marriage translation, pls

RHass

Hi, I have this marriage record for Herman Reinhold Weissbrodt, son of Wilhelm Weissbrodt and just want to know if there are any other genaological clues in there?

https://www.ancestry.com/mediaui-viewer/tree/71451667/person/310159158977/media/b64fe8b9-eef3-44c1-a46b-81998721f799

sylviaelchinger1

Here's the full transcription of the record -

[page 1]

No. 30

Fraustadt, 5 June 1877

Before the undersigned civil registrar appeared today for the purpose of marriage

1 the master shoemaker Reinhard Hermann Weißbrodt, personally recognized, Protestant religion, born on 16 October 1845 in Schwiebus, residing in Fraustadt, Scheibenstraße No. 609 , son of the householder Wilhelm Weißbrodt and his deceased wife Augusta nee Buchwald, residing in Fraustadt, Scheibenstraße No. 609

2 the shoemakeräs widow Ottilie Caroline Schubert nee Rudolph, personally known, Catholic religion, born on 22 November 1844 in Biskupize near Ostrowo, residing in Fraustadt, Markt No. 21, daughter of the county messenger [Kreisbote] Carl Rudolph and his wife Marie nee [Glogen?], both deceased.

[page 2]

As witnesses were summoned and appeared:

3 the master tailor Carl Robert Büttner, personally known, 44 years old, residing in Frausstadt, Fleischerstrasse No. 107

4 the cloth maker Anton Friedrich Plischke, personally known, 55 years old, residing in Fraustadt, [?]strasse No. 111

In the presence of the witnesses the Civil Registrar asked the engaged couple individually and one after the other, the question

whether they declare that they want to be married to each other.

The engaged [couple] answered yes to this question and thereupon the civil registrar declared that by the power of the law they are now legally married husband and wife.

Read, approved, and signed,

[signatures]

The Civil Registrar

[signature] Maschke

The agreement with the main register is hereby certified.

Fraustadt 5 June 1877

The Civil Registrar

Maschke

Note - the last 4 lines of the transcription indicate that this is a duplicate copy of the original record. Therefore the "signatures" of the participants are not their own, but rather written in the duplicate copy by the registrar.

RHass

Many thanks! These small details are very helpful!