It was the tenth day of August, 1916, when John Laskowski got around to
filing the first of his immigration papers. He had surely been in the United States
for twenty six years by then—at least, that was what the 1900 census
had indicated. I could never find the actual documents to reveal when he really arrived in America. Until
now.
That was just the thing: the Laskowski family seemed to be
one of those immigrant families which had slipped through the cracks. Not in
passenger records, nor in immigration indices could I find any trace of the
right family. It didn’t help that the head of household, John’s father Anton,
had shown up in various records with his given name alternating between Anton and Antoni—and
his surname actually shortened, just this one time, to Lasko instead of the
usual Laskowski. Still, I had always been up to the task of wild card searches.
But with no success.
So when that little prompt came my way this week—a reminder
that it was high time to recheck online records for the possibility that the
Laskowskis’ number was up—it was a timely tip, indeed.
Although the blog tip had pointed in the direction of new
additions to the FamilySearch collections, fortunately, I didn’t stop there. I
also wandered over to Ancestry.com to see what I could find. I’m so glad I did—for
there, at almost the first hit I found, was an invitation to view “Selected U.S. Naturalization Records—Original Documents, 1790-1974.”
I have to confess: I had that “yeah, sure” attitude as I
clicked through to the hint’s source document. There it was, though: John
Laskowski’s own records. Not some other guy by the same name. It was him. For
sure.
That, in itself, was astounding to me. Do you know how long
I’ve paid the price but come away empty handed? That thought, alone, made me
stand still and consider the enormity of it all. These things can make one
emotional. There is just something about seeing a document that one’s ancestors
once touched that evokes a fervent response. The reason I can spot it in
others, as I teach beginners’ genealogy classes, is because I’ve felt it,
myself. It is real and it is palpable.
There was something more about this discovery. Make that two
somethings. The Declaration of Intent divulged the town where John Laskowski
was born, and provided the details
about his arrival in New York City.
That first detail—his place of birth—was something that had eluded me for all
these years of research effort. The second detail—when and how he got here—was
the bonus, for it provided the next step in this research chain of events we
call genealogy. It provided me the key to lead to yet another set of records.
When John Laskowski walked into the office of the Clerk of
the Supreme Court of Kings County, New York, I’m sure he had no idea someone
would be peering over his shoulder, nearly ninety nine years later. But now, I
can read the signature he affixed to the page, duly sworn before the clerk of
the court, “So help me God,” declaring
I am not an anarchist; I am not a polygamist nor a believer in the practice of polygamy; and it is my intention in good faith to become a citizen of the United States of America and to permanently reside therein.
I had waited a long time to discover the family’s secret.
Now, I was on my way.
Above excerpt from the Declaration of Intent, signed by John Laskowski in Brooklyn, New York, on August 10, 1916, courtesy Ancestry.com.
Above excerpt from the Declaration of Intent, signed by John Laskowski in Brooklyn, New York, on August 10, 1916, courtesy Ancestry.com.
And what fine handwriting too. He wrote neatly, left a record, and wasn't an anarchist -- sounds like the perfect ancestor!
ReplyDeleteI know, Wendy. Really, what more could I ask?
DeleteJust glad to have found it!
The Anarchist movement was a serious problem in 1915-1920 to established Governments. I can see the concern (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_bombing), but cannot see how our Government actually thinks people "saying" they are not "this or that" actually "makes it so." And yet they continue to do this. The "if it is on paper, it has to be true" thing - regardless of history lessons repeated ad nauseum, doesn't work.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure it was just a matter of "if it's on paper, it has to be true." Knowing lawyers--and liability--this might, more likely, have been written into the document as a device, in order to use it in prosecuting those who subsequently demonstrated otherwise.
DeleteFortunately, in John's case, he was far from anarchy. He seems to be the only reliable landmark I can find on this family history journey.
Great find! So happy you didn't give up on him and I bet he is too!
ReplyDeleteThis find was a long time in the making, but I'm sure glad to have finally found it. It feels good to know now I can make some serious progress on this line.
DeleteHe went to school to have such beautiful penmanship for a man:)
ReplyDeleteBest I can figure, John arrived in New York when he was about nine years of age, so he likely spent some time in school here.
DeleteWhile his signature looks fairly well formed in the Declaration, by the time he signed the Petition seven years later, his hand was wavering. He may, by that time, have been having some health struggles, though, because he died seven years after being granted his citizenship.