cohen.[1] She married Benjamin (aka Barnett) Diamond in about 1893. She was about age 17 years old.[2] Benjamin was about 18 years older than Rose and this was his second marriage. He came to the union with four children: Nathan (born about 20 September 1875), Sophie (b. ca. 21 February 1887), Gussie (b. ca. 15 January 1889) and Celia (b. ca. 10 July 1892).[3]  

Benjamin emigrated in about 1895, shortly after the birth of their first child together, Ida (b. ca. 12 March 1895). Rose and Ida arrived in New York in about 1902.[4]

The family settled in the Lower East Side of Manhattan and had Eva (also called Adele) on 15 August 1904 and Mollie on 1 April 1906.[5]

The 1905 New York State Census found the family (Ben, Rose, Ida, and Eva) living at 245 Monroe Street. Ben worked as a tailor.[6]

Five years later, they were still in the same neighborhood at 249 Monroe Street. Ben was a machine operator in a shirt factory.[7]

Sometime between 1910 and 1915, the Diamonds moved to Brooklyn and lived in an apartment at 265-267 South 2nd Street. Benjamin was, reportedly, a dry goods peddler.[8]

Ida married Morris Groff, a medical student, in 1916.[9] The couple, along with their daughter, Martha, lived with Benjamin, Rose, Eva and Mollie at 909 Driggs Avenue, Brooklyn in 1920.[10]

While I have located neither a death certificate nor grave location for Benjamin, Rose's 1937 naturalization file indicates that he passed away on 18 June 1922.[11]

Eva/Adele married a furrier named William Weiner on 3 Novmber 1923.[12]

Daughter Mollie married Sidney Shapiro on 23 January 1924. Sidney was a milkman and later may have worked in a grocery.[13]

Rose remarried on 4 July 1925 to Nathan Blumenfeld who was also a widower. He was a grocer and immigrant from Iasi, Romania.[14]

For a moment, I thought I had a small mystery on my hands. I checked the "New York, New York, Death Index, 1949-1965," database on Ancestry and the index of this index showed that Rose had died outside of New York City.[15] I checked the images of the index page and found that, actually, she died in Brooklyn (The K in the borough column indicates Brooklyn. An X would indicate outside of the City.). I have entered a correction on Ancestry for the transcription of this index.

Rose's grave is located in Montefiore Cemetery, Queens, New York, in one of the First Lubiner Progressive Benevolent Association plots in block 89, gate 156N, line 12L, grave 4.

Notes:
1. For her parents names, see: Kings Co., NY, marriage certificate no. 10117 (1925), Nathan Blumenfeld and Rose Diamond, 4 July 1925; Municipal Archives, New York City. For her approximate date of birth, see her naturalization petition: Rose Blumenfeld, naturalization file no. 221044 (2 February 1937), U.S. District Court, Eastern District, Brooklyn; "New York, State and Federal Naturalization Records, 1794-1940," images, Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 18 March 2017).
2. 1910 U.S. Census, New York Co., NY, population schedule, Manhattan, enumeration district 1693, sheet 14B, family 254, Benj. and Rose Diamond family; images, Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 18 March 2017); citing NARA microfilm publication T624, roll 1008.

3. Barnett's Diamond, naturalization file 29790 (16 February 1917), New York State Supreme Court, Brooklyn, petition denied;  "New York, County Naturalization Records, 1791-1980," images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-89MX-MKHQ?cc=1999177&wc=MDSP-4WR%3A326204001%2C327733201 : 12 September 2017), Kings > Petitions for naturalization and petition evidence 1917 vol 120, no 29601-29850 > image 513 of 993; citing the Kings County Clerk.

4. Rose's naturalization record (see note 1) indicates she did not recall the port of departure or ship, but she did indicate she arrived in New York in July 1902. Thus far, no record of her arrival has been located.
5. I have not yet located Eva's birth record, but her birth date is documented on her father's naturalization file. Mollie's birth record: New York County, New York, birth certificate no. 17556 (1906), Mollie Diamond, 1 April 1906; Municipal Archives, New York City.
6. 1905 New York State Census, New York Co., NY, enumeration of inhabitants, Manhattan, assembly district 4, election district 18, p. 51, Ben and Rose Diamond family; images, Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 18 March 2017); citing New York State Archives, Albany.
7. 1910 U.S. Census, New York Co., NY, population schedule, Manhattan, enumeration district ??, sheet 14B, Benj. and Rose Diamond family; images, Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 18 March 2017); citing NARA microfilm publication T624, roll 1008.
8. 1915 New York State Census, Kings Co., NY, enumeration of inhabitants, Brooklyn, a.d. 14, e.d. 4, p. 52, Benjamin and Rose Diamond family.
9. New York County, New York, marriage certificate no. 10550 (1916), Morris Graff and Ida Diamond, 5 September 1916; Municipal Archives, New York City.
10. 1920 U.S. census, Kings Co., NY, population schedule, Brooklyn, e.d. 3, sheet 15A, dwelling 1, family 10, Benjamin and Rose Diamond family; images, Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 18 March 2017); NARA microfim publication T625, roll 1149.
11. Rose Blumenfeld, naturalization file no. 221044 (2 February 1937), U.S. District Court, Eastern District, Brooklyn.
12. Kings Co., NY, marriage certificate no. 14602 (1923), William Weiner and Eva Diamond, 3 November 1923; Municipal Archives, New York City.
13.New York Co., NY, marriage certificate no. 5970 (1924), Sidney Shapiro and Mollie Diamond, 23 January 1924; Municipal Archives, New York City.
14. Kings Co., NY, marriage certificate no. 10117 (1925), Nathan Blumenfeld and Rose Diamond, 4 July 1925; Municipal Archives, New York City.
15. "New York, New York, Death Index, 1949-1965," images, Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 12 September 2017), entry for Rose Blumenthal, Brooklyn certificate no. 7025, 9 April 1956.