RootsChat.Com
Research in Other Countries => Australia => Australia Lookups completed => Topic started by: Wiggy on Monday 25 May 09 13:32 BST (UK)
-
New thread Searching for origins of: MCNALLY, Catharine Christiana
« on: Today at 16:09:47 »
Thomas MCNALLY (RANSOM) - born 1820 in Hobart, Tasmania.
died 20 March 1904 Launceston. named as Thomas RANSOM
We are trying to establish if he was the son of Thomas RANSOM (Died 1829) who, with partner Catherine Christiana MCNALLY ran the 'Joiner's Arms' Hobart, and the 'Royal Oak', Green Ponds. Thomas Snr was convicted and transported in 1791.
Thomas would have been 80 when Thomas was born, but the story and the connections are all there - we just want to prove the two Thomas's are father and son! ::)
In Thomas Snr's will, Catherine is named as Thomas mother - and he is called MCNALLY throughout, when he is named as a beneficiary. Thomas and Catherine are buried in the same grave at Cullenswood.
We've obtained T. RANSOM death certificate, (but no parents named, no wife named, no children named.) The dates do match though!! ;) He was a widower and he had 15 children!! His wife was Sarah Stanfield and they lived at Killymoon near Fingal, Tasmania.
If anyone can throw any light on this it would be great - births weren't registered until 1846 so it would be a late addition anyway.
Maybe someone has knowledge of a name change for Thomas. ??? :-*
Wiggy :)
-
Wiggy,
Have you checked the church baptismal records for the area in which they lived?
Often these can be repositories of inforamtion that has not been transcribed into official registers.
regards
Robyn
-
Call me crazy :) but it seems to me Thomas, born 1821 is more likely to be the grandson of the elder Thomas.
Could Catherine McNally be the daughter of Thomas and therefore nee Ransom ::)
If Thomas snr was transported 1791 and died 1829 aged 80, he would have been abt 50 when he arrived in Australia.
Where was he from?
Trish
-
Hi Trish and Robyn, Thanks for your suggestions!
Grandson seems more likely doesn't it! ;) Thomas Snr must have been a lusty fellow!! :P
I'd not even thought through to the grandson bit though, because the other story is so firmly in the family history and backed up by newspaper reports! (not that you can believe everything you read ::) )
Thomas Snr - from London, about 48 when convicted at the Old Bailey. Catherine McNally - may have come from the West Indies - hard to find a trace on her. She was about 50 years younger than Thomas (and about 13 years older than her second husband Frederick Von Stieglitz). But the story is all there, except hard evidence of Thomas Jnr's parentage
Haven't been to London birth registers yet - am still trying to get a line on them.
Might have to take a trip to Tasmania myself someday, for Thomas Jnr's birth particulars.! I wonder, would he have been registered in a church? - given that he was born 'out of wedlock' ;) as far as we know.
Wiggy
-
This could take a while to research so I am just going to type up what I have found so far :)
Births RANSOM, Mother Sarah Stanfield
F Ransom, 1845 ( F, born Avoca)
F Ransom, 1847 ( F, born Avoca)
Frederick Thomas Ransom, 1850 ( M, Fingal)
Thomas, 1852 ( M, Fingal)
M Ransom, 1853 (M,Fingal)
Marriage/relationship 1845 Clarence, Tasmania to Thomas RansoN
-
Children of ANN ??? Ransom and Francis William or Walter VON STEIGLITZ, born 1811
Lewis Frederick, 1841
F 1842 ( F, born Avoca)
Selina Anne, 1849
Florence Elizabeth, 1854
Mary Jane, 1854
-
Site to try if havent already :)
http://portal.archives.tas.gov.au/menu.aspx?search=8
-
Christina McNally and Frederick STEIGLITZ seem to have a relationship too in 1830.
Could Catherine and Thomas snr have had children reg. under McNally and Ransom???
Have fun will look at this again later.
Cheers, Trish
-
Yep - all correct so far! Those Ransom children are the offspring of Thomas Junior.
Catherine married Frederick Von Steiglitz and her daughter married Frederick's brother - very complicated. We can't find the birth evidence for either Ann (abt 1817 - 1892) or her brother Thomas (1821-1904) - that's what we really need! Ann doesn't rate a mention in Thomas Snr's will -( usual for those times maybe?), but we believe both she and Thomas are T Snr's children - if only we can prove it!!
Keep up the good work folks - I am grateful! :)
Wiggy
-
Hi Trish, Thanks for the suggestion!
I have already tried the Tasmanian site you suggested and both Ann and Thomas are there - one as Ransome and the other as Ranson - all spellings acknowledged as variations. Neither has parents mentioned. Problem! but Ann's marriage with Von Stieglitz and her children are recorded. We believe Thomas and Catherine only had two children - reckon Thomas might have run out of steam by then!!! ;D Jnr was only 10 when Dad died aged about 88. (That's a tremendous age when you think he came out on the second fleet - notoriously bad conditions, went to Norfolk Island for years etc etc.) It does make you wonder. There is a pavement in Campbell town in Tassie which has two bricks in it, both referring to a Thomas Ransom - one of 48, the other of 20. I wrote to Tasmanian Library to sort out this discrepancy and they say there is only one Thomas registered and think the bricks may be wrong - each brick tells half the story we have been handed down - very confusing. ::) :-\
Still searching!! ;)
Wiggy
-
Well this one has me beat, although Australia is not my area of expertise even though I live here ;D
Thomas seems quite a lad :) ;D
WHERE ARE ALL THE AUSTRALIAN EXPERTS, Come in Spinner ;D ;D ;D
Trish
-
Gee that last reply I wrote was confused!!
I've rectified it I hope! I am confusing myself never mind anyone else.
Where is your expert area Trish?
Wiggy
-
Nowhere in particular but I love the English counties :)
Its just that I have no one really that stayed in Australia besides me, so I have not purchased Australian records like others have on this board.
Cheers,
Trish
-
Searching for any knowledge of Catharine's roots.
Born possibly 1790ish. Where?? ???
Partner of Thomas Ransom from about 1814-1829 in Hobart and Green Pond Tasmania. Bore him two children we believe. See above! ;)
Married to Frederick Lewis Von Steiglitz (ie/ie) in 1830; died 1857. Lived at 'Killymoon', near Fingal during marriage.
Where did she come from, and when, to Tasmania ? Was she a convict/convict's daughter?
-
How sure are you of the date of arrival of Thomas?
There were at least TWO convicts by that namea transported one in 1789 and the one in 1791 in State Library of Queensland http://onesearch.slq.qld.gov.au/primo_library/libweb/action/search
The one on the Admiral Gambier to NSW that is in the Tassie records may be a third.
One Thomas Ransom received a conditional pardon in NSW in 1797 ([4/4430] 774 -009)
http://srwww.records.nsw.gov.au/indexes/searchform.aspx
Still no trace on Catherine/Christina. There is always teh possiblity that she was a soldiers child. After ruling out a convict background for one I am researching who arrived in PJ in 1826 aged 7 I began to look at the famlies of soldiers who accompanied the convicts to find their arrival.
From my experience it is very hard to find them listed at all. All documentation to the family I am researching merely lists Sgt **** and family not even a wife's name. Even in correspondence from the soldier it is my wife and children.
It might be worth visiting these sites as a starting point:
http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~garter1/tobegin.htm
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-conflicts-periods/other/british_army-in-aust.htm
http://members.pcug.org.au/~pdownes/keenan/index.htm this gives a look at one soldiers life in Australia.
good luck
Robyn
-
Hi Robyn,
Well we have documentary evidence of him arriving on the second fleet (abt 1791) and going to Norfolk Island - conditional pardon in 1797 and full pardon 1810 (on Norfolk Island) He assisted evacuation of last convicts from Norfolk in 1814 - to Derwent River Settlement.
It is VERY interesting that you say there are two Thomas Ransom's on the QLD records ::) :P because there is some confusion - two bricks in Campbelltown Tassie with two different ages given for Thomas (on two different ships) - 48 and 20, and the stories seem to have been amalgamated in the family history - Tasmanian Library says there is only one and has backed that up with newspaper references. They cannot find reference to the fact that he was superintendent of boat-building in the colony - which we have as part of family oral history. There is a write-up about Thomas in the Aust Dict of Biog. - I believe there is a web address for that in some stickies under resources.
Anything else you can tell me about the Thomas's you have found would be great!! :D
Thanks Robyn, Wiggy
-
Hi Again Robyn,
Have been trawling through the convict lists for Thomas Ranson(m)- the one we are interested in seems to be there on target - Scarborough/Second Fleet/ Middlesex/life.
On the third fleet came others - Robert Ransom and a Thomas Rawson - I wonder if there has been a bit of a mix up somewhere in the telling. ::) The Salamander is a ship of the third fleet, and this is one on which one of the Thomas' (of bricks fame) is supposed to have come.
Found the lowdown on another marine ancestor while I was there though - thanks for that pointer!! ;D
I want to attach a photo of the bricks but can't reduce them - don't know how I mean!
Wiggy
-
Wiggy,
Pleased that the military tip was of assitance. We forget about these individuals who had no say in their arrival in Australia. We tend to focus on the convicts but the soldiers faced the same lives and little chance of returning home.
Did you checkout the QLD site? I think that they can provide more information for a fee.
Someone else will have to help with the image information as this is not something I deal with.
good luck
Robyn
-
Queensland site won't let me in - say there's an error or something.
-
Wiggy,
Sorry tired to give you a shor cut. Try
http://www.slq.qld.gov.au/info/fh/convicts
and navigate from there
Robyn
-
Thanks Robyn - and there they are, both of them - this is something I am going to have to work on!! ??? Both From Middlesex - as is the
Thomas Rawson and both for life - as is . . . ! Very confusing - but Rawson isn't on the Third fleet according to QLD register- only the NSW list - I wonder - misspelling by someone I wonder?? ??? ::) Oh boy am I confused.
Wiggy
-
Wiggy,
I had a look at the Old Bailey records
http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/forms/formMain.jsp
and found
THOMAS RANSOM, defendant name in trial of WILLIAM SHERBERD, Theft > burglary; LUCY SHERBERD, Theft > burglary; THOMAS RANSOM, Theft > burglary; ELIZABETH RANSOM, Theft > burglary, 25th October 1786.
The two men were found guily and given life but transported instead the two wives were found not guilty.
Thomas Ransom, defendant name in Supplementary material, 9th September 1789.
The following capital convicts accepted his Majesty's pardon, on condition of being transported for life . Thomas Vallame , Daniel Collins , William Shurberd , Thomas Ransom , William Bead , John Gervalt , William Allen , John Wright . Joseph Reay , Solomo...
From this it is impossible to say if he is the 1789 or1791 convict.
regards
Robyn
-
Wow, Robyn thanks so much! :) I had the records for the 1786 trial but not the subsequent one. That could make heaps of difference. I will look into the second one. I am continually astounded by the way all you folks find info - and the resources you seem to have. Just re-read your note - those two Thomas's are the same person aren't they? ::) :-\
I wonder if there is a site where I can find who went to Tasmania and who didn't? As I said, the Tasmanian records show only one - and we believe that that one is the 1786 trial. These are the texts from the bricks at Campbellltown - as I can't manage to attach the photos.
1) Thomas Ransom, Age 20s, Scarborough 1790, life, Built Joiner's Arms Inn Hobart, AP58 SY
2) Thomas Ransom, Age 48, Salamander 1791, Burglary - life, Supervised Norfolk Is Evac. BA 89.
On the strength of it, it would seem that the younger is more likely to be the father of our G.G. grandfather - but the Will we have would indicate that it is the older of the two. Tricky
Thanks again,
Wiggy
-
Wiggy,
Yes the two extracts are the referring to the same person. It is a pity that no age is given.
Have you had a look at the material in the Tassie Archives on the Thomas Ransom per Admiral Gambier to PJ, then the Chapman to Tassie?
It is on page 242 of CON31/1/34
http://portal.archives.tas.gov.au/menu.aspx?search
Not vert infomrative. You will need the NSW indent I feel.
regards
Robyn
-
Wiggy,
Yes the two extracts are the referring to the same person. It is a pity that no age is given.
Have you had a look at the material in the Tassie Archives on the Thomas Ransom per Admiral Gambier to PJ, then the Chapman to Tassie?
It is on page 242 of CON31/1/34
http://portal.archives.tas.gov.au/menu.aspx?search
Not vert infomrative. You will need the NSW indent I feel.
regards
Robyn
I am sorry to be so very ignorant, but I can't seem to find how to get to p242 con31/1/34. I am into the tassie site but don't know where to go from there - hopeless that's me! :'( I've been in and out of various indexes but not the right one obviously!
Wiggy
-
Hi there,
Not sure if this will help but I think this is a direct link to that page
http://search.archives.tas.gov.au/ImageViewer/image_viewer.htm?CON31-1-34,436,1,S,80
JM
-
Wiggy,
The given link works then put thenumber in the image box to 242 and wait for the image to appear.
Of course you haveto have found Thomas Ransom in the convict files on http://portal.archives.tas.gov.au/menu.aspx?search=11 on the first link then by searching under convict records for his name, you then just click on the blue links
- number 80639
then con/31/1/34
then click CON31/1/34 View this record online
and you end up in the same place as the link.
Robyn
-
You are a very patient woman!! I will try again!
Wiggy :) :) ;)
-
ah ha! Now I have it - I have seen this record before (my trouble is, I never know how to return to things I have stumbled upon!) I don't think this is our Thomas - but it may well be the other man! Or is this ours and . . . no I'm not going there ::) - ours was happily living in Tasmania with his Joiner's Arms Inn by that date -
Confusing - that's what it is!
Continued thanks for all the help!
-
Wiggy some thing from rootsweb maling list archives
http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search
search for thomas ransom 19 results 4 of interest.
if you are one of the sumitters in the discussion of Thomas Ransom of Fingal then you will have this, if not a some possible leads
RObyn
-
Thanks again Robyn - - - - Yes that is definitely the family - the next generation from the Thomas I'm looking for.
The Thomas in that lot is the Thomas McNally mentioned in Thomas senior's will. Will have to find when he changed his name to Ransom(e)!
Wiggy
-
Feel I am making progress with Thomas - thanks to much help -
now for Catharine Christiana McNally!!! There's a problem ::)
-
Hi Wiggy,
I have been following this with interest. You are so lucky to have Robyn helping you.
Best of luck,
Trish
-
I am, and she certainly is a great help - but then so were you ;).
Wiggy
-
Sorry - wrong post! Been to the right place now!
Wiggy
-
OK - so I've been to Tasmania, and Thomas (1820) is definitely the son of Catharine and probably of Thomas Snr., though father is not named on church register of christening. The same Thomas Snr definitely died at age 86 so he had this daughter (Anne) and son when quite old. Thomas Jnr does not have name change from McNally to Ransom registered - but that was not unusual apparently. Tasmania can only find record of one Thomas Ransom coming there - the other apparently stayed on Mainland somewhere.
Still trying to get a fix on Catharine Christiana McNally - who seems to have been known as Christina most of the time - cannot find any new records of her in Tasmanian libraries even with librarian's help - nothing in arrivals - of any description, nothing in convict musters, nothing even on lists of people drawing provisions or supplying provisions. (Gee didn't they loved making lists of EVERYTHING) Also looked at Norfolk Island lists - nothing. Have put another post up on Common Room board - see if there is anyone with info. Only definite is her motherhood, marriage in 1830 and death in 1857 - and her gravestone to prove it!
Wiggy :-\ ;)
-
No doubt you have seen these 2 references?
It says that Catherine Christina McNally was a friend of Ransom's
http://adbonline.anu.edu.au/biogs/A020508b.htm
http://adbonline.anu.edu.au/biogs/A020316b.htm
-
Indeed I have, but thanks for looking. :D
There are a few incorrect things in that article - like Thomas's birth, (he died at 86 or 88 in 1829) - but the rest is proven and there is Christina - but how did she get there? ??? Big mystery! (Thomas was married in England before his conviction and I'm guessing that was why he and Catharine Christina didn't marry - 'cos she married soon after his death.)
Wiggy
-
Oh so he was already married??? Guess he didnt want his wife to come over lol.
Good luck in your quest.
-
I wonder if his wife wanted to come with him on the convict transport? :D
Or even if she would have been allowed? ??? Oh well Australia was good to him in the end, and he died a man of means and good standing!! ;) Guess he liked younger women - Christina was about 47 years younger!!!
Cheers,
Wiggy
-
Is it possible Christina was not a McNally by birth ??? Could she have been transported herself under another name? Even been a common-law wife to a McNally or married one.
Trish
-
Just wondering if you have considered that Catherine might be the Catherine McNALTY who arrived on the Sydney cove in 1807? Convicted middlesex in 1806 to a term of 7 years.
http://users.bigpond.net.au/convicts/page57.html (Lesley Uebel's Claim a Convict site.)
This would be a simple one letter surname alteration similar to my Godwin who became Goodwin and Vickers who became Bickers in my research. All in Tasmania originally at one time.
Have you joined the Port Jackson (PJ) mailing list on Rootsweb? Very knowlegable group of people who have a vast depth of research on convicts of this time frame and who are most generous in the assistance.
http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/index/other/Prisons/AUS-PT-JACKSON-CONVICTS.html
Someone may have inforamtion on Catherine McNalty and who you may then be able to rule out. Also may know about Catherine Christiana McNAlly.
Very few MCNAlly convicts in the right time frame though.
regards
Robyn
-
Wiggy,
Catherine was sentenced 1806 Old Bailey as Catherine McNally, arrived Sydney Cove 1807,married Bryan Overhand Capt of Lady Nelson1810 in Sydney, moved to Hobart in 1814 with Thomas Ransom boat builder Norfolk Island, gave birth to Thomas Mc Nally 1820, married Frederick Lewis Stieglitz in 1829,became chatelaine of Killymoon, died in 1857 and buried next to the hawthorn hedge on east side of Cullenswood Church near St Marys, Fingal Valley. Thomas McNally adopted the name Ransom. At one stage I thought his father could have been Matthew Brady the bushranger as Brady was assigned to Thomas and Catherine on his arrival in Hobart 1820, but dates don't quite fit. Unlikely to have been old Thomas. Might have been Overhqnd who could have turned up again for a short time. She was highly regarded by Governors and bushrangers alike, and does not seem the flighty type, so his father is still an unknown. I have been researching her for 20 years. I live 2km down the road from her grave, so happy to answer any questions that I can.
Regards, David Clement
-
Hi David,
- wish I'd know about you five days ago when we were travelling through St Mary's and looking at the graves in Cullenswood cemetery. (Talk about wet!)
Thank you so much for that information - I just knew someone out there had to have some connection and some knowledge about Catharine. From where did you glean your information? - 'cos I've been looking at convict musters,ships lists, marine lists etc etc and never a sight of her.
If she was married to the ships captain, was that why she didn't marry Thomas - in spite of 50 year age gap? and I presume the captain died about the same time as Thomas given that she married Fred'k so soon after Thomas's death. Tell me anything you can!! I will be most grateful for anything.
Where do you fit in to the family - or is it pure history of the area which you are digging. We've always thought we are descended from Old Thomas but that seems unlikely from what you are saying! We like to claim him - he seems a really enterprising type!! ;D Do you think he just left young Thomas in his will for love of Catharine? And do you know anything about Anne who we think was born in 1817 (but I can't find the proof) - We think it was she who married Francis Von Steiglitz. Certainly it was someone called Anne Ransom!
Cheers,
Wiggy :)
-
Robyn - hello again,
Thanks for those sites - I've just been visiting them and finding three extra convicts - bad lot we must have been! ;)
There is a wealth of information out there if one only knows how to plug in to it! Or who to turn to for help.
Thanks for your interest!
Wiggy
-
Hello Wiggy,
Yes it was wet! Pure serendipity that I came across your post- I haven't opened Catherine's file in two years! Planted a tree this morning, came in for coffee and just casually googled catherine for no reason.
I'm doing this from memory, not from my file, just to get the dialogue started and to stimulate your questions, then if necessary I can check what I have.
No, I'm not a descendant- moved here almost 30 years ago, am a local history buff, we lived for 7 years on the property next to Killymoon, and I sort of fell into researching Thomas and then of course Catherine, and the more I found,and it was not easy as you have found, the more facinating it became- their story is an epic of early Colonial history, from Old Bailey to government House, Governors and Bushrangers, it would make a great film, with Meryl Streep in her prime or Cate Blanchett as Catherine!
She claimed to be innocent at her trial in 1806, "as innocent as this babe at my breast", and she had a child with her on the Syndey Cove in 1807. No further trace of the child, She was however reported as having a child by Overhand in the NSW 1814 muster. No record in the 1811 muster as Overhand was away as captain of the Lady Nelson taking Gov Macquarie to VDL for his first tour. In the previous year theNSW Colonial Secretary's records are full of reports of aggro between Overhand and the commandant of Newcastle penal settlement, apparently over catherine , because Macquarie issued a special order for her to be removed from Newcastle and brought to Sydney, where she married Overhand (1810). My belief is that this child might have been Anne, but have no proof, and Catherine was a master(sic) at not being included in records. No other reference to Anne until her marriage, apart from the 1837 comment by bushranger Martin Cash in his "personal narrative" that the "missus" had an adopted daughter.
I don't like Stieglitz, and I think he was a money grubbing opportunist. Go to http//images.statelibrary.tas.gov.au and search for stieglitz. He had to sell out to young Thomas when Catherine died, because Killymoon was old Tom's grant and had been left to Catherine in trust for young Tom. I think young Tom took the Ransom name because he wasn't a Stieglitz, didn't like his stepfather, recognised that his inheritance derived from old Thomas, and wanted to lose his mother's origins for her.
You need to try and obtain a copy of "Martin Cash- his personal narrative as a bushranger in VDL' and check page 20 about his time at killymoon as a dairyman in 1837. Also a wonderful description of Stieglitz chatting up Catherine in the Royal Oak in 1829, in "The Hermit in Van Diemens land"- I don't know whether it is online.
Bryan Overhand was dismissed as Captain of Lady Nelson in 1814 for helping convicts to abscond and signed on the Emu which sank in 1815 in Cape Town. A Captain Benjamin Ormond (same initials) started to arrive in Hobart 1817 and died in Parramatta 1824 aged 40. B aond BO never appeared in the records at the same time. Ormond was in Hobart in March 1820. My theory is that he made contact with Catherine and had a one night stand with his wife,possibly even with knowledge of Thomas, (she never married Thomas), he died in 1824, she didn't know for a number of years until Thomas died, so was free to marry Stieglitz in 1829. Explains all, and keeps her respectable. No trace of Anne in all this though.
I have not yet found out about her pre 1806. Who was Michael McNalty, supposedly her husband, what was her maiden name, where was she born- was she Irish, and was she married to a McNalty's from Armagh where Stieglitz was born (1803). I even theorised as well that Catherine was Thomas's daughter! So there are still plenty of unknowns.
Over to you
David
-
Hi,
Davclem:
What a wonderful synopsis. She must have been quite an intriguing woman, full of resource and character that I am sure all her descendants have inherited.
Of course one speculates on her early life but researching it may well be impossible.
Wiggy Congratulations on cracking your brickwall.
regards
Robyn
-
Yes, it sure is fascinating You've opened a can of worms and it is all very entertaining! - - - - but if Rupert Murdoch can have children well into his 70s why can't Thomas?? :D ::)
I want to read all those reports of aggro now! :D Oh how I wish I'd know about you, just down the road as we drove past!! ;)
We don't like Von Stieglitz either because the family tale is that he 'stole the family money' to build Killymoon. Is Tyrone in County Armagh - we have Fred. being born in Tyrone - but I thought that meant County Tyrone.
I presume you have seen Thomas Snr's will, where he leaves everything to Catharine (spelt like that in his will) then, at her demise to Thomas. (Nothing of Killymoon there 'Fred.' built it) - - He was to inherit the Royal Oak and Joiner's Arms, and all the land and rents belonging to them. Then we read somewhere, can't remember where, that Thomas Jnr had to buy Killymoon for 30,000 pounds -( and where a post office employee would have that sort of money from is anyone's guess.) Unless his wife's family came to the party!
How did you find out all that about the husbands - two!! She was only 17 when she was transported - how would she have had time to have two husbands?? Fast worker - but you say she wasn't flighty!! And where did you find out the info re the captains and her marriage - I am not doubting you - just really, really interested! :) And the trial reports? I really must get into this more! Was Catharine listed under her married name when she came to Tasmania? Why, then, was she always referred to as Catharine/Christina McNally or Mrs/ Widow Ransom after Thomas's death - we knew they'd never married just thought they had a full on de-facto relationship - which is why Thomas had to give up as Licensee of the Joiner's Arm's Inn (he was living in sin - quel horreur) And, when did she go to Norfolk Island? because you said she arrived from Norfolk Island with Thomas.
Anne's last child was born in 1860 so if she'd been born pre 1814 she would have been pretty old to have been still childbearing, at 46+. That's old in those days isn't it??? Alright for the blokes - not so good for the women!! ;) I don't have Anne's marriage certificate - just lists of her many children, and her death - and she would have been about 78. Do you have evidence of her birth in Sydney. I must get back to the libraries and look at the indexes again! The people in Hobart and Launceston were very helpful - but I didn't have enough time at either. Melbourne is closer!
Too many questions - but I am oh so glad to finally find someone who knows something - I knew there must be someone out there who knew a bit about Catharine/Christina.
Thank you so much for sharing what you have - I look forward to the next installment - meantime I will go looking for those references you've suggested.
Wiggy
-
Robyn - not sure I've done the cracking - but it is very exciting to have made contact with David! Reckon the cracking goes to David!
Wiggy :D
-
Wiggy,
I will just refresh myself on some of the sources and let you know in half an hour or so- but you will pick up her marriage 1810 to Bryan Overend on the IGI - search Catherine McNalty under South Pacific
David
-
I have seen that photo of Frederick - and also the entry in Aust Dict of Biog re him too - have you seen that?
Don't suppose you happen if there are any photos of either Catharine or Thomas Snr do you? - or even Thomas Jnr - who is the one you started researching all those years ago!
Wiggy
-
Wiggy,
Here we go for starters
1 Google " INDEX TO NSW COLONIL SECRETARYS PAPERS 1788-1825"
click on website URL that comes up
Click on "search and browse..."
Click on 'O"
Scroll down from Ovens John until you come to'Overhand, Bryan"
then read
ditto ORMAN Benjamin
ditto mcanulty
ditto McNally
2IGI at www.familysearch.org
search "Stieglitz, Ireland", will bring up 19 entries,all Freds family NB his sister was called Christina-
3 www.oldbaileyonline.org
Search for Catherine Macnalty 1806, and that will bring up trial report- Age 23
No she never went to Norfolk Island- Thomas did. She was sent to Newcastle , the lime kilns!
David
-
Wiggy,
Yes,I have a photo of Catherine, very severe, sad, Victorian black silk dress . I am not IT ept, so will have to get a copy made for you, also have one of young Tom, when he has become old Tom himself, on a bycycle- I like him! Will copy.
My email is
Moderator Comment: email address removed to prevent spam and other abuses. Please use the secure PM (personal message) system to share email addresses and other personal information. Thank You.
if you are willing to give me your address , I can post it to you, but it will take two or three weeks, as i will have to go into Launceston
David
-
In reply 42 you said she came with Thomas from Norfolk Island - or did you mean she arrived in Hobart at the same time??? I'm confused.
I reckon she was confused too. Have you seen young Thomas's baptism record? It says Catharine was unmarried.
The old Bailey record would suggest that she was older than the 68 years that her gravestone says.
She is written up as Christianna on her marriage record - but she has signed herself as Christina. She is one tricky lady. In Old Thom,as's Will she is Catharine Christiana.
Right I'm off to look up those sites you've suggested.
;) Wiggy
-
the Lady Nelson is that beautiful little square rigged boat in Hobart isn't it - original or repliqua?
-
Hi Wiggy and David :)
Well how fascinating ;D
As I live in Sydney, I will ring St Phillips Church in Sydney/Church of England Archives and see if It is possible to discover what is on the marriage record of Catherine and Bryan.
Cheers,
Trish
EDIT; just found the registers are available at the State Library, unfortunately it may take me some days to get in there.
-
David, did you get my PM? Hope so!
Yes Trish you are right - quite fascinating - I hadn't realized what a remarkable story was hidden in all the records!
Wiggy
-
Night thoughts!
Catharine's date of birth in IGI is 2 June 1790. Yet her trial age is 23 in 1806 - these don't add up - I find some of the dates on IGI very suspect - also sus is the fact that Anne and Francis Stieglitz child Selina Ann was born in Ireland according to IGI - that is not correct I don't think - she lived in Tasmania I'm pretty sure. Think I have the right generation - but will go back to search.
Another question - to which you may not know the answer - I have evidence from some historic buildings register that the Joiner's Arms belonging to old Thomas was in Macquarie Street - but I have a newspaper report granting a licence to Joiner's Arms Inn in Murray Street - with a different licensee. I suppose one could have closed, and the name taken by another.
forgotten the rest of my thoughts - I think very well when horizontal!
Wiggy
-
Good Morning All
Ok, lets try and answer those questions, and toss in some more tidbits
1 The link with Norfolk Island is Bryan- he was married to Catherine, and he evacuated Thomas from Norfolk Island. Catherine was not on Norfolk. I don't know how they all came together and how the relationship developed, except that Bryan would presumably have known Thomas from his trips there on the Lady Nelson over the previous years. He might have offered him lodgings in Sydney while he waited to go to Hobart. Bryan's life was changing at that time. He was in trouble with Macquarie,He and Catherine may have not been hitting it off, there was a child, Catherine may have taken the chance to go toHobart to muddy her convict trail. I don't know.
2 It is a replica at Hobart
3 Murray St and Macquarie St intersect, the pub was probably on the corner, hence the two addresses? It was also known as the Carpenters Arms in the 1818 Licensee records . I think Thomas sold out, before moving to Cross Marshes I've an auction notice somewhere, but in any event the owner of the pub is not necessarily the licensee
4 I think the 1790 IGI record is a red herring- she was married to a Mc Nal(t)y, not born one. The old Bailey record indicates an older person, by direct statement and by the nature of the offence and her response. Witness describes her as a woman.The "I am as innocent" response really resonates as Irish as well! The discrepancy in date on gravestone? She was very good at blurring and hiding her past( the 1843 and 1848 Census records for Killymoon record her as "free" ( not free by servitude, or in her case free by marriage!)). She doesn't appear in musters. I think she down aged herself to Frederick when he was courting, knocked 5-6 years off her age.
5 Haven't checked the local baptism records for Selina Ann, but no reason why she couldn't have been born in Ireland. Martin Cash autobiog states that Frederick was away from the colony in 1837 and was for 3 Years! Fred couldn't wait to leave after Catherine died in 1857 and go back to Ireland to marry Hesther Blackett and let his new mother in law buy him a Von. Brother Francis and Anne could have gone back to Henry and Charlotte in Ireland to introduce her to the family. Francis lived on "Lewis Hill" on the St Pauls River, near Avoca, named after the home of the Stieglitz in Ireland
Have more , but apparently the rest exceeds permissable 5500 charcters, so will do it in 2 seperate posts
David
-
-
6 the Norfolk Island mafia connection was reinforced when Sarah Stanfield , dau of Daniel Stanfield,Corporal of marines on Norfolk and subsequent beef baron of VDL, married young Thomas! She was killed Aug 9 1890 when her horse bolted on St Marys Pass and the carriage overturned.
7 Matthew Brady the making of a Bushranger, by Karl R Von Steiglitz ". "He arrived at Hobart Town four days after Christmas on the convict ship Juliana and was sent to work for Thhomas Ransom. Both Mr and Mrs ransom treated him very well and liked his happy nature and high spirits......" You have to wonder about Catherine's liking for convicts and bushrangers, well Thomas's as well- "100 Australian Bushrangers 1789-1901 by Allan M Nixon " Obviously Brady had plentyof contacts...On 14 April 1825 Arthur issued a proclamationin which he offered 20 gallons of rum for the capture of Brady and McCabe. On 20 April Brady suddenly appeared at the Royal Oak Hotel at the Cross Marshs, fastened a notice to the doorway and gallopedoff again the locals were amazed to read ' It has caused matthew Brady much concern that such a person known as Sir george Arthur is at large. Twenty gallons of rum will be given to any person that will deliver this person unto me.i also caution John Priest that I will hang him for his ill-treatment of Mrs Blackwell at Newtown" {attaboy, Matt}
8 Journal froma Journal of T Scott in the suite of his Excellency Lieut Col Governor Arthur during an excursion to the NW Quarter of VDJ 1829 "Jan 9th Friday at 1pm His Excellency left Hobart Town . The day being wet and the roads heavy for travelling, the party reached Mrs Ransome's Inn at the Cross Marsh at 8 o'clock in the evening- 29miles from town" Thiswas the year Thomas died. The inn was called the Royal Oak, it still stands in much its original form.Cross Marsh is now called Kempton. As far as I can work out Thomas is actually buiried under the Midland Highway which passes over what was part of the cemetery at the time, but I am not sure!
9 Is the IGI record of a marriage of a Thomas Ransom to Elizabeth Durrell 8 June 1778 at St Leonards Shoreditch, our Thomas- don't know , except dates place and names fit, but that way lies madness!
10 The Aboriginal /Settler Clash in VDL 1803-1831 N J B Plomley
December 1827 Shannon River Mrs Ransome Hut plundered, tea, sugar, knives stolen
19 March 1828 Clyde River region Mrs ransome and 2 servants, came upon some natives making spears who fled when fired upon
11 Novemeber1828 Shannon Mrs Ramsome Hut plundered
9 November 1830 Stieglitz Dysart Parish Hut plundered
11 Diary of Robert William Von Stieglitz 1875-76
includes reminiscences of his time in VDL1833-36
"my brother Frederick lived 36 miles from Francis and I remember how delighted I was to see his house at Killymoon. One reason was he kept splendid horses and took delight in putting any young fellow on them so much the better if they ran away with them, but he did not care how much you knocked them about over logs and fences" [I rest my case- the man was despicable DWC)
David
-
Good afternoon - I can't keep away from this saga!
Have you seen the References to Killymoon in the Tasmanian Motor News 1969 - I presume you would have May have even written it!! ;D
Found the proceedings of the trial - am now looking for Thomas in same records. Also found Mary Cavenaugh and Edward Kimberley in the musters - not the trials yet though. Maria Kimberley wife of Daniel Stanfield.
Re # 1 We heard in another reference in the card index at Launceston Library, that Thomas and another man were responsible for the evacuation of the last convicts from Norfolk Island aboard the ?Chapman? - there is so much which may have to be revised in my story! Didn't realize that the Lady Nelson was involved also - not enough research by me!
Re # 3 The Inn was on the corner of Macquarie St Extension and Weld Street according to the piece I have on it. still a mystery then!
Re # 4 Do you think Catharine might have 'borrowed a baby for the trial to substantiate the story that she was pregnant when arrested - long shot but trying it for size?? :D No, That doesn't gel if she had the baby with her on the boat though does it?
Re # 6 - Having just driven up St Mary's pass I can see how easily one would be killed if a horse bolted there - I didn't go for it much myself! Too steep for me, but beautiful scenery! ;) We knew of the marine's connection with the Stanfields and Norfolk Island - didn't get to Rokeby - bad luck.
Re #7 We'd heard that Matthew Brady was made very welcome at the Royal Oak - first time I've heard the area called Cross Marsh though - Green Ponds in all other references - these things are not important - just interesting.
RE # 8 We looked in the graveyard at Kempton and wondered that a man of Thomas's standing didn't have a stone - your explanation makes a good case.
Re #9 There is a reference from a book on the second fleet, ('The Second Fleet' - Britain's Infamous Armada - from the Mitchell Library in Sydney) or some such name - I have the reference somewhere nearby - that Thomas and his wife Elizabeth being both brought before the courts in England - together with his friend and his wife. The wives got off the men were transported. I haven't seen any marriage certificate - just the court reference from the book. I'm grazing in the Old Bailey records for that!
Curiouser and curiouser as it says in Alice in Wonderland!
Fascinating news really David - I can hardly wait for my cousin to arrive home from England to share all this news with her! We set out on this search together and have hit brick walls at every turn. - it seems we didn't take enough turns!
Wiggy
-
Hmmm other references definitely say Murray Street for Joiner's Arms - so maybe the historic reference is wrong - It says the current 'Le Provencal Restaurant' in Hobart is the old Joiner's Arms. Ref. South Hobart - A brief History.
-
Wiggy,
by now you should have found the trial and I referred to it back in an earlier post.
"« Reply #21 on: Monday 01 June 09 12:39 BST (UK) »" Date of trial was was 25th October 1786. Very interesting read. You have to admit things were not very impartial at that time.
regards Robyn
-
Thanks Robyn - I'd found it before but not taken good enough note of it! Reading as I went along, I am truly horrified as the random nature of the sentencing!
Do you know - could Free men in positions (as Captain) force convicts to marry them - I know she may well have wanted to - but could the marriage have been forced upon her? Just interested! She doesn't seem to have been too keen on her Captain!
Wiggy
-
Whoa there- forced marriage? She had Mrs Macquarie and Governor Macquarie getting her out of Newcastle, Overhand having punch ups with Purcell over her- I don't think our righteous Governor and his lady were into white slaving- and don't forget Bryan's was a 7year sentence which at full term was up in 1814, by then he was out of favour with Macquarie for looking the othere way about absconding convicts, perhaps he had to leave, he was a mariner, got position on the Emu, it sank, he couldn't get back, he trusted Catherine to Thomas, a nice guy and very old, things just happened, he cam back as Ormond, fathered young Thomas, still incognito, died in 1824-its a complete fabrication, but all the facts fit it, and it is an epic love tragedy! I like it
It is very morish when you get a sniff of the trail!
Joiners Arms was Murray Street- ad in Colonial Times 9 Sept 1825, page 1 col 1 "To be let for the term of two, three or five years,the Joiners Arms Tavern in Murray Street and occupation given on the 29th inst. For further particulars apply to Mr T Ransom on the premises"
Thomas Ransom was allocated pew13 in the distribution of pews in St Davids Church 22 September 1820, with Barnes, Wallis, Hopwood, Connelly, Eddington and Devine
Booboo on my part-told you I was relying om memory- Lady Nelson was not the ship used for the last evacuation party off Norfolk, it was Kangaroo commanded by Wm Hutchinson who wrote to Macquarie about the settlers in the party " Mr Thomas Ransome, the Master Carpenter, is desirous of settling at the Derwent, I beg leave to recommend him for such extension of land as your Excellency may judge him deserving of" ( Punishment Short of Death - Margaret Hazzard 1984).. However, the more primary source is Historical Records of Australia, which prefaces the above with "I should be wanting in justice were i to pass by Mr Thomas Ransom, the Master Carpenter, whose diligence and attention in keeping the boats in repair enabled me to expedite the service" The kangaroo reached Sydney on 10 march 1814. On May 7 the following item appeared in the Sydney Gazette "Thomas Ransome, John Hatcher, etc, etc, proceeding southwards in His majeaty's brig Kangaroo request all claims to be presented for payment" You need to Google the journey of the Kangaroo under Lieut James Jeffreys from Sydney-Hobart 1814 to get the details
It was the Cross Marsh near the Green Ponds
David
-
(Henry Savery "The hermit in Van Diemens Land)
December 1829
"Upon finishing my ride from Bothwell, I found a comfortable resting place at a large and commodious brick residence, standin a little off the road. Justice to the excellent entertainment the good landladys management afforded demands that Igive a few particulars of the hostess herself, and of the manner in which I spent two or three days in her truly comfortable home. As I really feel much to be her due, I will say that although she is not all that she has been, she has still not yet so far o'erstepped the meridian of her days as to have lost the possession of much for which doubtless she has heretofore been greatly admired." (Take that as a compliment, I suppose- Catherine at the Royal Oak)
David
-
:D :D I love your fabrication!! ;) Definitely the stuff films are made of! I was just asking, please Sir, if convicts could be forced into marriage - or agree to it just to get out of their convict digs!! ;D (Glad to know theirs was a wonderful love story written by D C.)
I hadn't realized Bryan was a convict also - you didn't say that did you?? No wonder he felt inclined to let them escape. Have to go back and re-read!
So you reckon that photo I took of the place in Macquarie Street is a bum steer then do you - pity! It looks good! And I'll have to remove the photo of 'Lady Nelson' too - Come on David - just when I was getting things looking really pretty! ::) Must say that ship didn't ring bells with Thomas. (just thought, I can leave it on Bryan's page can't I? ;) )
-
Re reply 65 - "could very well pass for 43 in the dark with the light behind her" I think Gilbert and Sullivan put it! :D
I'm going to have to return to work to pay for all the photocopies I want of all the Colonial Secretary's letter regarding this trio of people - Thomas, Bryan and Catharine. I want to read about the punch-ups! I'm getting the Martin Cash book on an inter-library loan and my friend has found 'The Hermit of VDL' for me. A long letter to the Mitchell library is called for. :)
Wiggy
-
I was looking around for Bryan and his trial - (which I can't find!!) and I found this request instead - did you ever see this? It adds more fuel to the fire! I think it was posted on Rootsweb about a year ago!
Quote:
Does anyone know of anything about PJ convict Bryan/Brian Overend/Overhand/Overand who arrived in 1806 on the Fortune? He had at least two children Elizabeth (1810) and William ( 1808) by Sarah Anderson. Elizabeth died as a baby, but what happened to William - may have taken the name Anderson. there is a William Overend burial on NSW BDM index in 1849 aged 43 - But what Happened to Bryan? (end Quote)
Wiggy :-\
-
Wiggy,
By coincidence (!)I posted to you about an hour ago giving chapter and verse on Bryan and Sarah and Elizabeth, and the whole lot disappeared in a puff of smoke before I hit "Post". True, I really did. Will repeat it, but at the moment am going to watch Spooks! Have got two meetings tomorrow, so it will be tomorrow evening before it happens. Are you going to answer the post, or move it onto me?
David
-
Now I know I've had good tuition these last two days - but I really don't feel competent to take this one on - and anyway maybe someone else has answered by now - I have responded to several leads on Rootschat only to realize that I am up to three years out of date ::) - comes from acting fast and reading after!
My knees are cold and I'm going to bed! Oh dear - old age? :o Never let it be said!
I will look forward to reading the 'chapter and verse' after your meetings and my visitor/ing.
Cheers
W
-
Birth;
Elizabeth OVERAND
1839 NSW
Parents William and Catherine
Birth;
William ANDERSON, Mother Sarah, 1809
Death; of a Sarah ANDERSON, aged, 13, born c 1817, in 1830
Quite a few deaths of a William Anderson in NSW in right time-frame
-
Now that is interesting Trish.
This is a completely new lead in the hunt! Now I wonder at Bryan Overand and his good character. I wonder if he ever married Sarah - and if so, had she died by the time he married Catharine? One supposes she must have. Waiting for tonight's installment of the saga, when David reckons he will reveal all!
And Trish, . . .
When you are on to St Phillips, please could you ask about Anne's birth maybe - either as McNally or Overand/Overhand/Overend - somewhere between 1811 and 1814 maybe. That would be much appreciated. I suppose it might even be in the indexes for NSW. ;)
Hi Robyn,
I've been back to the trials and trawled through many of them just reading and getting a feel for the 'summary' justice being meted out. It really was terrible just how little evidence was required to send a person to the other ends of the earth for the rest of their life - or a good part of it. Do you trawl around in Google, or whatever search engine, finding relevant sites, or do you have them pointed out to you as likely places to find info? I haven't done much Google trawling - I can see I will have to start!
I read a good book some time ago - fiction but based on fact (whose name I can't remember) - about someone sent out from Bristol to P.J. and then N.I. - funnily enough, one of my ancestors turned up in the book for a cameo appearance! Not Thomas.
Wiggy :)
-
In between meetings! I contacted Grahame re his query on Bryan/Sarah. He was only really interested in Sarah, and has moved on. Yes,Wiggy, despite my fabrication , there is potential for Bryan to have been an out and out womaniser. Benjamin Ormond was very much involved with convict malarky as well. Off to next meeting! David
-
Oh, Bryan was tried Lancaster 1805-David
-
Hi David,
I found Bryan being transported - but not his trial - can't find a way to the Lancaster trials - only things to do with Lancaster Castle. Can't even find Liverpool trials - will keep looking. Do you know why he was transported - his misdemeanor I mean?
I've been out in the sun pruning leads from the wisteria and vine this afternoon - and thinking, thinking, thinking - and here is my fabrication - which, though I like yours, I think is better - ('cos I want to be able to claim Thomas - who seems a decent type) I'm not sure I like the cut of Bryan's jib - to use the nautical vernacular.
My take:
I reckon Catharine was maybe not forced, but encouraged, to marry Bryan; but she didn't like him much - so when he went off to sea again, and she got the opportunity, she took up with this decent chap Thomas - as sort of father figure, which she'd missed since being transported. If she'd been en-amoured of Bryan, she'd have called her son after him and used his surname for Thomas Jnr - I mean she was married to him, so no shame there - and she'd have been using his surname - ditto. So I reckon she and Thomas got it all together - but she couldn't marry him - (already discussed ;)) Then, when Thomas died, she needed someone to keep her - can't justify that move ??? - so she married Fred - (in 1830 by the way - not 29! I have the certificate.) I know Thomas was a little older than her - what's a mere 45-50 years between friends. I mean Thomas must have been in his right mind as he was still receiving grants of land well into his eighties! Thomas Jnr's baptism certificate shows Catharine unmarried - why bring that 'shame' upon yourself if you are really married? - speaking in the terms of those days you understand.
Maybe Anne was Bryan's daughter and maybe Trish will find her baptism or birth in the NSW indexes - but Thomas is a Hobart lad, born and bred. So Anne would have been Thomas's adopted daughter - 'cos following my wonderful fabrication, Catharine didn't really want to have anything more to do with Bryan and removed her daughter - well, he could hardly take her on the ship with him anyway.
Like it?? ;) Wiggy
-
by the way, Selina Anne Stieglitz was born at Fingal in Tasmania!! Oh well another wonderful story bites the dust. ::) :)
Wiggy
-
Benjamin Ormond/Orman. Forget the theory that Bryan reinvented himself as Ben !!!
Information removed due to copyright violation. See http://www.rootschat.com/forum/copyright.php for more details
RootsChat must deal with any breach of copyright by its members.
For some time the team of Copyright Editors has been removing breaches of copyright and sending detailed personal messages to the member that had posted the information. Due to the volume of posts and members this is now impractical. Messages in breach will simply be deleted and this notice posted. We apologise for any inconvenience caused but are sure you will appreciate the importance of this issue.
-
Evening David,
OK, so we can dismiss Ben from the family then! I hope! ;) That just leaves Bryan to attend to. Very thorough research David! Don't know where all the info comes from, but I'm impressed. :D
I've been reading the description of Martin Cash at Killymoon - the reference says the 'adopted' daughter seemed younger than Thomas - that means it wasn't Anne - then who I wonder? ???
I am still waiting to be convinced that Catharine would not use her married name for Thomas Jnr and for herself when living with Thomas Snr, - against the acusation of 'living in sin' maybe? - and for her Marriage to Frederick. Why, why, why?? The only thing is that the marriage record doesn't say she was a spinster! Well, that's a relief. Only, I suspect, because it wasn't required piece of info.!
Another question - what makes you think that Catharine was married when she arrived in Australia - the fact of the child at the trial?
Keep arguing your corner - I might be convinced! ;)
Wiggy
-
Martin Cash says "seemed" and you conclude"that means she wasn't"- thats illogical and unsustainable ( Smile)
She has a child at her trial in 1806 which you reckon might be a 'rentachild", the Society of Australian Genealogists " Convicts to NSW 1788-1812" CDRom states "& 1 child" on the Sydney Cove 1807, the 1814 NSW Muster has her with a child by Overhand, she has a child in 1820, and she needs to adopt another one? What does she do with all these children?
Mind you, your point about Anne's age at birth of her last child is a good point, but Ann could still be in the frame as the 1814 sprog, its biologically possible- you're the one who reckons Thomas is in the frame at age 125 for young Tom.
I like exclamation marks, they show passion and conviction, and invite retaliation and encourage challenge, opening the way to truth- and they have a sense of humour, unlike umlauts .
David
The above CD ROM shows her as wife of Michael McNalty/McNall
-
And therein lies the problem David :) - I don't have that CD - but I will have to visit the library very soon to have a look at it! One can look at it in libraries I presume?
Wasn't saying she wasn't married :P - just wondering where the evidence lay/lies.
OK so Anne could still be the daughter - what do you mean I conclude she wasn't - wasn't what? ??? logic and sustainabe arguments aren't necessarily my strong suites. - but then again, they might be on occasions. like when I create possible scenarios. I agree Anne could be Bryan's - so, that lends more weight to my scenario re Catharine ditching Bryan, i.e. that Anne is now/then known as Ransom.
Wiggy ;)
-
OK - today's thought re Catharine and Thomas Jnr.
Well, Bryan was out of the picture and Catharine was being Thomas's 'faithful and valuable female who had for years borne his name . . .was unhappily unable to enter into the legal state of matrimony, in consequence of circumstances....which she could neither alter nor recur to, and which until the prying eye of some persecuting hypocrite ferretted out their secret, which before was generally unknown'. They couldn't marry but they did have a child - T Jnr. (OK, so Anne may have been Bryan's - still to be proved) Thomas Snr couldn't acknowledge him because - well I mean - look at what happened when the locals spoke out about them not being married - he lost his license - even though 'his reputation was unimpeached and he was universally esteemed' - (no wonder I want him for a GGGG!! :D )
I presume 'recur to' means C couldn't prove Bryan was still around - off at sea or dead at sea. :-\
So they just partied on together with THEIR son until Thomas's death - but Thomas Snr is all the time making good provision for C and T Jnr by accepting more grants of land. Young Thomas was baptised McNally - but that fact didn't have to be known by all and sundry - maybe just the Rev Knopwood knew that! Young Thom could still have been known as Ransom to the general public - but not in the Will because that is legal! ::) Ane we don't know that Thomas Jnr was not known as Ransom to everyone - infact - it sounds as if he was - see quote above about being generally unknown! That report wasn't made until 1825.
By the way, this makes a good reason for why Anne didn't even rate a mention in the Will.
I rest my case - for now! ;)
Wiggy
-
HOBART TOWN GAZETTE
3 Jan 1818 to 25 Dec 1819
Entries for Thomas Ransom
4 July 1818
Settlers who have tendered freth meat for the supply of His majest’s Stores at Hobart Town, Van Diemens Land, and from whom the under mentioned quantities will be received – from the first to the 7th of August, Thomas Ransom , 1000lbs ( repeated 11 July 1818)
15 August 1818
RANSOM v WILLIAMSON I will als caufe to be fet up for Sale by Auction on Wednesday 19th inft at Twelve O’clock ,a Dwelling Houfe fituate at Macquarie Ftreet, with fome furniture therein, the Property of the defendant, unlefs the Executions on the above Actions are previuosly fuperfeded. Martin Tims Provoft Marfhall
22 August 1818
RANSOM v WILLIAMSON
To be Sold by Public Auction, on the premifes of Mr R Morgan at Kangaroo Point, on Monday the 24th inft at Twelve O’clock, Ten Head of Horned Cattle; alfo, at 4o’clock on the fame Day, a Dwelling Houfe and premifes, fituate in Macquarie –ftreet,the Property of the defendant in this Caufe.
3 October 1818
A lift of Publicans who are duly licenfed for the keeping of Public Houfes, and Vending of Wines, Spirits and Beer- Thomas Ranfom, sign Carpenter’s Arms
10 October 1818
CAUTION-having fuftained repeated and ferious injury from the neighbouring stock-holders treffpaffing on Captain Jeffrey’s farm at Pitt Water, I herby notify that in future all Cattle ofany defcription found on the faid Farm will be immediately impounded and the Owner or Owners profecuted for the Damages.
THOMAS RANSOM Agent to Captain Jeffreys
7 November 1818
Foe Sale at Mr Ransom’s in Murray ftreet, beft Bengal Rum, fine Hylon tea at 12shillings per lb, white sugar at 1s per lb, black worfted and white cotton stockings, muflins, calicoes, clothes and numerous other articles
9 January 1819
To be paid from the Police Fund ofVan Diemen’s Land, Quarter ending 30th September 1818, Mr Thomas Ransom, as Superintendant of Boat Builders &12.10.00
10 April 1819
See 9 January , ditto in respect of Quarter ended 31 December 1818
15 May 1819
Benefactors and Annual Subscribers to the Auxilliary Branch Bible Society of Van Diemens Land, Thomas ransom benefaction 2.2.0 and annual subscription 1.0.0
5th June 1819
NOTICE-In order to accommodate the persons indebted to James Campbell, ferryman , of Hobart Town, who may be inclined to pay their refpective debts, as requefted in last Saturday’s Gazette, I hereby notify that the same will be receifed by Mr Thomas Ransom of Murray-ftreet, who I have authorized to grant Receiots on my behalf, John Gibson,Agent on behalf of James Campbell, June 3rd,1819, Clarence Plains
19 June 1819
See 10 April 1819, ditto in respect of Quarter ended 31st March 1819. Salary &10.10.00
26 June 1819
LOST a few days ago, a Metal Watch with a chain and three gold seals-whoever has found the Fame and will bring them to Mr Ransom at the sign of the Carpenter’s Arms, Murray –ftreet,will receive Five Pounds Reward for their teouble
19 July 1819
As 4 July 1818, 750lbs between 25 September-2 October 1819
18 September 1819
See 19 June 1819, ditto in respect of quarter ended 30th June 1819, salary 12.10.00
16 October 1819
See 3 Ocober 1818, but at the sign of the Joiner’s Arms
4 December 1819
Now on sale at Mr Ransom’s in Murray ftreet, some excellent Plumbs at a moderate Price
As 18 September, ditto, in respect of quarter ended 30th September 1819,&12.10.00
-
Wiggy,
We need to put on the record that Anne Ransom who married Francis Stieglitz, brother of F L Stieglitz, was described by Martin Cash in 1837 as adopted and seemed younger than Thomas born 1820. Her age at marriage was given as 22 so born 1818. assume that is correct and she is not the child of Catherine and Bryan Overend ( NSW muster 1814), then she may have been a convict woman's child, and where was the Hobart Female Factory in 1818 but in a room at the corner of Murray and Macquarie Street.
My understanding is that old Thomas ( died 1829 at modern day Kempton) was buried in a part of a cemetery which is now under the Midland Highway
David
-
That would explain why, when we searched the Kempton graveyard, we were unable to find a gravestone - it seemed odd that one of such standing had no memorial - it also seems odd that the headstone wouldn't have been moved when the road was built - but maybe is was in a very bad state of repair. There were a few illegible stones way up the back which didn't seem to be in original place by way they were situated.
Re Anne - will alter my tree to note new info! (Refer back to post 79 please!! - laughing)
Thanks for all that info from the gazette David - specially with all the old spellings included!! I saw a list of Inns supplied from Cascade Brewery when I was chatting to the manager there; ( I was waiting for my daughter who was on the tour, and mentioned that I was looking for the Inns - he was very helpful and interested, and took me on a tour of their history room!) Both Joiner's Arms and Carpenter's Arms were mentioned on it. Also have clips from other Hobart papers where both of those inns and subsequently Royal Oak are mentioned. Trouble is, I reckon there must have been two Joiner's Arms! one in Murray as per paper and one in Macquarie as per 'Short History of South Hobart' - or someone has got their facts muddled. It happens! I do it all the time!
I was so proud of myself for recognising GGGg in "The Hermit of VDL' before looking up the index of persons at the back! She seems to have been a 'good egg' (inspite of stealing 19 shawls -value 36s) - which is a relief!
Wiggy
-
Also, was looking in the Female Factory lists last night - they don't seem to list babies, so may be hard to substantiate findings on this. Couldn't she have been Thomas's?? If we are presuming correct date of birth was 1817/18. Refer again to post 79 on this thread!
Cheers
Wiggy
-
hi Ransom and McNally folk
I haven't had time to read all your discussions and links from May - but look forward to it
but I am typing out /transcribing old manuscipts and came upon a Mrs Ransom and her Inn - reference - and thought I'd google her - I did know of the Killymoon connection but not much else
I have Vincent - of Vincents Inns and Oatlands Mill ancestry (amongst others)
anyhow, I thought I'd share this - hot from the pages of an 1829 deposition by Catherine - then cc Mc Nally - pasted below. enjoy!
“Mr Gage and Mr Gregson were at the Royal Oak Inn on Magisterial Business one day when Mrs Owen of Swan Inn was here – the only day she … ? was here – between 11 – 12 o clock at night. I was sitting in company with Mr Harrison, Jun, Keeper at Jericho and Mrs Owen. Mr Harrison remarked that he wished he could get Mr Gregson to come home, meaning as I understood to Jericho. Mrs Owen immediately observed that Mr Gregson was not going home that night, and he betted five shillings that he would not go home. Its done said she – and Mr Harrison immediately got up and walked into the room where Mr Gregson was – I do not know what passed but he instantly returned and paid the 5 shillings to Mrs Owen saying I have lost it – she took the money and gave me four shillings for him to her own servants. Very soon after I went up stairs – Mr Gregson followed me up and into the bedroom where I was and asked me where Mrs Owen was to sleep – I asked him, what is that to you? he said 0 but tell me for I want to know. Well if you want to know, said I, she sleeps with me – Let me know said he – for I have her permission – indeed said I, but you don’t sleep here with her I assure you. I would not allow such a thing in my house for the best fifty pounds you can had for I am above it – and if I caught you and her at any things improper in my house I would have pitched you both down stairs – with that I left the room and came down stairs. Mr Ransom who is now dead remarked on my coming into the room that I paid Mrs Owen who was sitting there no attention – I had better give her a little wine – and I exclaimed in her hearing curse? such women they are a disgrace to their sex – she instantly rose ordered her cart and went out – I saw Mr Gregson stand beside the cart as she left in the cart. When Mr Harrison laid the wagon with Mrs Owen, he said that he had no other business but to see Mr Gregson home as Mrs Gregson expected to be confined any hour.
My distinct impression was that Mr Gregson was in earnest in his proposal.
Sworn before me by way of affidavit this 20th day of August 1829
H Simpson
CC Mc Nally "
:) Julie
-
Thanks Julie - that is interesting - more grist to the mill! I wonder what they were doing! Doesn't sound as if Catharine wanted anything to do with it anyhow! She called Catharine in the deposition? I had the feeling she was known as Christina in Tasmania - interesting!!
Wiggy
-
Julie,
You are magic! another thread in the tale, and Wiggy will undoubtedly be delighted that her GGGM was such a pillar of rectitude!
David
-
hi again
no sorry not called Catherine / Catharine or Christina in the docs - only as CC Mc Nally and prior to this doc - as Mrs Ransom
I wish I could visit that inn - fly on wall - in those times
I will post more soon! next week
bye
julie
-
Julie,
Read The hermit in Van Diemens Land for a two page description of the courting of Catherine
David
-
thanks - will read it
Julie
-
Two pages! - have I missed something??
Quick back to 'The Hermit'!!
:D Wiggy
-
No 28 December 1829- pages 167-169 See also biog notes on Thomas pg 214 and Frad Stieglitz 215
-
There's something odd about the transcription - or was the affidavit sworn before the Mr Simpson much later - Thomas is said to have died on 6 Feb 1829. This affidavit is in late August. I wonder why it took so long to come to 'court'.
Hmmm interesting. I'll have to think about that - old Thomas playing ghosts maybe! making sure his Inn was in good hands? Of absolute rectitude! ;)
Wiggy
-
Peter Harrisson of Bath Parish in the District of Oatlands Inn holder upon his oath saith.
In the month of October 1826 I accompanied Mr Gregson to Ransom’s Inn at Green Ponds, where he and Mr Gage another Magistrate were engaged in hearing a case of sly grog selling. There were very many people at Ransom’s Inn and among them the wife of George Owen who then kept a public house at the foot of Constitution Hill. When the justice business was over I dined with Mssrs Gregson, Gage, Whitefield, Espie and one or two more. I remained there until nearly midnight.
In the course of the evening I sat sometimes smoking cigars with Mr Gregson, and the rest, in the left hand room, and at other tines with Mrs Ransom and Mrs Owen in the right hand room. I was not continually in the company of either Mr Gregson or Mrs Owen. Between nine and ten o clock I became very impatient to go home, and I stated my wish to Mrs Owen and the others who sat with me in the room .- Mrs Owen offered to bet me 5 shillings that Mr Gregson would not go with me. Before either ten or eleven o clock I forget which I accepted the bet and lost it, for Mr Gregson did not leave Ransom’s until the hour named by Mrs Owen was past. – Mr Gregson was then in the adjoining room. I went to him then and importuned him to go with me. – He said he would go when he had finished the cigar he was then smoking.
He remained there about two hours after he had so promised to go home. When I had lost the Bet I paid Mrs Owen the 5/-. She then offered me another bet of 5/- that Mr Gregson would not go home that night.- This second bet I won for Mr Gregson left the House with me as I have stated about, or a little before midnight.- We reached Jericho about 2 O clock in the morning, having rode at a very rapid rate.-
Mrs Owen left Ransom’s a little time before Mr Gregson and I mounted our Horses some time afterwards Mrs Ransom told me that on the night in question Mr Gregson had spoken to her in private upon the stairs and expressed his intention to sleep there that night with Mrs Owen, and that she (Mrs Ransom) had indignantly refused to comply with his request. – I told Mrs Ransom that Mr Gregson must have been joking. She replied that she knew quite the contrary for that he was in earnest in making the proposition.
I afterwards heard the same story from different gentlemen who said it had been mentioned to them by Mrs Ransom. – I mentioned these things to Mr Gregson, at my House, in the presence of Dr Hudspeth and I think, Mr Bryant. Mr Gregson laughed heartily.
On or about the 13th April 1828 Mr Gregson passed the afternoon and evening at my House smoking cigars. – About ten o clock at night he drew from his pocket a paper which he asked me to read and sign. It purported to be a relation of what took place at Ransom’s between him and Mrs Owen. I instantly signed the paper and returned it to Mr Gregson, who soon afterwards left my house
– I never saw the paper before he then produced it to me. Dr Hudspeth was present when I signed it. In signing the paper I thought I had stated that I saw nothing improper between Mr Gregson and Mrs Owen on the day in question nor that I had cause to suspect anything improper between them.
I never said, or meant to say, that MrGregson and Mrs Owen had not to my own certain knowledge any private conversation or intercourse together. They had opportunity. They might have been together on the day and night in question while I went twice or three times to Ransom’s stable.
Three or four months ago as near as I can guess Mr Horne of Chiswick and Mr Gregson came to my Inn. One of them produced the paper which I had signed in April 1828.- Mr Horne asked me if the signature thereto was my hand writing, and if the facts therein stated were correct. I said that one part of it bore as I thought a double construction and must be allowed namely the part where I was supposed to say, positively that the whole story about Mr Gregson and Mrs Owen was false. I said I did not and could not know it to be false.
Mr Horne then made the alteration I proposed, and I swore to the truth of the contents before W Horne. I came here to made this deposition at the insistence and request of Dr Paton of Norfolk Plains from whom I received on Wednesday last the letter now produced.
Peter Harrisson (signed)
Sworn before me at Anstey Barton this 29th Day of August 1829
Thos Anstey
+
also
+
The examination of Christian McNally who states
I live at the Royal Oak Public House Green Ponds
I remember Mr Gage and Mr Gregson meeting there about some Magisterial Business.
Mrs Owen who present on the occasion. I never saw Mrs Owen and Mr Gregson alone in any room with his arm around Mrs Owen nor did I ever see him use the slightest freedom with her.
I never turned Mrs Owen out of my house.
Mr Gregson and Mrs Owen never met at my house but on the occasion I speak of.
Mr Gregson and Mrs Owen never had tea together at my house nor any other refreshment whatever.
Christian McNally
Sworn before me this 2nd January 1829
B? Horn/e JP (Horne of Chiswick? or Hone?)
-
Ah Ha - thanks so much - that explains the date discrepancies!
I'd like to have joined you on the wall at the Royal Oak!! More fodder for someone to make a film about this lady! I'm sure she's worth it!
Wiggy
-
"The Cyclopedia of Tasmania" 1900, Pages 389-391
'State of Morals in the early Days"- "the marriage contract was not strictly observed. Sales of wives, public and private, were common.One, of some attraction,bought her owner 50 ewes another 5 pounds and a gallon of rum. Of the last named, in 1817, the paper remarks"from the variety of bidders, had there been any more in the market, the sale would have been pretty brisk" It is related that the gentleman who made the sheep bargain did not gain much in his purchase, for his new property plagued him somuch as to deive himintothe madhouse". Marriages were not very frequent in those days. In 1817 the Chaplain united a coupleof whom it is written" their united ages being 137 years who can possibly account for the all pevading charm of love" While no impediment existed to the formation of unhallowed associations, marriages could not be sanctioned witout a government stamped order.Some of the early advertisements offer an insight into the state of society"'December 1818 NOTICE
Whereas my wife Jane---- has again walked away with herself without any provocation, and I hear has taken up with a fellow who looked after cattle in the neighbourhood of the Macquarie River , this is to give notice that I will not pay for bite nor sup or any other thing she mqay contract on my account to man or mortal" Pages 389-391
Also, on pages 391-393 is an account "The first Schools in Van Diemen's Land", which may be relevant to those with ancestors with offspring in Hobart 1816-1825
-
Would you say now that this proves a point? I think I rest my case for owning Thomas as GGG-grandfather!
Don't mind how he came by her as long as she is his!
Wiggy
-
The current thinking is that the Catherine McNally associated with Thomas Ransom in VDL from 1820 onwards is not the Catherine McNally who married Bryan Overhand in Sydney in 1810, (NSW BMD), because the NSW 1828 Census shows Catherine Overand 40 ish (per Sydney Cove 1807) in Sydney.
The record shows that Bryan Overand fathered two children with Sarah A in 1808 and 1810, called William and Elizabeth (NSW BMD)Elizabeth died, William has been lost
William Overand would have been 20 in 1828. Let us say he married a Catherine x who was transported on the Sydney Cove. She would have become Catherine Overand 40ish per Sydney Cove. A William Overand and Catherine had a daughter Elizabeth in 1839 (NSW BMD). A William Overand died 1849 (NSW BMD). [the BMD do not show a remarriage of a Catherine Overand, or a death of a Catherine Overand]
There were 3 Catherines on the Sydney Cove 1807, including Catherine McNalty. One other was a Katherine, Katherine Roberts tried Edinbourgh. The other two Catherines were Catherine Watts and Catherine Baird alias McLeod.
We need to trace these two Catherines to eliminate them from the possibility of having married/de facoed William Overand c 1828, or to show that they could have done so.
There was a marriage of a Catherine Watts to Daniel McGrigger in 1807, could be our girl from the Cove, but we cannot eliminate her unless we can prove that McGrigger did not die prior to 1828 and his widow Catherine McGrigger married William Overand.
No trace of catherine Baird aka McLeod.
Help, please!
David
-
OK everybody, especially Twiggy, my post 99 and all previous information I have provide on the origins of Catherine McNally , aka Mrs Ransom and later Christine Stieglitz are wrong.
I am advised that the 1823/4/5 General Muster of NSW shows Catherine McNalty per Sydney Cove resident in NSW, an adult employed by Mr Hassall of Bringelly, Ref 31584 page 374. As an adult she is too old to be the child with Catherine McNalty on the Sydney Cove 1807. In my original research I stopped following the trail in NSW past 1820 when I found the 1810 marriage of Catherine to Bryan Overend and the Norfolk Island and VDL connection between Thomas Ransom and Bryan and the McNally connection to Thomas.
My apologies to all I have mislead- my only excuse being that network based web research in 2009 provides easier access to more checkable information than travelling 200km to trawl through hard copy on archive shelves in a limited time. However, sorry for the trouble caused, folks.
So Catherine McNally in Hobart with Thomas Ransom was either her maiden or widowed or married name, or an assumed name She either came to VDL with Thomas on the Kangaroo in late 1814, or was already in the colony, or came to the colony between 1815-1819. According to her gravestone she was 68 in 1857, so born c 1789, but the 1843 Census for "Killymoon" shows no married female over 45 ie c1797, so she shaded her age or the enumerator got it wrong. There was a "reason of long standing "why she could not marry Thomas which did not stop her marrying Stieglitz in 1830, so prima facie the reason lay with Thomas and ceased with his death.
Lets start again
David
-
Phew!!
Back to the drawing board!
Have just put a post on the Common room board asking for help with marine lists for first and second fleet. Have spent morning trawling fleet lists to see if I can see a suitable match for someone with a baby - there are so many crew and marine people not named it is impossible!
Wiggy wishing she were twiggy!!
-
Oh well - happens to all of us in the twisted realm of family history research!
meanwhile - who was the Christian McNally who gave evidence, also present at the Inn incident - mentioned in my previous post ?
Julie
-
Ah that's the question! - She was there alright and she was the partner of my GGGgrandfather - all that is history - of the family oral tradition - (which is so far proving to be amazingly correct).
The question is from where did she emerge? - and maybe we'll never know the answer - and the other question is, was Thomas her partner the father of her two children - only one of whom is registered at St David's i.e. Thomas 1820 - GGgrandfather.
I think that is # 1 in this post!!! ;D but the journey is proving most interesting!
Don't give up David? An R.E.R.i.T. is made of sterner stuff
Wiggy
-
(T)Wiggy,
I think that should be RSRIT
Julie, all your( marvellous) info is about the right person, the question now (again) where did she come from pre 1819 and who was she?
David
-
" but the 1843 Census for "Killymoon" shows no married female over 45 ie c1797, so she shaded her age or the enumerator got it wrong. "
Or she was visiting her daughter Anne up the road on census night!! ;) Well, - she might have been !! :D
Purely as a matter of interest, there is no age given on the marriage certificate - so she could have told Frederick any age! And Martin Cash says she is still good looking - not in so many words but you get the gist.
Wiggy
-
Just found the Brig Kangaroo arriving in Sydney in 1814 with free passengers on board - not named on this site but I'm getting there - maybe! No idea where - but somewhere!
Wiggy
-
There is an 1843 Census record for a Mrs Stieglitz , Launceston. Catherine may have been away from home that night- I have asked for copy, but could be a week or two
David
-
Can you see if Anne was at home with Francis on census night? - that would narrow the options!
This is just an interesting side track isn't it? - wondering who she was visiting. Gone to town to buy a ball gown for some rout? Replenish the larder? :)
I've just checked the other family members who lived in Launceston - but they are all next generation grandchildren. Fascinating getting the fuller and fuller picture of her life.
Wiggy
-
Hi Julie,
Just been re-reading your two transcriptions - at the end of the second one, you quote a bit from CC McNally sworn in Jan 1829 - and the rest is Aug 1829 - but the offence took place in 1826 - I find it interesting that, even in those days, the law moved so slowly - it beats me how anyone can remember a conversation for two years.
Specially when it wasn't a huge offence one wouldn't have thought. I look forward to reading what happened! Have you got to who was bringing the charges - and for what exactly? Going back to read again in case I've missed something - and if I have, don't answer this!! ;) So Thomas was still alive and in his right mind when Catharine was swearing to things in Jan 1829. - just realized - he only made his will 6 days before he died. Close shave!
Wiggy
-
I've been thinking about Catharine - again!!
When I started on this search I was armed with a family story - as most of us are! So far that story has held up - the good bits and the bad bits.
Catharine does not at any stage rate a mention as 'may have been a convict'. That doesn't prove anything - but I find it telling in that:
1. we knew Thomas was,
2. we knew they weren't married,
3. we knew Thomas lost his Inn licence because of it,
4. we knew the children were born out of wedlock
If all these things were known, why wouldn't something as 'ordinary' (for the times) as Catharine being a convict - why wouldn't that have been known?? ??? Free settlers were able to slip in to the colony much more easily than convicts! There are children of marines and of free settlers etc etc - there are un-named passengers on ships etc etc. SO . . .I'm looking for a free woman! I think! :-\
Anyone care to comment on that thinking - anyone know of any stray free women around?
Wiggy ;)
-
Whoa Wiggy,
Thomas didn't lose his licence because he was a convict, it was because Arthur didn't like Thomas and Catherine not being married.
The "children" born out of wedlock? only young Thomas is proved as Catherine's child , Anne was described by Martin Cash as "adopted", and he was part of the Killymoon household for a year as a dairyman
David
-
hi
Here below is reason for the case - libel
meanwhile can you let me know who Christian McNally was - who called the inn his? did Catharine/Christiana marry him after Ransom's death? - see his [previously posted] statement. I am confused!
I will post dates next
Julie
THOMAS G GREGSON v WILLIAM PATON
undated [Dec? 1828?]
In the Supreme Court
Between Thomas George Gregson Plaintiff and
William Paton defendant
Thomas George Gregson of Jericho in Van Diemen’s land Esquire the above named Plaintiff maketh oath and saith that he hath been informed and very believes that the above named Defendant sometime in or about the month of October last spoke and uttered certain and slanderous words of and concerning the Defendant in his character of a Magistrate of the colony to the purport and effect following that is to say “That Mr Gregson had been requested by Mr Gage to attend an investigation respecting the robbery of W Anstey’s sheep of which a Mr Owen of Bagdad was in part accused that W Gregson neglected to attend the two first appointments made by Mr Gage but did attend on a third occasion where a court was held at Ransoms and that during the trial an evident bias in favor of Owen was perceptible on the part of W Gregson – after the proceedings were closed Mr Gregson proposed to have tea and that Mrs Owen should make it for him. Mrs Ransom require to enter the room in which Mrs Owen and Mr Gregson were taking tea but before she entered she looked through the key hole and observed Mr Gregson with his arm round Mrs Owens neck. they were sitting on the sofa a short time afterwards Mr Gregson intimated that as it was a dark night he intended to remainat Ransom’s Inn all night upon which Mrs Ransom observed that she had known Mr Gregson ride home in much darker nights. Mr Gregson however was determined to remain and further informed Mrs Ransom it would only be requisite to provide one bed as Mrs Ovens and himself intended to sleep together- Mrs Ransom objected to this arrangement saying that she would not convert her house into a bawdy house and that Mrs Owens should quit the house Mrs Owens did so accordingly upon which Mr Gregson also left the inn and it was supposed had passed the night with Mrs Owens in the Bush. That W Gregson had induced Mrs Owens to quit the country for England in order that Mrs Owens might not be brought against him in evidence. And this deponent further saith that the charges so made against the character of this Deponent as such magistrate as aforesaid are wholly untrue and for which words his action is brought.
Thomas G Gregson [signed}
Sworn by
By the county
M Kennedy
-
Oct 1826 the purported [overwhelmingly likely] incident takes place at Ransom’s Inn
Late 1826 William Paton was told the story by Charles George Hardwicke while on the road with him
Oct/Nov1827 W Paton told David Gray the story
Dec 1827 David Gray told Joseph Archer of Pansanger and Horace Rowcroft.
17 Feb 1828 Archer told Gregson
17 Feb 1828 Paton and Gregson fight fierce "fisticuffs” in yard of W Lyttleton near Longford/Perth - when they accidently meet Paton at Lyttleton's !!
13 April 1828 Peter Harrison (signed) Jericho statement prewritten by Gregson!
18 April 1828 Horace Rowcroft sworn affadavit, before Josiah Spode JP
28th July 1828 Paton and Gregson appointed arbitrators
James Cox Esq JP [Gregson ] and William Paton [Patrick Wood]
11 Aug 1828 Robert Pitcairn to William Paton about the court case
17th Dec 1828 Hobart Town
Henry Jennings Attorney for W Gregson
Robert Pitcairn Attorney for Dr Paton
We hereby appoint William Lyttleton of the Lake River Esquire as umpire in the matter within referred WB Lawrence W Weston
2nd January 1829 Christian McNally sworn before B? Horn JP about incident in his inn…
Jan 6 1829
witness Henry Jennings Thos GW Gregson
witness Alfred Stephen William Paton
W Weston
29 Jan 1829 The examination of David Gray esq sworn before PA Mulgrave esq JP
29 Jan 1829 The examination of William Archer esq after being sworn before PA Mulgrave Esq
29 Jan 1829 Gregson v Paton
Agreement for compromise
6 Feb 1829 Thomas Ransom died ??
20th of April 1829 Peter Harrison (signed revised affadavit) Jericho later Sworn before me at Jericho this R Horn JP
20th day of August 1829 CC Mc Nally swears to H Simpson (Mrs Ransom)
28th day of August 1829 John Oxley? Gage (signed) Old Beach sworn before Thos Lascelles PM
August the 28 th 1829 Thomas George Gregson Sworn before Thomas Lascelles
29 Aug 1829 Peter Harrisson revised statement to Thos Anstey
at Anstey Barton
29 August 1829 Henry Clayton statement Norfolk Plains
1 Sept 1829 The examination of Mr Charles Brown Hardwicke after being sworn before James Gordon Esq
29 Sept 1829 The examination of Joseph Archer esq sworn before PA Mulgrave Esq
1 June 1830
Arbitration
between Messrs Gregson and Paton
The Arbitrators in the above case, having already decided that the contending parties have each sustained “an equal degree of injury” and “equality of suffering” and merely differ, as to the division of the expenses and costs, of the several actions incurred by the parties against each other.
I do hereby as Umpire in the above case, award, adjudge, and determine, the the whole of the expenses, charges, and costs, of ever description whatsoever, relating to this matter, shall be equally defrayed and borne, by mssrs Gregson and Paton shall share and share alike, and that all further proceedings in the above matter, shall cease.
W Lyttleton Launceston
WE Lawrence
WP Weston
Esqs
-
Julie,
That is truly awesome-my head is reeling .Mighty research
David
-
Thanks Julie! Wow
To answer your questions
Catharine Christina McNally was my GGGgrandmother and defacto wife of Thomas Ransom, though many years- about 48 - his junior. She seems to have been known as Christina.
The Inn was Thomas Ransom's - he left it to Christina in his Will - so it was hers when she was swearing these oaths! ( Sorry - just realized - the 'His' Inn licence refers to the licence Thomas held for the Joiner's Arms in Hobart - after he lost that licence, because someone 'snitched' he and Christina weren't married, he moved out to his property at Green Ponds and built the Royal Oak for which he gained a licence. That better?)
Christina married Frederick Von Stieglitz after Thomas's death - in 1830 - and after some years still at the Royal Oak Inn with Frederick, went to live at Killymoon in the Fingal region where Fred. had built the mansion. ( Just for a change, she was about 13 years older that Fred! - according to family history!) ;D Simple really - NOT.
David,
The 'it' referred to (in dot point 3/reply 110) was the fact that they weren't married - see dot point 2.! Sorry I should have made that clearer - but known none the less!
The 'adopted daughter' as described by Martin cash 'appeared to be younger' so may possibly not have been Anne.
Anne's age seems probably right for about 1817 given her marriage - she is not referred to by name by Cash, so not necessarily Anne! Mind you, can't think who the adopted daughter is - still working on that one - I need four heads for this! ::)
Also David, I think you are arguing my side of the debate when you say that having convict relatives means you know all about them!! 'cos we know very little about Catharine!
Smiles all round Wiggy
-
Thanks to you both
I am embarassed because I just relaised that I must have transcribed wrongly 'Christian' McNally instead of Christina McNally for 2 Jan 1829 deposition. I will double check this! I thought there were two McNallys in Ransom's Inn with such different depositions: 2 Jan 1829 she stated nothing remiss happened there:
(repeated from earlier)
The examination of Christina McNally who states
I live at the Royal Oak Public House Green Ponds
I remember Mr Gage and Mr Gregson meeting there about some Magisterial Business.
Mrs Owen who present on the occasion. I never saw Mrs Owen and Mr Gregson alone in any room with his arm around Mrs Owen nor did I ever see him use the slightest freedom with her.
I never turned Mrs Owen out of my house.
Mr Gregson and Mrs Owen never met at my house but on the occasion I speak of.
Mr Gregson and Mrs Owen never had tea together at my house nor any other refreshment whatever.
Christina McNally
Sworn before me this 2nd January 1829
B? Horn/e JP (Horne of Chiswick? or Hone?)
BUT the on Aug 1829 she said it was dodgy! phew.... Gregson was very powerful though I think.
“Mr Gage and Mr Gregson were at the Royal Oak Inn on Magisterial Business one day when Mrs Owen of Swan Inn was here – the only day she … ? was here – between 11 – 12 o clock at night. I was sitting in company with Mr Harrison, Jun, Keeper at Jericho and Mrs Owen. Mr Harrison remarked that he wished he could get Mr Gregson to come home, meaning as I understood to Jericho. Mrs Owen immediately observed that Mr Gregson was not going home that night, and he betted five shillings that he would not go home. Its done said she – and Mr Harrison immediately got up and walked into the room where Mr Gregson was – I do not know what passed but he instantly returned and paid the 5 shillings to Mrs Owen saying I have lost it – she took the money and gave me four shillings for him to her own servants. Very soon after I went up stairs – Mr Gregson followed me up and into the bedroom where I was and asked me where Mrs Owen was to sleep – I asked him, what is that to you? he said 0 but tell me for I want to know. Well if you want to know, said I, she sleeps with me – Let me know said he – for I have her permission – indeed said I, but you don’t sleep here with her I assure you. I would not allow such a thing in my house for the best fifty pounds you can had for I am above it – and if I caught you and her at any things improper in my house I would have pitched you both down stairs – with that I left the room and came down stairs. Mr Ransom who is now dead remarked on my coming into the room that I paid Mrs Owen who was sitting there no attention – I had better give her a little wine – and I exclaimed in her hearing curse? such women they are a disgrace to their sex – she instantly rose ordered her cart and went out – I saw Mr Gregson stand beside the cart as she left in the cart. When Mr Harrison laid the wagon with Mrs Owen, he said that he had no other business but to see Mr Gregson home as Mrs Gregson expected to be confined any hour.
My distinct impression was that Mr Gregson was in earnest in his proposal.
Sworn before me by way of affidavit this 20th day of August 1829
H Simpson
CC Mc Nally "
This explains to me why Christina was giving a deposition on 2 Jan 1829 as CC McNally when I thought she was called Mrs Ransom (was this common use of Ransom's Inn and Mrs Ransom's Inn ironical - because surely everyone knew they weren't married?). I was confused but now realise there was Mc Nally and Ransom running the same inn.
Lots more to find out! I am transcribing 100s pages of vdl depositions for online publication - it is addicitive to read and type them!
what other VDL names are you both interested in?
Julie
-
Morning Julie,
Thanks for the clear up - you've got to the nub of the whole thread!! :D Who was Christina, and Why weren't they married?? ::) - that's exactly what we are trying to find out! They were so evidently a good and faithful partnership. Thomas's Will names Christina's son as his heir after Christina - but says 'her son Thomas McNally' - so we are trying to establish whether T Snr was T Jnr's father (of GREAT age), and what prevented the marriage. There is a write up in the Aust Dict of Biog re Thomas (with a dodgy birth date) which refers to the matter without explaining it.
At the end of the second deposition, what is meant by 'laid the cart with Mrs Owen - 'loaded' is how I'm reading it - correct? Seems an odd way to put it though! Makes her sound like a lump of . . .
I love reading what you've added to the thread! Keep it up - you must be having fun reading the old documents - I find a couple of hours is usually enough for me before I feel bug-eyed!
Re other names of interest - mine are STANFIELD and KIMBERLEY. Stanfield was ex marine and Kimberley ex convict as was his wife Mary (CAVENAUGH) My other interest is GAUNT - but not until 1830 - so beyond VDL.
Cheers
Wiggy
-
Refer to reply 100 last paragraph - (if I could work out how to post quotes, I would and save you the trouble of going back!) Re prima facie reason for non marriage anyway.
I think the prima facie reason for them not marrying does lie with Thomas - here is my fabrication for today!
Being so much older (48 years) that Catharine Christina, Thomas, being a big hearted, 'respected and esteemed' man, decided not to hold her to marriage vows in case she wanted to 'hop it' at any stage - however Christina being 'a loyal and valuable partner', was quite happy to stick around with Thomas - and I like to think they had a genuine affection for each other - Look how he repaid her - with all his worldly goods! Maybe, for the same reason, Thomas didn't want to shackle Thomas Jnr to him so did not claim paternity - though he (al)most certainly had the right to do so. - and he left him well provided for also. Although he doesn't name T Jnr as his son in the Will, I believe that the fact that he named him his sole heir after Cathatrine is evidence of - well something!! ;)
Will this totally contrived story pass muster I wonder?
The more you read about these convicts - many of them - the more you have to admire their sheer determination to make a go of things in their adopted homeland, don't you think?! Not just a go, but a great success out of misfortune. Hats off to them!!
Wiggy Still smiling.
-
Barbara Cartland move over! (Smiley)
David
-
Missed my calling you reckon?
-
My last cast into the convict pond is WINIFRED McNALLY born c 1785 who arrived in Hobarton on Elizabeth Henrietta 1817, per Canada from Ireland (March 1816)to Sydney (6/8/1817) , with her
older sister(?) Bridget , both native of Co Mayo. Can't quickly find any subsequent reference to her- could have changed her name to a more romantic(Cartlandesque touch that) Catherine Christina to celebrate her new status. If she doesn't run, then its to the settlers pond we must go
David
-
What can I say? . . .Good luck! Don't let the Irish run away wit yer.
Me? I'm off to the Marines!
-
How can the marines help? A marine on active service pre 1819 will not have adaughter with him aged 30. If he has resigned and been given a grant then he becomes a settler, and still has to have a daughter of the older sort or has to die so that Thomas can access his widow.
If the impediment to the marriage of Thomas and Catherine in 1825 lies with Thomas ie Catherine was not a married woman,The question is "where did Thomas find an available 25-29 year old unmarried or widowed free woman in Hobarton between 1815-1819.
Further , why did she call herself Catherine Christina McNally if that was not her maiden or widowed name-if it was an assumed name, why, and my reading of Sherlock Holmes suggests she will keep the same initials, CM, as her real name. If it was an assumed name, then she could not have been known as anything else in Hobart, so must have come to Hobart with that name already.
Already checked about 500 settlers in HTG in 1818- can't be many left!
David
-
OK OK ! (laughing)
I was actually thinking more in the line of the Stanfield set up - i.e. marine who had married and had child about 1790 in Sydney - who subsequently came to Hobart -
So they are called settlers by now - alright - I'm off to the settlers then - except, it seems you have beaten me to them.
I am not an RERiT - more of a VNRiV - so you have to give me a bit of a break!!! You know - points for trying! Been looking at shipping lists and everything. ;) - (regressed again!)
Seriously:
Did Thomas only get to Sydney on the Kangaroo? Or did he come all the way to Hobart on her? I can see the trip between N.I. and Sydeny (Juan Antonio S slip!) of the Kangaroo - but not any trip to Hobart - not on the lists I've been scrutinizing anyway.
Wiggy
-
This is off top of my head, just off to Launceston for propoganda forum on the benefits of allowing farmland,water resources, roads, and cultural landscapes be given away to plantations financed byAustralian taxpayers for the benefit of timber companies--but can grab time to check HRT -Historic Records Tasmania.for musters , but this time looking for a McNally not a Ransom, a McNally with a wife, old daughter, mistress, someone available to catch Thomas eye.
No- there was a gap between arriving Sydney from Norfolk, and going to Hobart.The Kanagaroo left Hobart in middle of 1814 ( April?) under Charles Jeffreys and never got there,he wandered here and wandered there and eventually returned to Sydney claiming bad weather,lost his way, it was a more scenic cruise the way he went, whatever. Authorities a bit pissed off, and sent him off again, in August from memory.Really should know these date as well as my birthday, but Al Z says the general drift is OK for the moment.
The NI connection with Thomas is so strong that you would believe that was where Catherine was sourced, a daughter or a widow or discarded mistress of a NI man,but I thought I had checked this out years ago, looking at ages, initials, cross checking unspoken for birds etc. Bear in mind NI was settled 1788 so Catherine , under whatever name, would have to have been one of the ist born there,and therefore traceable. Which was why I fell for the Catherine married Brian met Thomas through Brian and Brian was leaving/had had enough of Brian alternative.
Keep thinking
David
-
Hi Robyn,
I've been trailing back through this thread and looking again and again at all the sites you suggested. I hadn't realized I could get into other pages from one of them and go through the marines/soldiers on the second and third fleets - and now I have seen them and - well there are no McNallys - but each page does say that the lists are not complete. So I reckon we'll have to be content with that for the time being - until someone finds a treasure trove under a bed and puts up all the names somewhere.
We're still looking though - trying to find even the merest hint in the Hobart town Gazette etc. She is one elusive woman. Meantime going through all the gazettes is turning up other news of family and proving a window into the times - so not wasted at all. I started going over the ground covered to find again the reference to John McNally and Port Dalrymple - that set up has come up again so we are trying to exclude it once again.
Cheers
Wiggy
-
OK, so you have advice ( Killymoon blog 2007) from B W Leo V Stieglitz that the Anne referred to in 1837 by Martin Cash as the adopted daughter at Killymoon and who married Francis Walter Stieglitz at Avoca in 1840 stated age 22 was ,in fact, adopted, and was the daughter of Thomas Amos and Catherine MvNally. Take a bow, Leo, you are a living treasure! So the tag of adopted was a subterfuge to cover up that Anne was Catherine's natural daughter, whereas no cover up was required for Thomas born 1820 even though the registration was Father U, he was called McNally not Ransom and not acknowledged as Ransom in the will of Thomas Ransom 1829 even though he left him his estate. Very odd.
Thomas Amos died in 1819- advice Wiggy to David, per Hobart Town Gazette, but I can't find wiggy's advice and the exact date of death!
Irene Schaffer Land Musters, Stock Returns and Lists, VDL 1803-1822, shows Thomas Ransom as having a wife on the stores in the 1819 (October?). The same return does not include a Thomas Amos (dead) Neither does the Free Women on General Muster, Hobart Town 1818 (October?) include a Mrs Amos or a Catherine McNally. All Hobart, but no entries for Port Dalrymple either. The list of Free Children Off and On Stores October 1818 includes no Amos Children. Wiggy's (misplaced by me) advice from memory stated 2 boys, sons of Thomas Amos.
So, a relationship 1817-18 between Catherine, aged 28-29 ( if born 1857-68=1789) and Thomas Amos, and inconsistency of acknowledgement of the two offspring ( Anne and Thomas) of Caterine McNally.
If you are suggesting that Catherine McNally arrived with Amos from Sydney(?) 1816ish then we need to be checking Sydney records, and arrivals in VDL for Amos
David
-
AMOS, Thomas Sterrop. Solicitor
1817 Aug, Oct 4 Present at Committee of Enquiry into conduct on board convict ship "Chapman" (Reel 6020; 9/2639 pp.48, 77, 140, 189, 449)
1817 Sep 18 Letter from William Gore explaining why he had felt entitled to fee for service of summons for court martial (Reel 6046; 4/1738 pp.284-5)
1817 Sep 20 To Gore re demand for payment for summoning witnesses to Court Martial (Reel 6005; 4/3497 pp.68-9)
1818 Aug 6 Re case Murray v Hook, Cripps and the executors of Abbott (Reel 6047; 4/1741 pp.285-6)
1818 Dec 16 Requesting passage to Van Diemen's Land (Reel 6047; 4/1741 p.345). Reply, 17 Dec (Reel 6006; 4/3499 p.210)
1819 Mar 1,3 Petitions to Governor's Court for sequestration order against William Gore (Reel 6020; 2/8130 pp.87-90, 107-12)
1819 Sep 25 Deeds of Edward Gray's farm at Cabramatta to be delivered to (Reel 6020; 2/8130 p.403)
David
-
HTG Sat 4 Dec 1819 Death notices. Also Sydney Gazette 13 Nov 1819 Same in death notices. He died in Sydney.
(Try email attachments!)
You didn't actually answer the question posed - Did the brig Kangaroo bring the N.I. evacuees to Hobart - I know they all got off in Sydney to stretch their legs for a month or so - but I was under the impression that they come on to Hobart on another boat - Just been back to ADB - it was the Kangaroo - of course! ( Keep meeting the Kangaroo in HTG - and it seems to spend a lot of the time taking forever on the voyage - obviously the captain was a tourist!)
Why would Thomas's 'wife' need to be 'on the stores'? - have I missed something - wouldn't he be independent of stores by then - I take on the stores to mean they are being provided for by gov't.
Wiggy
-
Not sure whether I think she (C) arrived with Thomas A from Sydney - I didn't realize he'd been to Hobart so no, I don't think I was thinking that - but now that you say he was in VDL, it does seem a possibility.
I don't think she was Thomas A's wife - his 'nanny' for his boys was my inventive thought! They seem to have been motherless judging by the death notice. He died 9th Nov 1819
Wiggy doing the quick step!
-
The undermentioned Persons have ob-
tained Certificates during the last Week
Winifred McNally Canada,
H.-E. ROBINSON
HTG 13/9/1823
Rules Winifred Out. How about?
MR. CUMMINGS, of Port Dalrymple, gives
Notice of his intention to return to that Set-
tlement by the Brothers, Colonial Vessel ; and of
his intention also to take down with him (under a
yearly engagement) John McNally and Wife. SG 6/1/1816
THat has to be the last shot in the locker
David
-
Very good David - so what do you reckon to that last?
Trish has found the death of Thomas Amos - but no child under name of Amos. I'll have to go back and check if I asked her to look under McNally - I think I did - in which case no-one of that name in Sydney either.
Have been trawling HTG again - all done for 1817 now - and funnily enough I came up with Thomas Ransom raffling a beautiful child's swing cot!!!!!!! 13 Sep 1817
And Mrs Ransom contributing to the Wesleyan mission Chapel and Charity School! (bad luck - it was in 1823!)
Wiggy
-
Thomas Amos was a Solicitor of the Supreme Court doing the Civil and Ecclesiastical Circuit- but very handy , he can kill two birds with one stone and claim mileage, if Catherine had been the au pair in Sydney and he had moved her to Hobart for the delivery .
But we have no date for Anne's birth apart from she stated aam as 22 in 1840 which is only circa 1818, so late 1819 is possible, which makes an affair in February 1819 with a local Hobart woman equally possible, so we are back to a local Mcnally rater than an imported au pair McNally, and as Winifred is out of the frame, we have to check on life of Mrs John McNally of Port Dalrymple.
If old Thomas is acknowledging a wife in Muster of October 1819 and a servant and all 3 are on rations,why would he not claim a child if it had been born to the wife.
So, Anne is born earliest 23 Jan 1819 plus 9 months, unless premature,and latest April 1819 plus 9 months. But young Tom was born November(?) 1820, so assume Anne born October-November ish 1819, too late for Muster but allowing time for conception of Thomas 1820. This would fit with a conception of Anne in February 1819, as a local dalliance.
If Catherine was the nanny/governess/au pair of the Amos household in Sydney and was not pregnant before January 1819 ,there was no need to move her away from Sydney where she was needed to look after the Amos boys while Father was on circuit in VDL. I vote for local dalliance and not dumped Sydney au pair, particularly given the "suavity" of Mr Amos as reported in his death notice- smooth talker. He probably never knew about the consequences of his dalliance, he died in Sydney about the same time as the birth in Hobart.
How are we doing?
David
-
Hmm - let me digest that with my porridge!
What birth in Hobart - it isn't there - have looked - unless - under what name are you proposing?
Wiggy
-
Thanks for your help Trish - no McNally births in Sydney! I appreciate the help.
David,
I'm finding it hard to digest all this 'dallying' - she seems to have been such an upright, conservative even, woman! Put upon maybe! ;)
There is no evidence in Hobart for this postulated 1819 birth you are talking about - well not that I found anyway -( which doesn't mean too much I admit.)
Also, are you saying she'd hardly had one child before she was pregnant with another - give the poor woman time to catch her breath! :D - It is just possible I have to grant you that - but not probable to my way of thinking!
See reply 129 - Why was Thomas claiming stores - wasn't he able to pay his own way?? And was he claiming a servant? "Please explain" I would so like to see the muster info. - is there a site I can see it on??
a regressed Wiggy :)
-
We have a workable scenario tying in dates, names, opportunity, motive etc, that Anne Cummings wife of John Cummings morphed into Catherine McNally in 1819 , had a child Anne in 1819 in Hobart by Thomas S Amos, solicitor of the Supreme Court on circuit in VDL and then entered into a long term relationship with Thomas Ransom. Sparing the details for the moment to support this construct, what is needed is help from all out there to find
1 A death date for John Cummings born say 1770ish possibly in Co Kildare, brother William, both joined the NSW Corps, the Rum Corps, the 102nd Regiment, possibly married 1805 to Ann Boynton, John was Captain in Corps and invoved in Rum Corps rebellion against Bligh 1808, resigned fromCorps,returned tohis grant in Port Dalrymple 1816 with employed servant John McNally and McNally's wife, His wife Anne Cummings left him c 1819 . If her marriage to John Cummings was the impediment to her marrying Thomas Ransom then the impediment still existed in 1825 but not 1830 when she married Stieglitz after death of Ransom in 1829. So looking for a John Cummings death 1825-1830
2 a certain death of Anne Cummings wife of John Cummings above. If such a death is found, the construct fails, because Catherine McNally died as Christina Stieglitz in 1857. There is reference to a possible death in 1825 in the Col Secs Index.
Help, please
David
-
I John CUMMINGS death in NSW, but not til 1835; doesnt mean there wasnt one in any another State I dont have access to.
102/1835 John Cummings, aged 27
Possible son of John Snr?
Trish
-
That was a quick effort, Trish,Glad you're still with us . 1819 MPort Dalrymple Muster shows children of John and Ann as George 14, James 12 and Ellen 10, so that John is out of the picture. I need to check local hard copy records for his trail, but that will not be until late next week, and RootsChat
might save me a 300km drive and back!
David
-
Oh Frabjous day!
Bingo!
HOBART TOWN GAZETTE 1APRIL 1825
With feeling of mingled veneration and
grief we have to record the death of Captain
JOHN CUMMINGS, in his 82d year, and after a
prolonged career of more than half a cen-
tury, devoted to the glorious service of his
country'. Requiescat in puce ! He had risen
from the station of a private soldier, AIONI
.BY MKP.IT; and therefore his rank was a
theme not more honoutable to himself, than
io the superiors who recommended, and His
Majesty's Government for conferring, his pro-
motion. " ¡*o should desert in arms be crown-
ed !" But alas, the ¿plendours which Jike ig-
nited vapours hover round mortality are
transient ; nor will worth, nor valour en-
tirely escape the withering blast of unfore
boded indigence. Ii was the fate of Captain
j Cumming»- to outlive competence, and at last
Itodie iu the Colonial Hospital of Van Die
¡ men's Land. O i can one soldier read this
.without dropping a lear on the memorial ?-^
Yes. Captain i iininiings, we repeat, breathed
his last in the receptacle designed for very
different characters. But no matter, he is
now adorned wiih eternal laurels around the
\k\orious buuiier of {hose who have fought
the good ti,-lu of faith. His spirit pines not
for the structure wherein she left her fleshly
tabernacle. And his name will survive no
less hallowed in our meirory, than though
lie h d escaped from life's thraldom in a
palace 1
But! 82 in 1825? Makes him born 1743, 47 when he comes to NSW with the Corps, 52 when he marries in 1805, 67 when he is arraigned in 1810for his part in the Rum Rebellion(1808), and 76 when he advertises that his wife has shot through,. Everything else fits, need to check this 82-72? 62 would be perfick ( Thanks Pa Larkin)
David
-
terrific job David! You certainly have stickability!
and I love the juxta-position of the announcement - between an account of a road accident and sale of cows!
Catherine
-
We think we've gone off the 'Anne Cummings morphing ' idea! Anne drowned in 1821 and really upset that idea.
This is a real puzzle - but it WILL be solved - somehow, someday.
Wiggy
-
Wiggy,
This story gets more fascinating with each post. Feel humbled by everyone's research skills.
regards
Robyn
-
Robyn,
Glad we have you on the edge of your seat!
We have a person identified as Catherine McNally in Hobart in 1820, in association with Thomas Ransom at latest October 1819 when he lists a wife in the Muster.
Where did she come from? Obviously by boat, some time,as either a convict or a free person- if a convict she could become free. Ransom arrived Kangaroo 1814 from Norfolk Island after brief transhipment time in Sydney.She was not on Norfolk. Catherine was either on the Kangaroo with him , already in VDL, or came after 1814-1819.
There is no record of a Catherine McNally in VDL before 1820. Either she has slipped through all the record cracks, or she changed her name to McNally, justifiably or with a purpose, to conceal previous identity or her association with another person whose name she was using. Catherine McNally could be her maiden name, a married name, or the maiden name of her mother , or an assumed name.
I am currently assuming that a person sticks by her own Christian name, so I am investigating all Catherines listed in the AOT convict index, Irene Schaffers list of free women in Hobart 1818, and Rose Murtaghs list Of Kangaroo convicts. The possible suspects are down to about 20 and being progressively eliminated by establishing that they were either dead before 1819 or had a documented life after 1819 which was not that of Caterine Christina McNally aka Mrs Thomas Ransom and who married and died as Christina Stieglitz in 1857 aged 68.
If for example a single Convict called Catherine Kelly born in Dublin c1790 turned out to have had a mother called McMally , then I would be quite pleased!! Marriage by Catherine is not a reasonable option, as there are no McNally men around that fit the scenario ,either in NSW or VDL. Why would a free woman either living in Hobart pre 1814 or coming to Hobart 1814-19 change her name, other than by marriage?
The search continues
David
-
But . . .if she didn't marry, but was using her mother's maiden name, where is the reason she didn't marry Thomas?
Could she not have married under name she was using in VDL, - found it was a disaster and then reverted to mother's maiden name to blind pursuers - just thinking aloud really!
Wiggy
-
Hi there,
I've been following this thread too, and have had a thought about the reason she didn't marry Thomas. Not sure if this thought is a side track so, I apologise in advance.
But
in the regime of Lachlan Macquarie (the then Governor of what was then New South Wales ie VDL and NI and east coast of Australia), convicts could not marry without the governor's permission, which was NOT always forthcoming. Is it possible that there is a register of convicts who sought to marry ? If so, would such a register be currently held in archives in Tasmania or NSW? I have not ever needed to look for that type of register, so I am sorry that I cannot advance that thought.
But, on the State Records of NSW website there's index references for
a Maria McNally receiving a certificate of emancipation on 1 Jan 1811.
and a Mary McNalty appearing before the magistrates on 3 November 1810
and a Thomas Ransom ex Norfolk Island receiving an Absolute pardon on 17 Sept 1810 (arrived 1788 on Scarborough)
http://srwww.records.nsw.gov.au/indexes/keyname_search.asp
Of Catherine MCNALLY - could she have been a child of Maria or Mary - oh well, I do hope I am not side-tracking you all. This thread is so very interesting.
JM
-
Definitely not side tracking - any suggestion is more than welcome! Being fresh out of ideas for the moment, all contributions are most welcome! As you can see - there is quite a lot of fantasizing going on, as we try to approach from a new angle!
Thank you JM
Wiggy
-
JM,
Good suggestion, but the Index of Convicts applying for permission to Marry in AOT only starts 1829 and goes to 1857.
However, while checking out the Catherines, I did come across , on Alexander 2, from which several irish female convicts were transhipped to VDL in 1816, an Elizabeth McNally! born 1785. So did she come to Hobart per Kangaroo 1816 (not the 1814 voyage) under another name-identity switch- the only unaccounted Catherine per Alexande per Kangaroo to VDL 1816 is Catherine Oakes, but I haven't even started thinking Elizabeths yet!!
David
-
OH, so if we all catch IMAGINITIS, that's fine - tis much better than the current pandemic of course ;D
So, umm, have you considered these TWO Mcnally women?
Winifred and Bridget, both were prisoners Per "Canada", 1817 to NSW and both were then sent on to Hobart on the "Elizabeth Henrietta" on 11 August 1817 (as per NSW Col Secretary index on NSW State Archives) - right era, wrong first names ::) ::)
Surely there would be some record of either Winifred or Bridget in Hobart in a general muster after Aug 1817 (fingers crossed at this end)
Umm, David and Wiggy, I only noticed these two after going back to an online search of NSW archives after reading your recent replies and catching the imaginitis bug. ;D
JM
-
David was there before you - both been excluded. Full marks for trying! keep it up! ;)
David does the research - then I come along and pick at it - I think that is about the order of the day! Occasionally I get things right!
Cheers
Wiggy :D
-
Bit more,
I had presumed you have checked out the following: (sorry for the long link, but ....... this Catherine seems to have been MARRIED and there is UK HOME OFFICE reference)
http://onesearch.slq.qld.gov.au/primo_library/libweb/action/display.do?ct=display&doc=slq_voyager1048553&indx=1&vl(74576467UI1)=all_items&fn=search&ct=search&vid=FamHis&indx=1&vl(60921004UI0)=any&dum=true&vl(freeText0)=mcnalty&srt=rank&vl(1UI0)=contains&frbg=&tab=default_tab&mode=Basic&scp.scps=scope%3A(IC)
Catherine McNalty, one of 113 convicts transported on the Sydney Cove, January 1807.
Sentence details: Convicted at Middlesex Gaol Delivery for a term of 7 years. Spouse's name Michael McNalty.
Vessel: Sydney Cove.
Date of Departure: January 1807.
Place of Arrival: New South Wales.
Source: Australian Joint Copying Project. Microfilm Roll 87, Class and Piece Number HO11/1, Page Number 386
JM
-
Hi JM!!
Don't go there - I promise you - don't go there! ::)
When David entered this thread at about reply 42, that was the Catherine he was putting forward as the goer in this story - she's been ditched - Found to be lawfully married to Cap't Bryan Overand in 1810 and living in sinless state in Sydney in 1828 - and for years in between. She is definitely out!! :D
Wiggy
-
Hi JM!!
Don't go there - I promise you - don't go there! ::)
When David entered this thread at about reply 42, that was the Catherine he was putting forward as the goer in this story - she's been ditched - Found to be lawfully married to Cap't Bryan Overand in 1810 and living in sinless state in Sydney in 1828 - and for years in between. She is definitely out!! :D
Wiggy
Sorry - it told me it didn't post - it was lying!
-
HI,
This is one piece of information checked out early in the saga.And her old BAileey record has also been supplied and discussed.
The general agreement is that this is not the Catherine Christiana being researched. I have just spent time rereading all the posts from the very first trying to brainstorm more ideas about where to look.
Of course not all records are aailble online for convicts in the UK and unless you kneow where they were convicted and can contact local agencies then you are unable to follow that path.
Most convicts were well documented after their arrival in Australia.
Most marines/soldiers etc were well documented up unil they left the service and then things get hard to trace.
Most of the times their wives and families were not recorded at all or merley Mrs??? and children.
Most early free settlers were not documented at all merely listed as passengers etc and unless you are fortunate enough to find a newspaper report, gazette listing, or name in a government file re land, muster etc then tracing them is almost impossible.
We have term for our unexplained ancestors "swimmers" how else did they get here????
I still have a swimmer to find back in 1825/1826 aged 7!!! Must have been really fit!!
Wiggy, I'm still cogitating abut getting nowhere yet.
regards
Robyn
-
I promise "I WONT GO THERE"
Ummm, but I umm, really don't know where else to look at this minute!
Ummm, did you know that my brickwall chap W A L K E D all the way from Cambridgeshire England to Prospect NSW Australia, via Wellington NZ - he couldn't swim!
Sorry, I will try to think of alternative places to seek YOUR Catherine out!
JM
-
Hi Robyn,
I had Catharine listed on the 'swimmers log' for a while, but took her off when I heard about David's first version of events - I think I should have waited a little bit longer!
We'll get there - might not be tomorrow but - - - With extra Rootschatters all thinking we'll either come up with the answer or get into an even bigger tangle!
Wiggy
-
Just wanted to put all your minds at rest - Cap't John Cummings in reply 139 was resting in 'peace' - not 'puce' - you will be glad to hear! It was playing on my mind! I couldn't bear to let him remain in puce. :D
Computers don't know everything after all!!! (OK, OK, I know you knew all along - but . . . )
Thank goodness I've straightened out that one!
Wiggy
-
Hi Y'all,
Keep the vibes going ,please-this has to be solved now and not let peter out! I've just trawled McNeally and Mackeneal but he (James)complained that his wife was seduced by Darcy Wentworth in 1822, so they're out
JM, doesn't Catherine of the Sydney Cove fit the bill beautifully- congratulations on having found her anyway. Her legacy to me is that I now have to find out what happened to Bryan Overend, last seen in the water as the Emu sinks in Simons bay at Krynsna at Cape Colony in 1817
I shall go and sit on her grave at Cullenswood on Friday and ask her for a clue
David
-
. . . . .and I'll look after her GGGGG-granddaughter and GGGGG-grandson to make sure they come to no harm. Then I'll light a candle for her on Sunday!
Please don't say a word re Sydney Cove Catherine JM - David has to learn to get over Bryan!
Wiggy
-
Hi Y'all,
Keep the vibes going ,please-this has to be solved now and not let peter out! I've just trawled McNeally and Mackeneal but he (James)complained that his wife was seduced by Darcy Wentworth in 1822, so they're out
JM, doesn't Catherine of the Sydney Cove fit the bill beautifully- congratulations on having found her anyway. Her legacy to me is that I now have to find out what happened to Bryan Overend, last seen in the water as the Emu sinks in Simons bay at Krynsna at Cape Colony in 1817
I shall go and sit on her grave at Cullenswood on Friday and ask her for a clue
David
I PROMISED NOT TO GO THERE so I won't ;D ;D ;D :'(
-
Bit More,
So have you eliminated this lass?
MCANULTY, Catherine 1810 May 26 Departing Newcastle for Sydney per "Lady Nelson" by order of Governor; appears as McKinnulty (Reel 6066; 4/1804 p.15) (NSW State Records online index)
JM
-
Or this one?
MCCAULEY, Mrs 1823 On list of persons owing quit rents in Van Diemen's Land; for land in the District of York (Fiche 3270; X19 p.16) (NSW State Records)
Although there's no first name, tis VDL - but ...... I'm not sure of the location of the District of York.
JM
-
Ummmm........
If all else fails, you could consider this lass as perhaps "her" - no first name, and you would need to have a hearing problem to convert McKellar to McNally, but ummm......... my imaginitis tis working overtime and if the surname was handwritten, ummm, the "ar" ending could be "y" and the "Ke" could be "Na" without too much trouble at all, at all, at all ........ as I think there's an Irish twist to this puzzle.
(Again this find is from NSW State Records online index - do you have access to the reels in VDL oops, Tassie ::))
JM
MCKELLAR, Miss
1815 Jul 12 To accompany John Drummond's family to Hobart (Reel 6045; 4/1733 p.164)
1815 Jul 18 On list of passengers to embark on "Emu" for the Derwent (Reel 6004; 4/3494 p.125)
-
In response to reply No. 160, - yes - that is the very same Catherine McNalty you found yesterday!
Re next two - Don't know if David has considered those - I am a bit hamstrung - don't have ability to look at these indexes - no doubt the SRO will chase up your references in time!!
I'm impressed with your imaginitis and poor hearing hearing! I think you have a very bad case of it! Excellent! ;)
Wiggy
-
Hi there,
I wish I could get to the NSW archives and look up those index references for you, but its a long trip for me. I have read back through the thread several times, and get somewhat confused. I had some spare time earlier today and I have been going through the 1788-1825 NSW Col Sec indexes just looking at each heading hoping to spot Catharine or Catherine, or Kitty or variations etc and also have gone through most of the "Mc" names. So far, NIL sightings except for the three I posted earlier.
As she's NOT McNalty, then I agree with the thread, that it seems she was either using an alias or was not a convict who landed firstly in Sydney in the timeframe 1810-1919.
Do you have access to the General Musters, or only to indexes for them ?
1. I have forebears who came free in 1817 and they were so very difficult to find simply because they came free, so I do understand the difficulties in searching for HER. As mine stayed in Sydney, I found them on the 1828 NSW Census. So, WAS THERE A CENSUS in 1828 or thereabouts in Tassie?
2. Do you know if she could read or better still if she could read AND write? Possibly to consider if there are documents with her signature on it.
3. Has anyone checked out the references cited on the Aust Biography info on Thomas Ransom or followed up on any possible connection between HER and the names mentioned in that summary? The references could have additional info that was NOT included in the summary.
4. Or has the following newspaper reference been checked out Colonial Times (Hobart), 22 Jan 1830 - its mentioned in the references in the Biography for Von Stieglitz, Frederick Lewis (1803 - 1866)? It could be a reference to " 1830 he married Catherine Christiana McNally, who owned an inn at Kempton" which of course is mentioned in this thread, BUT it could also be a reference just to HER. I couldn't figure out from this thread IF you had checked out that particular newspaper edition, so sorry if I am asking a question you have already sorted.
Well, that's my thoughts to the present. Perhaps if you have a moment, you could post a further summary and a list of questions that you would like various RChatters to follow up for you. There's the Irish board option too, as I am convinced McNally is of Irish origins, and with her marrying an Irishman in 1830, well perhaps she was born in that county and .... there goes the imaginitis again ::) ::) ::) .
Cheers,
JM
-
Ummm,
Have you checked out the convicts on the ship CATHERINE arriving VDL 1814.
Ummm,
JM
-
Hi JM,
You are a good woman - just like Catharine was! :D
Q 1. Don't know about 1828 in Tassie - but we want to find her much earlier than that. Before 1817 - but she may well have arrived with the first settlers - just don't know. I'm told with the first settlers is highly unlikely - 'it was a penal settlement' - but - who knows?
David has trawled the musters and every list he can lay hands on - and every permutation he can think of. Apparently there were musters annually in Tasmania for the first years. I have briefly looked through some of the musters without coming up with anything new - but not nearly as thoroughly as David has done over the years he's been looking. I spent a few hours with them last Tuesday at the state library - I find reading them very difficult on the microfilm - don't know if David can see them in hard copy. I've also trawled through the Hobart Town Gazette for any mentions - so has he to a much greater degree: ditto Col. Sec's letters.
As I keep saying, I don't have anything positive to say Catharine ISN'T a convict - just that the 'family lore' to which I keep harking back, does not have her as a convict - it has proved pretty accurate to date - no other evidence at all! - But as Thomas's convict status was known, and the other convict forebears were known, and the marine's status was known, I can't see any reason why Catharine's status as a convict (if she was one) wouldn't be known too. It is negative evidence, but as strong as I can get. Why happily tell one's story and hide another?? The other reason I have for thinking she came free is that the convicts are so very well documented - and Catharine has slipped in under the radar. The convicts didn't often do that, but it seems free settlers often did.
Q 3.Yes we know about the ADB entries for Fred Stieglitz and Thomas Ransom, and the references to Catharine in them.
See nothing about being a convict there for her is there??
Q 2. There is a marriage certificate to Fred in 1830 - I have that but I don't think Catharine signed her own name - don't think Fred'k did either - it all seems to have been written in one hand - if she did sign, it is very good writing.
Still looking for any other documentation. But really, both she and Fred should have signed themselves.
Question 4 - yes
Our questions are -
1 who was she?
2 where did she come from and when?
3. Why couldn't she marry Thomas? - See reference in ADB for Thomas.
Apart from that, everything is pretty clear really!!! ;D
Re last post - yes to the 'CATHERINE' - and all the Catherines on the 'Kangaroo' - and all the Catherines arriving in Tasmania on whatever vessel whatsoever - (and all the Catherines known to man I do believe) ::)
Cheers we will find her . . .we WILL find her . . . WE WILL find her . . . WE WILL FIND HER! :)
Wiggy
-
OH DEAR.......
Ah, so the marriage certificate you have, its a copy of the register - and you are looking at the handwriting of the registrar or clergy or whoever transmitted the record from the church to the record keeper etc. Does it note the church where the ceremony was performed? If so, perhaps the parish still has the original where they both signed their names? - Cause I have copy of 1817 NSW marriage registry where my two forebears signed (umm, she with her X mark, he with his full signature). But when I ordered that record from the NSW BDM ummm, I get a typed up document, which doesn't do much for me at all. ESPECIALLY when I mention that on the parish document with their signatures THEIR AGES were also noted, BUT the NSW BDM certificate did NOT include that info.
Ummm, when were VDL marriage records first kept separate from NSW records? ie Should I consider trawling the NSW BDM marriages for any possible earlier marriages for HER - thus trying to find the encumberance to her marriage to Thomas? I know Trish has been down that path, but I will have looky look look too. Fresh eyes sometimes find the needle in the haystack.
Fingers and toes crossed here that you can get to the parish records, if only to read what she wrote for her surname when marrying Freddy V ::)
And, have you considered posting on the RC Irish boards for anyone who has access to Irish records late 1700's early 1800's for possible birth for her? I think I heard that the Irish records are being easier to research now.
JM
-
Bit More,
In 1810 in a C of E service at Parramatta, a Catharine CLEMENS married a Joseph MCKINLEY or MCKENLEY. I cannot find any children of that marriage, nor a definite death for either Joseph or Catherine. Perhaps the couple were stowaways to VDL (imaginitis at work here). However, I did find a death for a Catherine McKenley or McKenly aged 50 in 1826, perhaps that was Catherine Clemens - not sure, and you would probably need buy a transcript to sort out that.
So I also looked at NSW deaths from 1810 to 1830 - there's a Michael McNALLY who died aged 35 in 1827 - if there was a connection between him and Catharine that would explain why there's no marriage to Thomas Ransom when she first appeared in VDL. Ummmm I presume the Michael McNally who died in 1827 was NOT the same one as found previously for a spouse of her that I promised NOT TO GO THERE on.
Also there's Patrick McANNELLY who died aged 26 in 1827. These various spellings could be worthy of keeping a note on.
I did not find any marriages for any Catherine to either of those two males (Michael or Patrick noted above).
There's also an 1818 death for a 21 year old James McAnally and an 1822 death for a John McNalley, aged 32.
Of course that's going down the path that McNally was her married surname.
Umm, OH is due home shortly, and I umm have not started our evening meal - Cheers,
JM
-
JM - no you don't have to go trawling! nice of you to offer ;)
What I looked at were the original parish records, on micro-film, at the Hobart Library. I took a photo of it (cert.) and it has turned out quite well considering. She and Fred were married at Kempton/Green Ponds.
Funny but it just says they were married by licence - no age required - just adult; no marital status required so she didn't even have to write widow/spinster or anything. (I was wondering what the difference between licence and banns was in those days - she was married by licence, the others on the page were married by banns. I know what banns are but wonder at the difference in recording.)
The thing about Tasmanian records is that they don't include much detail - which I find quite peculiar. Victorian records are much 'more betterer' at supplying all the interesting details.
I have Thomas Jnr's birth record - original obtained same way - and that just says mother Catharine McNally unmarried - no father given. I also have his death certificate 84 years later and that doesn't give any parents/wife/children or anything. Have a look at 'Jaunay site' and she/he tells you what the different state certificates supply - Tassie is way behind the eight ball for info.
Putting a post on the Irish board is definitely worth a try - have heard things are a bit grim there though re records!
Am hoping David will arrive back from Launceston with the one and only previously unseen Catharine - one thing I will say - she 'signed' her marriage certificate as Christina. Her name Catharine is spelt like that - with an 'a' in the middle not 'e' - and I don't know if the recorders just spelt all the 'Catherine''s alike with an 'e', but I haven't seen any others of them spelt as Catharine - but ours is! Get all that bit?? (And there are no other variations of Catherine either - so I think it is a recorder's spelling!) Thing is, that Catharine is different - but no sign of the difference except on Thomas Snr's Will, and in the HTG report re her claiming Thomas's Will. Don't suppose it matters - just interesting!
REALLY LOVE the serendipity of the Clemens bit!! Don't know about either of those, but don't think that is the Michael McNally - as that Catherine married 'another' in 1810. The James and John I think we've discounted.
Hanging in there
Wiggy
-
Hi there,
Umm, in NSW in 1828 one of my lot married by licence rather than by banns. I think because he was a widower, ie they had to get permission from the NSW governor to marry. Both bride and groom had NO convict background, HE was widowed in NSW in 1827, she was a spinster. I think LICENCE cost more than a banns marriage. Also, sometimes licence was a way to a marry quickly rather than wait for the bump to appear while the banns were being called each week.
It is odd that Tassie records for the period when under the NSW governorship are NOT as detailed as the NSW ones of that same era - really odd, cause they would have had the same set of rules for keeping records.
JM.
-
NO, definitely not out-running the bump!!
No bumps for that couple! More likely wanting to get hands on the money quickly - Fred that is! Only 11 months since Thomas died - even though he and Catharine weren't married, they'd been together for a nymber of years as an apparently harmonious couple.
It is odd about the lack of detail in the records isn't it? Did you look at the site which tells you all about record details - I guess you've been there many times before - I have to revisit every time I want to check what I am likely to find!
Will put a post on Irish board as you suggest - no harm and you never know your luck!
Wiggy
-
JM, JM, Are you there??? ;D
- the most wonderful thing has happened! The reply came from Ireland - pointing me in the direction of this very thread!!
We seem to know more than anyone else!!! ;)
Wiggy
-
Hi Wiggy,
Sorry I wasn't here when you last posted.
Thrilled to bits though, so
Keep Searching.
JM
-
Just to add to the confusion,
The surname MCNALLY -here's some examples of variations of that surname found in NSW early records (1788-1825):
McAnelly
McAnnally
McAnnella
McAnnelly
McAnulty
McNally
McNalty
McNulty
JM
-
Wiggy,
Only 5 marriages in NSW of a Catharine to a male surname MC*,4 for Catherine one a dupication for the Clemens one below. none for Christina or Christiana.1778-1818
only 2 close enough to be contracted to McNally
Information removed due to copyright violation. See http://www.rootschat.com/forum/copyright.php for more details
RootsChat must deal with any breach of copyright by its members.
For some time the team of Copyright Editors has been removing breaches of copyright and sending detailed personal messages to the member that had posted the information. Due to the volume of posts and members this is now impractical. Messages in breach will simply be deleted and this notice posted. We apologise for any inconvenience caused but are sure you will appreciate the importance of this issue.
no children in the indexfor either couple.
BUT see this birth: (*) (can't find a death in NSW for John MC!!)
regards
Robyn
-
Hi Robyn,
Do you think the birth entry is for parents John and Catherine and son John?? Is that your reading of the combination? - very interesting - could be on to something there!!
Keep it up JM - seen your posts in Ireland as well! Thanks for the extra push!
Thanks for the help both of you!
Wiggy
-
JM,
Re reply 167 - have just re-read what you wrote - I was under the impression I was reading original church register - but maybe it was a transcript - it was in a book with other marriages on the same page - and looked original - but now I am wondering if it was a handwritten transcription. Certainly it was only a quarter of A4 size paper ( - or thereabouts) - not one or two pages as now. I have my grandmothers marriage certificate from Launceston in 1907 - and that was a much bigger affair - so - I will just have to return to Tassie and look again. I was under the impression that the church registers form that time ago were now held at the Library - which is why I took it for an original document.
Hmmmmm. :-\
Wiggy on the merry-go-round!
-
Robyn - reckon you might be going to take the prize! Terrific research!
This could be the family who was taken to Launceston with the Cummings family - about reply no 136 - I think. We thought about them but couldn't be sure the wife was named Catherine. What you have found may possibly be the clincher to one of the questions.
Wiggy :)
-
Wiggy..
Just thinking out side the square and doing what you were planing on doing but also duplicating others work too unfortunately.
But while I didn't look past 1820, JM had found this:
and an 1822 death for a John McNalley, aged 32
.
does tie in with Dave's find
MR. CUMMINGS, of Port Dalrymple, gives
Notice of his intention to return to that Set-
tlement by the Brothers, Colonial Vessel ; and of
his intention also to take down with him (under a
yearly engagement) John McNally and Wife. SG 6/1/1816
Still lots of work to do here.
good hunting all
Robyn
-
Yes - I agree, there is! What about the John McNally per Boddingtons who arrived in 1793 - as David reminds me.
Can you see any marriages from 1804-16 of John and Catharine?
Also I found last night something which everyone else seemed to know about (- except me!!) A registration in T.A. for a Catharine McNally born 1822 and married 1843 - quite outside our year range, but the fact that the Catharine is spelt like that makes me wonder. (An Uncle or John's brother, naming his child after Catharine - that's what I'm sticking to! - says she with blinkers firmly in place)
(I haven't had so many laughs for a long time folks - it's the imaginitis that does it - another name for laughing sickness!) :D
Wiggy
-
Wiggy
No marriages in NSW for them 1788-1811 only two MC* john
Information removed due to copyright violation. See http://www.rootschat.com/forum/copyright.php for more details
RootsChat must deal with any breach of copyright by its members.
For some time the team of Copyright Editors has been removing breaches of copyright and sending detailed personal messages to the member that had posted the information. Due to the volume of posts and members this is now impractical. Messages in breach will simply be deleted and this notice posted. We apologise for any inconvenience caused but are sure you will appreciate the importance of this issue.
none for Mac* john
so no further forward
Robyn
-
Thanks Robyn
I think we've come to the same conclusion - I keep telling David - it was his free cousin who you were talking about.
The hunt is on!! - - still!
Wiggy
-
Robyn,
somewhere along the line my congratulations were postd but didn't appear, so again a terrific find and top marks for stickability, seems to be the clincher that joins the dots
I have checked the NSW BMD for births of anybody called Catherine, Catharine, Catherina, Catharina and Christina 1788-1792, given Christina Stiegltz aad 68 in 1857.NIL. So she wasn.t an early BC
Ihave checked NSW BMD for marriages for the above names 1803-1819, nothing close to McNally or the various approximationsoff the name
There is n John McNally in the 1814 NSW Muster, only James, and the only Cathrine is my friend Catherine McNalty married to Bryan Overend. James is shown as per Bodington, and only James is listed on Bodington. Yet John McNally n 1819 Port Dalrymple Muster claims Per Boddington. THere is also listed a James McNally, and also three McNally children, John, John and Elizabeth. A probable transposition error betwen James and John for the Per Boddington.
I haven't checked the 1811 NSW Muster for John McNally, and Mrs.
John Cummings of Port Dalrymple who employed John and Mrs McNally in 1816 had a brother William , also resigned from Rum Corps with John, who was a Hawkebury settler, I think, so his householdwill need to be checked, in case brother John pinched his overseer or something.
Now we (probably) know how and where she came from , but we still don't know who she is!
David
-
Dave and Wiggy,
Once again it's a pity how poorly documented our earliest free settlers were.
Considering there was no compulsory registration for over 50 years we should consider oursleves lucky to have the records we do . I agree, we most probably know how CCatharine Christina came to be in Tasmania but who was she before her marriage and what part of the UK or otherwise did she come from and how did she get to Australia in the first place?
It is always possible that John Macanally was a soldier (will do some looking in this area) who took his gratuity here in Port Jackson and if looking for him and his wife etc is like looking for my James Emms, his wife and family with the 39th regiment in Australia 1826-1832 then the going is just going to get tougher.
We can prove their existence in official letters, pay lists, diaries etc,land grants etc but they don't show up on musters or on the manifests of the ships on which they travelled to Australia nor can we find them in the NSW indexes only who we suspect is their son Thomas marrying in 1845. A professional military historian is on the trail now with all my references etc and is no further along than I am, confirmed existence (no names for wife and hchildren confirmed)and the fact that they stayed in Australia but then a dead end.
This is at least 15 to 20 years after Catherine et al so it is going to take some prying!!!
regards
Robyn
-
Well Well Well
Found a James Macanally with the 1/46th regiment South Devonshire (1814-1817 ) http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~garter1/m46th.htm A wee bit after the birth in 1811 but he may have transferred to it from an earlier regiment 73rd Highland regiment (1810-1814)
Would be good to check references to him in the Australian Joint Copying Project but I am not able to get to a state library minimum 4 hours drive)
regards
Robyn
-
They are tumbling out of the woodwork now! But all James-good one ,Robyn
James Macanally alias Wilson ,Sydney Gazette 18/5/1811, leaving colony, allclaims etc, per Brig "perserverance", sealing , Macquarie Island etc, and on board Catharine Rook
JohnMacanally leaving colony, allclaims etc, per Brig Rosetta Sydney Gazette 16/12/1815, sealing and salt at Kangaroo Island and return, Captain William Rook
William Rook per Matilda 1788, tried Lincolnshire 1788, married Mary Huxtable
Catherine Rook bapt 1788 St Martins Birmingham ???? Brother William (not the above obviously)father Samuel Mother Ann
grist
David
-
Hi Robyn,
I can undertake that look up on Tuesday when I go to the state library - at least that is something I can do to help!
We are also going to PROV - which is more likely to have the info - library or PROV? Tell me (as a novice - but learning) just what I am seeking when I see the AJCP.
Having looked through the names of soldiers/marines etc I'm blowed if I noticed any Macanallys or McNallys of anything close - definitely a novice!
David,
Robyn is telling of a baptism in 1811 - so all these comings and going of James Macanally to the whaling grounds are just comings and going are they? - so he could be there in Sydney long enough to father a child?!
Is this another James/John we are talking about - or did he settle down and become a farmers right hand man?
Are you saying James Macanally/Wilson came free - or not?
In your first post on this subject David (about 126 I think Cummings household that is) you said John McNally - did you mean James? Was that a typo? Or is the subsequent belief that it was James the typo? No wonder my head is whirling! ( I reckon he is James John - or John James and uses his names alternately to confuse the descendants. )
One minute we have no J McNallys - now we seem to have too many!
Wiggy
-
Nah, John and James only come together in 1819 port Daltymple Muster which lists both a John and a James, one female McNally, 3 children McNally, John, John and Elizabeth.
We have a John and Mrs Mcnally being employed by Capt John Cummings in 1816 and being taken to Port dalrymple.
Robyn has found a John McNally baptised by John and Catherine McNally in NSW IN 1811
I have just found John McNally on Rosetta going sealing at Kangaroo Island in January 1816, Capt William Rook married to Mary Huxtable
Trouble is that the Port Dalrymple Muster shows John McNally as Per Boddingtons, when in fact it was James who was on Boddingtons. So, I have followed James as well, who was on Perseverance in 1811 with Catherine Rook also on board.
Confusion may be rife, but I think all the balls have to be kept in the air until they are proved irrelevant. John and James may be cousins, brothers, unrelated, but when they are both listed at Port Dalrymple in 1819 which only had a total population of 700, I am loath to let a McNally go
David
-
Wiggy,
AJCP is in the state library, need to check references to the regiment in its index FIRST to locate the right reels to look at. (ask for help at front desk if needed)
PROV only good for Victoria records not interstate.
JAMES/JOHN? I think we can agree that it MAY be the one person I have a JAMES/THOMAS in UK census same wife and children and place of birth and in Tas records CHARLES/THOMAS referring to the one man. But as Dave says could be a brother etc. Too early to call.
Dave
I like the scenario
Catharine ROOK may have accompanied her brother on his voyage to Australia. JohnMacanally leaving colony, allclaims etc, per Brig Rosetta Sydney Gazette 16/12/1815, sealing and salt at Kangaroo Island and return, Captain William Rook
family in the IGI:parents Samuel & Ann
19 SEP 1785 WILLIAM ROOK
Gender: Male Christening: Saint Martin, Birmingham, Warwick, England
11 FEB 1788 CATHARINE ROOK -
Gender: Female Christening: Saint Martin, Birmingham, Warwick, England
02 JAN 1792 GEORGE ROOK
Gender: Male Christening: Saint Martin, Birmingham, Warwick, England
There may of course have been a marriage by the captain(brother) at sea or they may have married before leaving the UK ( both hard to trace) but ships records may be another avenue to look at.
I wonder if they are laughing at us taking all this time and effort to find them?
let's keep hunting
Robyn
-
Dave,
Done some "trawling" of shipping recordsat http://www.hotkey.net.au/~jwilliams4/mariner1.htm (This site was an invaluable resource but is hard to find nnow as it's webmaster has altered whow she does online material)
and noted in http://www.hotkey.net.au/~jwilliams4/mariner7.htm
Rook - Capt master of Elizabeth & Mary/sealing/NZ 1819
seems he may have been empoyed on different ships.
checked my other online sources and records dating back to that time are next to impossible to locate.among them a great linking site:
http://rmhh.co.uk/mariners.html
would be great to link descendants of William Rook and MARy Huxtable with those of Catharine MCNALLY as we know her and see if modern DNA testing could find a link!!!
I am enjpying the hunt.
regards
Robyn
-
Why do I feel as if I am swimming in a tidal wave?? :D Thinking of changing my stroke from dog-paddle to freestyle!!!
Doing well you two! (And while you are testing the DNA, dig up T Snr from under the highway, and sort that out once and for all!)
Wiggy - bringing up the rear! ;)
-
Wiggy,
you might not realise it but I am trying to keep my imaginitis under control. Might be losing the battle thopugh
Robyn
-
Why hold it in Robyn - go for it!! :D
I have written a ripping three act play for this story - only trouble is, the first Act is missing! I live in hope!! My script is a wonderful example of imaginitis though! I'm quite taken with it really! Modest about it too! ;)
Search the good search
Wiggy
-
Bit More,
Hi All,
Re the NSW birth 1811 for a boy named John, with parents John and Catherine.
The NSW BDM register shows TWO registrations for the ONE birth (sometimes there can be at least three recordings of the ONE birth in those early records. One registration is recorded in at line 2491 of Volume 1A with the surname recorded as ,MACANALTY and the other at line 233 of Volume 5 shows it as MACANALLY.
One volume was for the regiment, while the other volume was maintained by the Rev W Cowper, under the authority of the Penal Rules administered by the Governor as per Whitehall's regulations. I understand that the variations in the spelling are caused by the clerks recording the information - they recorded what they HEARD based on their own accents, their own education etc. Very occasionally, the maiden surname of the mother was also noted and sometimes that surname even appears online under the mother's given name.
I will try to figure out any clues to help as I intend to trawl through the NSW BDM online for births 1808-1919 with the mother's name as CathArine, and with wildcards for all other options.
I have RBTT and don't think anyone else has checked NSW BDM that way.
Cheers,
JM
-
Been thinking guys - Robyn, JM, David et al :
Some people play bridge, some do jigsaws/crosswords/sudoku etc, some read the paper cover to cover - and others do family jigsaws! That is all it is - a family jigsaw!! (Thinking about what you said re family members laughing over our attempts to find them Robyn! )
Now I feel justified to have another look at the puzzle!! Thank goodness for that!
Have to leave time for community/family good works - but after that . . . . . .
a relieved Wiggy ;)
What is RBTT JM? I only know about Reading in Bed its Terrific RiBiT - from school! ;D
-
Oh, Read Back Through Thread = RBTT
Just finished NSW bdm trawl, and sorry BUT Did NOT find any other possible children for Catharine McNally, but did notice that most births were recorded at least twice, spotted some of mine (1818 and later) were recorded 3 times. - And so checked, and by 1827 birth of my own ggg grandmother - well she's there three times, I have pulled out my hardcopy, and can explain. Once is her christening in Methodist faith, once is where it is transmitted to Rev Cowper, and once is where it is recorded in the Governor's records, (as her Dad came free and was working for the Government Administration).
Have to do some 21st Century things for family, so won't be back online until much later.
Cheers,
JM
-
Got to keep 21st Century in focus - as well as oldies. See you on your return!
Wiggy
-
JM,
Interesting info about the double entry-have wondered before, but never checked-thanks.
I have checked NSW BMD as follows, ignoring surnames to eliminate spelling variations, such as you have found
1 Marriages 1803-1817 ( based on aad 67=born c 1789)for anybody called Catherine, Catharine,Catherina, Catharina, Christina. No relevant groom name
2 Births 1788-1797 same names-6 hits, 4 canbe accounted for, and Currins and Kennedy would have been only 15 in 1811 when John born to Catherine andJohn McNally, and this does not fit with any subsequent indications of age.
Nice to have "Team Catherine" firing on all cylinders!
David
David
-
Hi Jm
That's how I found the Mcannaly entry for John!! (parents John and Catherine)
Must admit to being disappointed when you found no more!!!. (also the same for marriages)
Have discovered a useful way of searching births is just:
surname initial & wild card, first name and a year range .
It will even bring up late registrations ie births registered after 1908 if they occured up to that date and have been proven and accepted by the registrar, I have come across several this way. It happens when children's births seem not to have been registered at the time but their marriage and death certificates prove their parents and year and place of birth then they MAY be registered and the year given will be the year of registration not of birth. I suspect other details will be needed as well.
Must admit it is interesting finding births in 2005 when you are searching for births in the 1800's!!!! but that's how they show up. Presumably the registration has the year of birth on it and it is somehow linked to the index.
Dave, JM and Wiggy,
Must admit I like puzzles and clueless crosswords!! I like to get to the end of things!!!
have a restful Sunday
Robyn
-
Hi all
try googling "Captain William Rook" or "Captain Rook"
Even a lithograph of a Captian Rook in the NGA!!!!! http://www.printsandprintmaking.gov.au/catalogues/work/41099/nelson-p-whitelocke-captain-rook.aspx surely an attempt at the character in "Vanity Fair" of the same name.
and a bit aboutour Capt Rook here
http://www.rduggan.com/griffiths.html
and is this his death c1825
The schooner, in the course of her voyage, went into very high latitudes, and experienced weather of the utmost severity. One man well known in Sydney, Captain Rook, got frost-bitten, lost the use of his limbs, and died.
from http://www.nzetc.org/tm/scholarly/tei-McNMuri-t1-body-d1-d25.html
( but he is referred to in a newspaper aticle on the NLA data base in 1826)
try this a reference to CATHARINE ROOK on the Perseverence in May 1811 with James Macanally alias Wilson Do we need to look at the alias????
(SOOOO many James and John Wilsons but some deaths in 1829 both NSW and Tas no marriages of James or John to Cath*rine in NSW) don't really want to pursue this surname
earliest mention of William Rook 1805
http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/626738?searchTerm=captain+rook
http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/628249?searchTerm=captain+rook
MORE TO EXPLORE! Books to source!!
"thre is even a present day Captain William G Rook!!!!
Robyn
modified to add references
-
Not sure but I think David has followed up on the John Macanally/Wilson alias. I think I remember that - but I'm getting a bit confused!
It sounds as if that is the best fit to date doesn't it? So maybe Catharine was Catharine Rook - were they going to VDL? Obviously they weren't married at that time - but they could have had a baby with them with the surname Macanally. The baby has to be registered in Sydney doesn't it?! No mention of baby on board Perseverance. Doesn't mean baby wasn't there I suppose! Did you notice how not all the people on the Perseverance were listed - ad a couple below for another person on the same ship - but not mixing with the 'scrum'.
Anyone know when John Macanally was born? Ship sailing in May!
Oh boy - leave the deck for a couple of hours and see what seas we've sailed into - don't know which island to turn to next!!
Y'all do the looking - I'll try to keep up with reasoning!!! ::) ??? :D
Wiggy In a spin.
-
Can't leave you lot alone for a minute without information melt down!
Love all the new Capt Rook research, and the searching tips on birth registrations
William Rook was apparently married to Mary Huxtable, so Catherine on Perserverance with John McNally must be a sister or daughter? If so ,we are there, nicht? So we are looking for a Catherine Rook born c 1789?
David
-
How about Cath(o)rine Rook ( solves the debate about Cath(e)rine or Cath(a)rine), christened 18 April 1790 at Thorney Nottingham, daughter of Thomas and sister of Ann, Mother and sister called Sarah?
To be valid, we need a William as brother to Thomas? or a William as father of Thomas, making Catherine niece or granddaughter.
Bad research- making constructs before checking facts, but sooooo tempting to do
David
-
Just too good not to share- How about Thomas Rook son of William Rook born 1751 in Cumberland...at Wigton
There you are Wiggy, the perfect ending
David
PS facts are true, but connection is (at moment) wishful thinking
-
See reply 203
David,
Surely we want a William as son of Thomas don't we - if William is sister of Catharine and Catharine is daughter of Thomas? How old is William supposed to be - he could be a bit older than Catharine and therefore not home for census - I presume you are looking at a census not BMD. He is Cap't of ship and Catherine is about 21 in 1811 - so one would think he would be a bit older than her - wouldn't one?
Wiggy - reeling - ha ha get that - like a drunken sailor!
-
Yes - the Wigton is good - but I reckon that William is a bit old for being out on the high seas - in those days! In these days he'd be just starting a solo round the world voyage!
Wiggy
-
Hi All,
Thanks Robyn, I had wondered about some of the post 1908 births on NSW BDM online. Yes, I too use wildcards when I search their ummm records, have you ever noticed that they sometimes have the numerical 0 instead of the letter O in their surnames?
Team Catharine Yes, that seems to be US LOT, well we seem to be involved in the board game CHESS, as we are now considering ROOK - - is it by rook or by crook as in Miss (ing) C. Rook.
I will try to find some spare time Monday afternoon for a decent hunt around on Rook. Between you and me and the gatepost, well, Miss C Rook could be in the frame, with that Wigton connection, and I don't think William was too old. One of my lot was at the Battle of Trafalgar, a Master Mariner, born 1745, Trafalgar was - 1805. He was on the Temeraire.
JM
-
I expect you are right JM - but Robyn had a date for him sailing round ridding the southern ocean of seals in 1825 - making him about 74!! So he'd be around 49/50 in 1811 - certainly old enough to be Catharine's father rather than her brother. Think I will have to draw myself up a tree to sort all this out! Put it on paper and look hard at it!!
Trying to get my head around David's suggestion for the Thorney, Nottingham family - Which of the two is more likely?? - anyway there wasn't a Catharine connected with the Wigton person was there??? ::) I bet you just threw that in for good measure David! Have a heart man - I'm wading through quicksand here!
Ah well, if Thomas R can sire a son at 75, I can hardly object to Captains being on the job at 74 can I?
Wiggy
-
Wiggy, forget Wigton! Read my PS- the facts are true, construct was only wisful thinking, the play on words. Even the fact that Catherine Rook was a crew member of "Perserverance" along with Jonquir de Santos , Mahomet Cassim, James Bloodworth, et al may be a pure coincidence of name, particularly as the Macanally concerned was James not John. It was John on Rosetta in 1815, also sealing and stuff.
Catherine and William Rook do seem to be highly relevant and must be pursued to see if she is our heroine, but my quick foray into the IGI was just that, a quick search for a quick solution, and I should not have jumped back a generation from the 2 Catherine Rooks circa 1789 at Thornby and Birmingham that came up. Wigton should be put on back burner as a nice piece of serendipity if it happens. Sorry to have confused the trail
David
-
Yes - well thought as much!! You don't take me in so easily!
Wiggy - laughing
-
Ummm,
Well I thought I was the one with the imaginitis ;D ;D ;D
But I will stay onboard, and hope that we do figure out the puzzle.
JM
-
This is just me doing a recap. of the situation - mostly to see if I have everything straight!
We have James (or John!!!) on the Perseverance at the same time as a Catharine Rook (possibly born in Thorney Nottingham) - who may or may not be sister to the Cap't William Rook. 1811. Was John a free man, and where did he come from?
We have a birth in Sydney registered in 1811 for John and Catharine Macanally - son John.
We have John Macanally going off and on boats seeking seals during 1815-16 - or thereabouts.
We have Cap't William Rook dying of frostbite near NZ in 1825 and then coming alive again somewhere in 1826 - (haven't seen that reference yet!) Or were there two Cap'ts William Rook? I think someone mentioned him being a convict didn't they? If he was born 1785 that would make him about 40 - which is pretty reasonable I reckon. Tried in 1788 - per Mathilda - same person as the Cap't??
Question:
Did marriages on ships get recorded? Could John and Catharine been married by Catharine's brother/father? If not, the baby in Sydney could have taken father's name anyway, and they may have lived as man and wife, much as Thomas and Catharine did.
OK??? so throw them all in together with three eggs and 2 cups of flour, bake 30 minutes, and what do we get?
1. Mr and Mrs Macanally and son John coming to VDL in 1816 but we can't see how - swimming????????? - we need Catharine in VDl by about 1817.
Is the father John Mc the same as the one on the sealing ship? - if so how did Catharine get to VDL and when?? :-\
or 2. is he James working for the Cummings? - in which case that is how Catharine got to VDL - with husband. That is almost the easiest to swallow. ???
. . . .And another critical search only slightly off topic - please can someone find the name of the ship on which Thomas Amos arrived in Australia in about 1816 - and did it call in at Port Dalrymple on the way to PJ?? I am hanging on the answer to this one!! I need it for my novella! :D
DO WE THINK that Catharine was in VDL by 1817? If she wasn't, where is Anne's birth registered - if at all? I'm going off looking for this again now!
This is all thinking aloud - so if I am off the mark, don't think anything of it!!
Cheers all,
Wiggy
-
Grab a Tim Tam, here's some novella material:
Captain Raine of the SURRY took Thomas AMOS to Hobart Town in April 1819.
Its mentioned in the Sydney Gazette.
Cheers, JM
-
Bit More on Thomas AMOS
Thomas S Amos, late Solicitor in the Courts of Civil Judicature died Tuesday 9 November 1819 at his residence in Pitt Street Sydney after a short illness (as per Sydney Gazette Sat 13 Nov 1819). The article notes that he had been in the Colony between three and four years...... He left youthful sons who were attending grammar school in Sydney........
http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/2179080?searchTerm=%22Thomas+S+amos%22
Earlier visit to VDL by Amos (earlier than the Surry in April 1819) the ship, Derwent, departed PJ 10 Jan 1819 - reported in Sydney Gazette Saturday 23 January 1819
Need to get more Tim Tams, bye for now
Cheers,
JM
-
Sorry JM, Not good enough!!! :D I want him taking a short stop-over in PD on the way to PJ in 1816 - coming from England!! Nothing less will do - will have to make it up if the evidence can't be produced!
David wants Anne born to T.S. Amos and Catharine as a result of this visit in 1819 - I reckon Catharine needs a break between offspring of at least two years - so earlier please - I'll save the Tim Tam for later - a descendant of Anne (maybe) says there is family history that Anne was daughter of Thomas Amos and Catharine McNally (and subsequently adopted by Thomas Ransom) - the only togetherness of the two seems to be in 1819 - I need there to be a meeting in about 1816/17. Our history says she was born 17/18. She says 22 when married in 1840.
The alternative path is for John, Catharine and family to move to VDL in 1816 -( as one McNally family did with the Cummings - but which one??) and Thomas having 'got frail with' Catharine in Sydney before the McNallys moved (don't you just love that expression? ;) )
- ahhhh now there's a point - do you think John wanted to take Catharine out of Thomas's way???? Imaginitis flaring! . . . . . . . . Have I investigated this thought before? - probably is the answer to that one!
Wiggy :)
Re last post - it would have had to be the Jan mission if any - April is just about too late!!
-
Went to Cora Nunn via Google, then to Col.Tas. Family Links, and turned up an entry for Anne Ransom which says birth 1817 (right according to our history); marriage 1889 - totally out of wack- should be 7 May 1840 - to Francis Walter von Stieglitz - correct; and death 1892 - also correct. The birth is registered as TASMAN, Tasmania - just like that - does that tell you anything? On a ship??
There are some other entries where the whole entry disagrees with everything we know about her - so I am dismissing those.
What do you think about that? I know it isn't Catharine - but if it helps trace her movements - then it has to be helpful - right???
Wiggy 8)
-
Ah,
So you are hoping that sometime during say the period 1815-1819 Thomas Amos met Catharine Christina McN (he was a widower with 2 boys at school in Sydney), either at PJ Sydney or HT or PD in VDL. Ummm, so perhaps she was a worker on one of his farms out the back of Sydney - perhaps we need to search for any assigned convicts to him. Ummm, I will "phone a friend" later this evening.
JM
-
WHoa,
Did I miss something we have a name for Catharine's father "THOMAS" !!!??
we have a Thomas Rook refered to here
http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/628849?searchTerm=william+rook
http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/2184705?searchTerm=william+rook
I spent a lot of time reading the the material turned up on the NLA search and one entry refers to a MR Rook and family. sailing from Hobart to Port Jackson
http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/2448596?searchTerm=william+rook
http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/2186739?searchTerm=william+rook
I doubt this is related to our research.
There were far more references than I put in my reply to this thread as none took us any further forward. WIlliam Rook seemd to be a prolific sealer and re reading the NZ article it is ambiguous as to what year the death was in.
I must admit that the 1825 death sounds right as although there are references to Rook after then seems not to be Captain William Rook.
earliest references to William Rook
http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/626738?searchTerm=william+rook
1808 April, permisssion to proceed southwards;
http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/627620?searchTerm=william+rook
1808 November as master of the Governor Hunter
http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/628849?searchTerm=william+rook
1814 departure on the Elizabeth and Mary
http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/2176871?searchTerm=william+rook
1816 November letters waiting to be collected
http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/2177188?searchTerm=william+rook
1817 re departure on the Rosetta
http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/2177188?searchTerm=william+rook
1819 Departure on the Elizabeth & Mary
and these are just a few!!
One however mentions him as being the administrator of an estate of someone who died on Macquarrie Island 1813
http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/2178445?searchTerm=william+rook
There is much to uncover!!!
Robyn
-
Well there is always the researcher who has a pedigree file on the Samuel and Ann Rook in the IGI who may be able to end our research one way or another:
http://www.familysearch.org/eng/Search/frameset_search.asp (search for Selina Rook then click in the only pedigree file and then on submission number and search for rook)
Can't post his contact details so you will have to go looking.
Take a look at the Rook Entires in the Submission,
There is a SELINA ROOK daughter of HENRY ROOK who is a grandson of Samuel and Ann Rook through George Rook mentioned in my earlier post re the IGI family.
family in the IGI:parents Samuel & Ann
19 SEP 1785 WILLIAM ROOK
Gender: Male Christening: Saint Martin, Birmingham, Warwick, England
11 FEB 1788 CATHARINE ROOK -
Gender: Female Christening: Saint Martin, Birmingham, Warwick, England
02 JAN 1792 GEORGE ROOK
Gender: Male Christening: Saint Martin, Birmingham, Warwick, England
I noted Catharine's daughter was called ANN.
Samuel seems to have been born in Birmingham 1762 either to Edward and Elizabeth or to John and CATHERINE Rook(e) in Birmingham in 1761 and what makes this family interesting is their children's names:
Anne, Samuel Edward, Elizabeth, Thomas, William.
Interesting that the names are so similar!! I will leave it to you to take alook at whats out there in the IGI.
hunting on
Robyn
-
The Thomas mentioned in the previous few replies on thei page is Thomas Amos father of Anne Ransome - who's confused Robyn, me or you?? :) Are we talking about hte same man??
The Thomas mentioned as being from Wigton by David on his second last post was just to stir everyone and see if anyone noticed - - take no notice at all!! Any other Thomases - let them drown I say! Except my two Ransom Thomases. - we'll keep them - very important or I wouldn't be here!
Wiggy ::)
PS All those references to William Rook are good finds Robyn - I reckon this man may be Catharine's brother - what do you think? 'It's in the vibes!' - did you see 'The Castle?'
-
The number of ROOK searchers thickens a 2004 plea:
http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/th/read/ROOK/2004-01/1073250130
and in 2003
http://boards.ancestry.myfamily.com/surnames.rook/238/mb.ashx
1813-1815 sealing voyages from Port JAckson
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=Sg49AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA105&lpg=PA105&dq=%22William+Rook%22&source=bl&ots=4bdOCq5En9&sig=4fQETjmzfHqyZnJaD4pIHm6-OoU&hl=en&ei=05R2SsKWKdKJkQX0rJ2WDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3#v=onepage&q=%22William%20Rook%22&f=false
ome stsuff outthere if you search for it.
Robyn
-
I wonder - would you be master of a ship at about 30 do you think? Just trying to work out if William is the father or the brother of Catharine Rook. I suppose you could be - I mean, look at Bryan - but only briefly! ;)
Very interesting information - specially the last about the Macquarie Island trips - I was listening to a book reading on the radio some time ago about one of the gangs which were landed on one of the Antarctic Islands and got left there due to bad weather - pretty terrible conditions! And quite desperate by the time they were finally rescued.
Cheers
Wiggy
-
Robyn - see R220 - it is I who am confused. We do need an extra Thomas - if David's brief IGI foray is to hold up!
Thomas and Sarah in Thorney Nottingham have children Ann and Cathorine (thought David was making up spelling to be obliging - but no) and hopefully William - as older brother to those two ( or brother or father of Thomas - just repeating the thread to see if it makes sense.)
OR Samuel and Ann in Birmingham with Catharine - ditto re William.
You know what - I don't think I've made anything clearer at all at all!! Ah well!!
Wiggy 'early in the morning, while it was yet dark'
-
Hi Wiggy and everyone,
On the ABC radio this morning there was an announcement about CONVICT records becoming available TODAY via the commercial website, Ance**** . Apparently the records cover as early as 1791. I will try to find out more about this latest release.
JM
-
Just for the Record,
From this thread we know that Catharine McNalty is NOT the lass in VDL with Thomas Ransom, BUT .... just for the record, the Catharine McNalty who arrived 1807 was tried with an Eleanor RUSSELL, on 17 Sept 1806 in London, and they were both transported on the Sidney Cove to NSW.
Still searching for Thomas' friend, Catharine Christina McNally.
JM
-
Turn my back for a minute, and I'm miles behind you all!
Does anybody have access to "Iron men in Wooden Ships-the Sydney Sealers 1800-1820" by D R Hainsworth.
Its not in the State Library Tasmania catalogue, and getting an inter library loan from the mainland would take a few days, so if anyone can access it, it might give an origin for Bill Rook.
I know how easy it is to send Wiggy on her novella bit, so I just drop in that Trugannini was known as Lallah Rook- please don't bite , Wiggy, I'm dizzy enough as it is - she's not relevant, no, she is not Catherine's half-sister.
NB the IGI reference did state Cathorine- I thought that a nice concensus solution
Cheers all, we are closing in on an ever expanding search, and , Wiggy, the story is worthy of a novel!
David
-
JM,
Oh, how I miss that Catherine! the centre of my search for 20 years,but I like the new one better now, I'mjust a fickle male
One angle I noticed in my VDL seraches-given the very small populations at the time in VDL it really is difficult to hide and commit identity theft, particularly with the detalied physical descriptions on their records, 5'3' high,red hair, pockmaked,squint in left eye and lisps is really difficult to disasppear ( made it up Wiggy, thats not Catharine). But an interesting area for future research is the concept of populations within populations. For example, there are a number of 1807"Sydney Cove" convicts in VDL in 1818, there is a population of "CatherineConvicts", and even a population of the original "Calcutta"arrivals in 1803. You notice in the early German migrant ships 1850-1870 that they marry each other for the first generation. Also occupational or religious groupings- they hang together, so clues about the person you are searching for often comes from their extended family, not their blood family.
So the clue to Catherine's origins may well turn up in a throwaway obscure reference in the history of the sealing community of Sydneyat large.
David
-
Dave,
I agree the various community of arrivals seemed to stick together and each formed slowly expanding spheres to corss to the mainland too.
I have in my paternal line a Princess Royal Girl 1832 who married an ARAB 1822 convict. Much later on and quite by chance I find in my maternal line a descendent of a Princess Royal Girl; in both cases the children had moved to Victoria in the late 1840's.
To add to coincidences an adopted daughter (my fathers aunt as we believed) married into a family descended from a Tasmanian convict and a marines daughter. The children had again come to Victoria in the late 1840's
Then I discover that her adoptive mother my (my ggrandma) cousins married into the same family [Beech(y) B(V)ickers]. So this unrelated adopted daughter ended up with Tassie convict background in her adoptive and marital familiesand truley connected by her marriage to my line. (don't ask how long this took to sort out!!!!!)
Considering the small population this is not surprising.
By the way I have another convict exile to Victoria who married a daughter of the Arab/Princess Royal family. So again like seemed to gravitate to like.
However their descendants have all been fine upstanding people!!!
regards
Robn
-
Hi Everyone,
Yes David, your clusters within communities occur regularly - I suspect even today! Oh and Robyn has similar thoughts too.
Here's my latest "tuppence worth" - watch the variations in the spelling on these TWO 1810 marriages at Parramatta NSW, each recorded twice, yet NO record found in the Col Secretary's records for either of these brides ::) ::) (These marriages are indexed online at NSW BDM)
At Line 1103 of volume 3A there's Daniel Kelly marrying Catharine Carr
and then
At Line 455 of Volume 147A there's Daniel Kelly marrying Cathrine Car
Sometime later in that same year
At Line 1149 of volume 3A, there's Joseph McKenley marrying Catharine Clemens.
At Line 466 of Volume 147A, there's Joseph McKinley marrying Catherine Clemens.
NB Vol 3A commenced back in 1788 and seems to include marriages conducted at Norfolk Island (ECR shown as CG on NSW BDM records are recorded in that volume., remembering marriages in those times were according to the rites of the Established Church - C of E)
David, I do not have access to your Hainsworth book, sorry.
I tend to favour the CLEMENS surname as a possible nee name for Catharine Christina Mcnally.
Need to obtain more Tim Tams, so catchyalata
Cheers,
JM
-
Robyn,
You're a mighty Rook hunter! Add the following to your list
Governor Hunter. Schooner Wrecked near Port Stephens, 1816. [LF],[AS1] , 35 tons. Registered Sydney 18 January 1805. Master William Rook. Stranded in the Furneaux Group, off Badger Island, 1 April 1809. Later refloated.
David
-
Robyn,
Searched through the soldiers
Re John McNally:
Went through 73 Highlanders and 1/46 South Devonshire lists, but the nearest I got - on my admittedly not very thorough search - was John McNabb and someone Mannerly. So no help at all there. Although I think John McNabb did appear on doth regiments' lists.
Found other useful stuff for family though.
Yes JM - I think the Clemens maiden name for Catharine would be a most fitting result!! :D
Wiggy
-
Looks like John Macnally was a regular crew man on the sealing ships, at least between 1811-1816
In the Governor Macquarie,
George Wade John Brian Ttios. Angelo
Charles Smith T. Middlcwood Valent. O-ton
Thos. Cam bed, John Macnally, Wni. Jones
_Peter Lawrie
6 Aug 1814 S Gazette
S Gazette 4 march 1815
In the Brig Governor Macquarie,
Thos. Campbell Francis Silva
Thos. Middiewood , John Macnally
Valentine Oston William Jones
Janies Allan Thomas Angelo
Peter Laurie Jas. White John Spears.
David
-
Rook shot?
The 1806 NSW Muster ( per telephone advice from Ref Library, not sighted) gives two entries each for William and Catherine Rook, one spelled with an "e', one without. William is shown as a "sealer' employed by Kable, and Catherine is shown per "Sugar Cane' . There is no Rooke on Sugar Cane, but there is a Catherine ROURKE, tried Dublin August 1792, so obviously not our Catherine , who claims she was born 1789, even Fagin wouldn't use 3 year olds!
So we have 3 references to a John Macanally on sealing ships 1811, 1815 and 1816, a birth of a John to John Macanally and a Catherine in 1811 , and John Cummings taking John McNally and wife to Port Dalrymple 1in 1816.
David
-
Were both references to Catharine as per Sugar Cane?? Or was one of them with William Rook(e) on Perseverance?
What a name to give a ship - I ask you! Sugar Cane - Sugar Pie - Sugar Baby!! ;) Not nearly as honourable sounding as - well, 'Perseverance' for example!! ( Or Kangaroo! ) SORRY GUYS - got carried away there for a moment. It's the imaginitis - flares up every so often!
Cheers
Wiggy
-
See reply 225 - Wish I could work out how to attach quotes! I'll try again in a minute!
JM, why are we throwing Eleanor Russell into the mix? - Is she yours by any chance? Or are you just trying to make the pudding mix a bit more fruity? ??? :D
Wiggy
-
Wiggy
to attach qoutes, highlight what you want to quote copy using control C or from the edit menu on the tool bar, go to where you wasnt it to be and use control V or paste from the edit tool menu. highlight it again in the new area and go to the box with all the buttons above the reply area and click on the box that has a talking balloon on it.
If anyone can give Wiggy easier directions feel free
Robyn
-
Early Sealers
Macquarie Island was first discovered in July 1810 by Captain Hasselburgh of the Perseverance while searching for fur seals in waters south of New Zealand. On 18 July eight men were landed with nine months supplies before the Perseverance returned to Sydney for further men and equipment. Despite attempts to keep the location a secret, by December 1810 another three Sydney based sealing gangs had been landed on the island. In the first 18 months of operations around 120,000 fur seals were killed. By 1815 the population of an estimated 250,000 animals had dramatically declined, with only 5,000 skins being taken during the entire season.
At least one of the earliest gangs on the island had also turned to the exploitation of elephant seals for their oil. Permanent try works for the production of oil were certainly established by 1813 when a gang from the Mary and Sally was landed at the Isthmus to put the existing works in order. Within a decade sealing operations at Macquarie Island had turned exclusively to the exploitation of elephant seals. Huts and try works were located at the Isthmus, Sandy Bay, Lusitania Bay, Caroline Cove and Hurd Point.
Russian explorer Thaddeus Bellingshausen visited Macquarie Island in 1820 and reported that a total of 40 men were working on the island. He also left an interesting description of the sealers hut at Sandy Bay which was:
20 feet long by 10 feet broad, inside it was lined with skins of seals, the outside was covered with a kind of grass which grows on the island. At one end was a small hearth, and a lamp was always kept alight. ... Beside the hearth was a bedstead. Provisions were stored at the other end of the hut. Inside it was so black and dark from the smoke that the smouldering light from the lamp and from the holes in the wall over which bladders were stretched, scarcely lit the interior of the hut, and until we got accustomed to the light the sealers had to lead us by
David
-
Re REply 223 Catherine Rourke alias Catherine Rook(e), sealer. It just gets more confusing the more you dig- now Catherine Rourke has morphed into Bourke, and has been massacred in 1809 .,a year before she is in the crew of Perserverance with Jamed Macanally!
• 1809 70 Europeans killed when the ship the Boyd was sacked and the crew massacred in Whangaroa Harbour, Northland. one woman, one girl, one boy and a baby spared and later rescued. Those killed included passengers: Ann GLOSSOP, ]Catherine BOURKE [/font] (or ROURKE), R W WRATHER, James MOORE, John BUDDEN, Robert THOMAS, Mordica MARKS, John PETTY, Thomas MARTIN, William ALLEN, John THOMAS, William MAHONEY, Denis DESMOND.
David
-
THANKS David - that's really a great help - - - -to our historic knowledge anyway! laughing.
Just what we needed! You really should have been a history teacher - ah well, never too late to start and use whoever is closest as class!!
Thanks Robyn!! I'll give it a try - I think! Will have to print out your instructions first so I can keep referring back to them!!!
Wiggy
-
Just what we needed! You really should have been a history teacher - ah well, never too late to start and use whoever is closest as class!!
Will ask Library tomorrow re 'Iron Men in Wooden Ships'
Brilliant Robyn - thank you - I knew how to do the edit paste thingy but hot how to put it in blue - now I do!! Wonderful isn't it - learn something new every day!!
Wiggy
-
Iron Men in Wooden Ships - the Sydney Sealers 1800-1820 Dr Hainsworth
Article in Labour History Issue 13 (1967 : Nov) page 19.
Will see if it is available - trawl of library doesn't say so, but I was looking for a book - will now trawl for Labour History! And yes it is spelt that way - so presumably not the Labor Party. Lots of references to the Communists though.
Wiggy
-
Hi All,
Re messages 225 and 235 and Eleanor Russell reference. I added the info about Eleanor for anyone in the future who may come across this thread while researching Catharine McNalty. Both those women were tried together, so it is likely they were co-horts.
Still searching for Thomas' friend, Catharine Christina McNally. (And for Rook, Rooke, Rourke, Bourke, O'Rourke etc and also variations on McNally).
I have a decent supply of Tim Tams on standby so hopefully I will have something useful to contribute shortly.
JM
-
Hi Wiggy,
Practical issue
I am not certain, but I think that threads should NOT go more than 20 pages on Rootschat. I suggest you contact the Moderator to confirm this, and to get advice so that we can keep track, and so that others in the future can follow up on any of the early convicts, settlers, and characters that have been mentioned in this thread.
Just An Opinion,
Just Moi.
-
Ummm,
Sighting of a Catherine KELLY, convict, on same ship as a James McQ..... with a possible alias of MCNALLY. Image on Ance***
Catherine Kelly on the Fortune, Alexander Convicted 29 May 1805 transported Jan 1806. Tried in London.
I am posting a part of one page listing some of those transported on that voyage, hoping that someone can decipher the surname of James McQ....
JM
-
JM
Checking the Old Bailey site we can rule her out.
CATHARINE KELLY was aged 39!!!! in May 1805 Reference Number: t18050529-5
Robyn
-
Ta Robyn,
Any ideas though on that male convict's surname? I have just been reading through the Syd Gazette online, and noticed that the Alexander carried wives and children of convicts, and I am wondering if that James McQ ..... with a bracket to include McNally, could have brought his wife and child - possibly a child named Catharine ?
JM
-
JM,
That is entirely possible but just how we find out names is another matter, Iwonder if his court records would show them but how do you access them from Aus as they are most likely not online this is from the QLD site:
http://www.slq.qld.gov.au/info/fh/convicts
James McQuire, one of 306 convicts transported on the Fortune and Alexander, January 1806.
* Alias(es): McNally
* Details: Sentence details: Convicted at Lancaster Quarter Sessions for a term of 7 years.
Vessel: Fortune and Alexander.
Date of Departure: January 1806.
Place of Arrival: New South Wales.
Source: Australian Joint Copying Project. Microfilm Roll 87, Class and Piece Number HO11/1, Page Number 372
cant't find him listed in http://search.ancestry.com/Browse/list.aspx?dbid=1590&path=
only Jas McGlockney Oct 1805 Lancashire, England
who was sentenced to transportation. (search term James and a year range in Lancashire)
regards
alsoInformation removed due to copyright violation. See http://www.rootschat.com/forum/copyright.php for more details
RootsChat must deal with any breach of copyright by its members.
For some time the team of Copyright Editors has been removing breaches of copyright and sending detailed personal messages to the member that had posted the information. Due to the volume of posts and members this is now impractical. Messages in breach will simply be deleted and this notice posted. We apologise for any inconvenience caused but are sure you will appreciate the importance of this issue.
this marriage in NSW INDEXES
1821 there is a birth to Daniel and Catherine McNally Mcenelly
so probably not our Catharine but nothing is surprising.
Robyn
-
Hi Robyn,
Thanks, I will "phone a friend" this evening, to ask for clues about researching the early convicts. But in meantime, I will try to find anything for him on the NSW State Records, and also on any submitted trees.
I can't find him on the Col Sec's index under James McQuire but I did notice the following index entry. Wish I could get to the NSW State Records Office.
MCSALLY, James In index to land grants in Van Diemen's Land (Fiche 3262; 4/438 p.64)
JM
-
Umm,
Certificate of Emancipation for James McQuire, alias McNally issued 1 May 1811. - Could he be father of Catharine? Robyn, I agree that it will be tough to figure out how to find the court records on him, but I will ask that question when I phone a friend later tonight.
JM
-
Umm, re James McQ alias McNally.
Lancaster Quarter Sessions - tried the online newspapers for 19thC Britain could not find him, and also the following link listed on the Lancashire Resources on RChat, but I could not find him there either!
http://www.lancastercastle.com/html/convict/default.php
JM
-
OK friends,
I am now being sensible - have got over the silliness of last couple of days. SORRY about that - was feeling just a tad overwhelmed by the expertise of y'all.
I really think - in spite of all, or because of all (not sure which) that Catharine McNally was NOT a convict. This is not evidence based - it is 'family lore' based! HUGE faith in family lore! Not cringing at thought of convicts - just BELIEVE it is not so - I can't say it enough but if all the other convicts in family were known, why not Catharine? AND the very difficulty of finding her points to someone free. I know I go on about this - but it's 'in the vibes'!
Have been RBTT (thanks JM!) and I reckon that the Catharine Rook on the ship with William might be a goer - or the Mrs McNally who came to VDL with husband and Cummings. Questions: Could they in fact be the same person maybe? Can anyone prove this??
Run this scenario by yourselves:
1. Catharine - possibly Rook - and John McNally have a child in 1811 in Sydney. - evidence of this.
2. John goes off on the sealing boats - well a John McNally certainly did.
3. John McNally with wife and family come to VDL with Cummings - 1816 - evidence of this! He got sick of sealing - or injured and couldn't go on maybe - leap of faith.
this is the tricky bit -
4. Somewhere, somehow Thomas Amos 'meets' Catharine and she becomes pregnant - your job JM!!
5. Catharine leaves John and goes to Hobart - why? maybe John was not thrilled with Catharine having Thomas's child - I don't know. leap of faith this bit.
6. Thomas R takes in Catharine and child, which Thomas adopts - evidence for this adoption per Leo v Steiglitz.
Set out like that it makes sense - Are the Johns the same people??- that is another question.
So a. let's pretend that that scenario is true - how do we prove it to be so??
or b. If it is NOT true, how do we prove it NOT to be so??
I know this is simplifying matters somewhat , and re-covering old ground- but, truth to tell, I'm getting dizzy with all the Rooks flying round my head.
What do you think guys? I mean, don't stop the other research - but . . . . . . .
Be interested to hear what you all think. Too easy?? ::) Possible?? :-\ Thomas Amos is the biggest sticking point that I can see.
Wiggy proud great-great-great-granddaughter of Catharine!!!! (who didn't show up in the book called 'Notorious Strumpets and Dangerous Women'! - love that title.)
-
Wiggy,
Chin up high!!
I tend to agree, if she had been a convict we should have tacked her down by now. But a convict's child/wife or soldier's wife/child may be impossible to find.
But all that aside one day an obscure piece of paper may turn up in the archives somewhere in NSW or Tasmania which holds the final clue (They are still finding Mozart compositions today)
Robyn
-
Hi Wiggy,
You're making sense! My Gran spent hours and hours and days telling me about my origins. It gave me an interest in family history, and decades later, I have "proved" most of the tales, and found stacks of official records to support her tales. I am yet to disprove any of her tales.
I don't think that TS Amos was father of Catharine's Thomas, as AMOS was only in VDL for two short visits as a Court Solicitor, shortly before his death in November 1819 in Sydney from an illness. I think you have that child born 1821 ?
Early on this thread you mentioned that Catharine could have been from the West Indies. Is this family lore, have you anything to support this ? I think there are online resources to follow up on genie info from those British Colonial times at St Kitts etc.
Thomas McNally, her son, is mentioned in various newspapers as Thomas Ransom, - he's there as a signature to a letter to the editor supporting Frederick L Von S's letter. (Haven't got nla online open at this minute).
I phoned a friend, and she suggests the following:
a) McNally (or variations) is quite likely to be her birth surname (probability about 70% of that)
b) Many women in PJ were known locally as "Mrs ......" but retained their maiden name on official records in those times, especially if licencee of hotels. And presume same pattern would occur in VDL although by 1829 they were doing "their own thing there".
c) Married women who earned an income retained their birth name (laundress, etc), as that was "who they were" officially, eg they were the Lady of John Smith Esq, if being announced at a function, but were Mary Brown if being recorded on a government document. This practice did not change until around the 1860's. There are many instances on Musters where female still listed under her birth surname, even though legally married and living with her husband AND children.
d) Back in Penal era .... As the clerks were recording names that were given orally, the clerks often did not understand the accents - clerks were educated in lots of academic subjects, but did not have training in accents from the slums that caused the social issues that led to convictions and transportation.
e) FREE SETTLERS and MILITARY Officers often brought servants with them. As she was skilled enough to conduct the hotel at Green Ponds, it is MOST LIKELY she arrived as a well trained household servant rather than as a convict. If that is so, NO NAMES were ever recorded on arrival documents. She will just be "and household" if that. If this occured, then ummm...... You will not find her arrival date except by deduction from other records.
f) As she did NOT have any children from her 1830 marriage, it is likely she FIBBED about her age to that husband- could be she was up to fifteen years OLDER. - ie in her 80's when she died. [/b]
g) if Thomas Ransom was UNWILLING to marry her, was it because she was perhaps different religion/denomination to him?
I think I have included everything mentioned.
HAVE JUST READ ROBYN'S POST, yes, Wiggy, Chip UP High.
I am a great great great grandchild of a chap who was charged at Parramatta with bigamy, found guilty and then pardoned when his earlier wife's husband turned up and dobbed HER in. Umm, that's the same wife who had dobbed in my ggg grandfather (he was then in his 50's, an his new wife was a teenager, who never returned to that marriage once he had been arrested, just days after going through the ceremony) -His arrest, trial and verdict and pardon got into "all" the newspapers in the 1840's,. My Gran told me about it when I was a young'un in the 1950's, and now the newspapers are online, and I have finally convinced a couple of cousins that our Gran's stories were right).
JM
-
Hi all just stirring the possum with this from the IGI
CATHRINA MACNALLY - christening: 19 JAN 1781 Chipping Barnet, Hertford, Englan parents John and Sussanah
I like Cathrina a nice combination of Catherine and Christina
Robyn
-
Thanks guys!! Reckon we'd better keep traffic shorter! Fit in more per page!!
Like your reasoning JM - that's what I think too. point 'b' in particular. Second marriage - childless - well she would have been 40 by then so maybe past it - in those days! Or Fred not up to it - he didn't have any children with his next wife either!
think the West Indies might have been just an idea because of the name sound - Christiana! I asked my cousin who brought this up and that's her answer.
I think it is fairly certain that she was 68 at death - there is a heck of a difference between 68 and 80! (not for you JM - I mean at 102 - well it is all so young!!! ;D) And the age difference with Thomas is fairly well established. F.L.
Thomas McNally/Ransom Jnr was, we, the family, believe, son of Thomas Ransom. (F.L.) He took name of Ransom in his 20s apparently - I like to think he was fond of his old Dad - there's me getting novella-ish again. He was born in Nov 1820 - Evidence of baptism.
Cheers, Wiggy ;)
-
Friend at Latrobe Library will look out journal entry re 'Iron Men in Wooden Ships'. It seems to be something on the Politics curriculum - if I read it correctly
On with the motley!
Wiggy
-
There is only one Catherine in the IGI born in 1789 with a mother called Christina, and that is Miss Catherine Brown, born 14/1/1789 and christened at the Quay Meeting House, Independent,Woodbridge in Suffolk, father John and mother Christina. Which proves nothing , but it does narrow the field for follow up! David
-
I wonder if Anne could have had her birth registered in Launceston - and if so, would it have appeared in Hobart? - I only searched in the St David's register when I was there - didn't think of this until today. Maybe she was born in PD.
Catherine Brown - interesting find - good idea using mother's maybe Christian name.
Wiggy
-
Hi all,
After lots more searching perhaps Cathrina MacNally 1781 could be a contender. Age in 1820= 39 in 1830= 49. Certainly would have been unlikely to fall pregnant at 49, in 1820 she would also have been of an age to be given the title Mrs MacNally (regardless of it being her maiden name) and certainly experienced enough to manage the Inn.
Also some interesting Devon records here: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/A2A/records.aspx?cat=027-1579a0_2&cid=-1&Gsm=2008-06-18#-1 (Catherine MacKnally prostitute & 2 children 1818 and indenture of Catherine MacNally aged 12 as a tailor in 1806)
would be nice to see both these records
Robyn
-
Hi Robyn,
Very busy babysitting - so off the boil for time being! Will look further when time permits. Catharine is fixed at 1789/1790 birth years though.
Wiggy
-
Catharine is fixed at 1789/1790 birth years though.
Wiggy, Are you basing this on her age as noted on her death cert? If so, I think that is suspect.
I think Robyn's Devonshire Records offices are worth following up. Plymouth was a major seaport with vessels sailing from there to PJ and VDL. Two children are mentioned with Catherine MacKnally in 1818 at Plymouth.
Do you have marriage and death cert's for Ann Ransom? What details are on either or both? I find that death certificates are only as reliable as the informant's own knowledge which after all was given at a time of grieving. One of my forebears death certificate lists as the mother, the woman who raised her, but NOT the name of the birth mother who died ten weeks after giving birth to her. The age at death was "out" some ten years, but the name of the informant (a son) and his siblings, and her two marriages and the address all confirm that the cert refers to my forebear. There's NO requirement to produce proof of the details the informant gave.
In 1980's NSW I was informant to a death cert. I was not required to produce any evidence, I signed that I gave the information truthfully and to the best of my knowledge.
JM
-
JM,
Anne Ransom married Francis Stieglitz at Avoca 1840 aged 22 ie born circa 1818. Thomas Ransom born Novemeber 1820 at Hobart. Certainly my read on all this is that Catherine was not a long term resident of Hobart, and that 1818-1819-1820 is the key period. A Catherine Mcnally in Plymouth with 2 children in 1818 is a nice find by Robyn - so she leaves Plymouth without husband,on a voyage( find) directly to Hobart,(Why?) with one of the children, Anne, arrives in time for the October 1819 Muster to meet Thomas and be included as his wife , and bears young Thomas a year later to Thomas aged c 75. She can't marry Thomas because she is still married to McNally back in Plymouth, or did he come as well and ditch her? Do we discount Leo's post that Ann was the daughter of a liason with the blow through solicitor Amos in Jan-April 1819, or do we say that she came without children or husband (why?) and yes Ann was the result of such a liason, because Catherine was alone and vulnerable in a penal colony at the end of the planet.
Nice, neat, simple, over to Robyn David
-
Hobart Town Gazette and Van Diemen’s Land Advertiser page 3, of Friday 3 June 1825
http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/search? (the article has NOT been text corrected, I will leave that to Wiggy)
SHE was not married to Thomas, but she WAS a married woman, and thus his licence to operate Joiners Arms was withdrawn!
Mr, Ransom, a truly respectable inhabitant of this town, 35 years resident in these Colonies, 18 years Principal Superintendent of Works, ....... at an advanced period of life, nearly seventy years of age, has been deprived of his license, to his most serious loss and injury, because it was discovered that the faithful and valuable female, who had for years borne his name, and conducted herself in all the various relations of humble life, with credit to herself and injury to no one, was unhappily unable to enter into the legal estate of matrimony, in consequences of circumstances of long previous existence not within her own control, which she could neither alter nor recur to; and which, until the prying eye of some persecuting hypocrite, ferretted out, were before generally unknown .........
I have just read Thomas Ransom's bio at that was mentioned by Robyn very early in this thread. Noticed the references include newspaper cutting that I realise is available online. I used keyword search "prying eye" and restricted date to 3 June 1825
http://adbonline.anu.edu.au/biogs/A020316b.htm
JM
-
In 1825 Several people in VDL knew her, and knew that Thomas and Catharine were NOT married to each other. (the prying eyes, and the letter writer, and Thomas, and of course Catharine) . Thomas died early 1829, and they had never married each other, BUT she was his principal beneficiary, so the impediment to their marriage was something HE understood and did not offend him, and the impediment still existed when he was dying.
Hence, I suggest that Catharine learned of the death of her first husband (not necessarily with surname McNally or variations), shortly after Thomas died (Jan 1829) and before Frederick Von S arrived in VDL (Aug 1829) otherwise she would not have been free to be courted by him, and afterall by 1829 EVERYONE in VDL would have learned of her lack of marriage to Thomas, and prying eyes issues would have arisen again, to cause the 1830 marriage to be challenged.
ANY SUGGESTIONS to follow up, as I have Not got any clues as to how to find the death of that earlier husband.
JM
-
JM I agree ages are very flexable and more often wrong than right, usually women make themselves younger, men older and when they get to real old age ages tend to get older again (easy to say you are 95 and only 85)
I also agree, "Prying Eyes" would have been everpresent and if this is so then they too would have known that the impediment(1st hubby) was dead when she remarried. That begs the question How did they know? His death must have been made known in some way ergo there must be record c1828-1830 of which we are in our ignorance blissfully unaware of its importance.
Anyone know how to search deaths by DATE alone??
took some time but I found this in the IGI:
DANIEL MACNELLEYand Catharine Inglis Marriage: 18 JUN 1804 Dunbar, East Lothian, Scotland. (no deaths though)
(There are 5000 McNallyand variations in here and this was the only marriage of a McNally to a female Catharine of any spelling.)
Robyn
-
Good find Robyn
::) no idea about finding death for her first huband, but it has to be before Jan 1830 when she married again. Presume her first husband may have had rellies/friends in VDL who had those prying eyes ! That IGI marriage in 1804 seems possible. JM
-
I don't think this would be Catharine's first husband, but just in case
NSW death V18291468 13/1829 MC CANAN DENNIS AGE 48
I did spot an IGI extracted birth for a Catharine Inglis, (there's lots of possibles) 15 Dec 1781 born, 23 Dec 1781 Christening, at Crail, Fife, Scotland, father was William INGLIS, Mother was Elizabeth CAMPBELL.
JM
-
On NSW Col Sec online index :There's a record for a Daniel McKenna (a Constable) travelling from VDL to PJ to give witness at a trial of a Doctor Morgan (ex navy Surgeon who had mental illness in 1819).
On VDL index Daniel McKenna a Ticket of Leave to travel to PJ, - indicating a convict record perhaps? Was he connected to Catharine McNally - possibly, but not sure how to follow that up.
This next question may be way off track, but are we sure that the "Winifred McNally" or the "Bridget McNally", both who arrived VDL August 1817 per "Elizabeth Henrietta" at Hobart, but was transported to PJ per "Canada" 1817 were NOT Catharine McNally?
EDIT TO ADD - Perhaps Bridget or Winifred knew the "prying eyes" dobber :o
JM
-
Bridge and Win have ben forensically investigated- they're cool, not in the loop, been flicked
David
-
Hi all,
The article JM refers to (reply 263) is one we've had in family lore (FL) forever - I've read it so many times I almost know it by heart - almost! What it does NOT say is that Catharine was married before - She might
well have been - probably was - but it doesn't actually say that. And you've forgotten what - - -
- Robyn I think - told me early in the piece- 7 years desertion meant one
could claim to be free to marry again - so that isn't a deterrent to my way of thinking - unless husband was in the offing, and that doesn't seem to be the case. Thinking thinking . . . What if Thomas wouldn't marry her for some reason - goodness knows why - but it could have been the 'circumstances of long previous existence not within her own control'.
I don't have the certificates for Anne that you girls are talking about - have
looked at what can be expected from Tasmanian certificates of those years and have decided not
to fork out $70 (tight that's me) to be told what I already know. Parents names were not on certs
in those days - nor anything else helpful - but I have seen index of Anne's marriage. I got Thomas Jnr's death cert for 1904 to find out who his father was - didn't give anything helpful even in 1904 - not even the fact
that he'd been married and fathered about 15 children.
Thinking, thinking . . . .( and some of what I think is that if those certificates were in Victoria, they'd have all the relevant info at half the price!)
Cheers folks,
Wiggy
-
Hi All,
Please think about the following:
1. That letter to the editor clearly explains that the impediment to Catharine's marriage WAS WITH CATHARINE. "because it was discovered that the faithful and valuable female, ..... was unhappily unable to enter into the legal estate of matrimony, in consequences of circumstances of long previous existence not within her own control, which she could neither alter nor recur to....
2. Who owned those prying eyes? Was the dobber Winifred or Bridget McNally and if either of them, what were the names of their immediate MALE family members or the names of the settlers to whom they were assigned? -
a) WHO DOBBED ::) and b) how were they related to Catharine - find answers to a) and b) and you solve "WHO WAS CATHARINE"
JM
-
Bit More, this time from the Colonial Times and Tasmanian Advertiser
1. Fri 28 Oct 1825. Licencees for next 12 months include John Pearce of the Joiners Arms Murray St
2. Fri 14 Oct 1825. JOINERS' ARMS INN and PUBLIC HOUSE, Murray-street, near the Post Office.-J. PEARCE, late of New Norfolk, acquaints his Friends and the Public, that he has taken and entered upon the above old established House, (lately carried on by Mr. THOMAS RANSOM), .....
John Pearce - did he know who owned those prying eyes? Umm, well that's a notion that would be hard to prove or disprove.
Ummmm..... I phoned a friend again last evening, re 7 years and Desertion and free to re-marry. This 'practice' can be misunderstood. Marriages conducted according to RC rites were not part of that practice. But usually the 7 years commences from the last known sighting of the other party. Transportation does not lead to the 7 year desertion rule IF both parties are in the same Colony, and VDL and NSW all part of same Colony, definitely one Colony until say 14 June 1825.
-
JM,
I liked way she is referred to so respectfully in that article. One possible reason over which she had no control was if her husband was in an asylum for the insane. No divorce was possible and everyone would have known about it if not spoken opening about it Worth a thought???
regards
Robyn
-
Hi Robyn,
Yep, as in perhaps Castle Hill Asylum in Sydney? - But we need to know HIS surname, my phone a friend seems to think McNally was her nee name.
JM
-
Wiggy, Jm and Dav
In 1811 the NSW government established what was known as a 'lunatic asylum' in Castle Hill for the care and treatment of the mentally ill. The facility moved to Liverpool in 1825.
andan intersting perspective athttp://www.studymore.org.uk/sunrise.htm
try googling Castlehill Asylum and you will find lots of interesting reading
We do have a very narrow timeframe and these records may (unlikley thuough) also mention Christina as a wife a in inmate. Records are available in NSW!!
??? this post: http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/AUS-PT-JACKSON-CONVICTS/2009-02/1235182891
Robyn
-
Hi folks,
Go away for a quiet weekend and you have my esteemed GGGg'ther associating with lunatics and I don't know what-all! ;) Had a look at that Rootschat site Robyn - interesting - but it doesn't ring any 'vibes' with me. That doesn't mean much - I know but . . .
Thanks for clearing up the '7 year' bit JM - your 'phone a friend' sounds like someone to hang on to! I did think that RC marriages mightn't come under that particular umbrella whatever anyone else did. And an RC marriage does sound possible first time around for Catharine if she was married before meeting Thomas R. - even though second time was definitely in the Anglican church.
Onwards ever onwards. :)
Wiggy
-
Umm, would you believe ::) a soldier with the 48th Regiment on foot named John MCNALL is listed on following site http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~garter1/m48th.htm I know that the 48th were garrison forces in VDL and at PJ and further, from as early as July 1817. I cannot find John McNall mentioned in Clem Sargent's book on the 48th (although I can find mention of my gggg grandparents and family).
JM
-
Hi JM and Robyn,
I looked at the 48th reg in VDL last Tuesday when at the State library and found that John McNall - except that in the original it looked more like McNabb - and he also seem ed to be in the 73 Highland Reg. which Robyn suggested needed looking into as well. (If I remember correctly!)
Robyn, thanks for PM - no offence taken, and I certainly didn't mean to give any - I was laughing when I wrote that bit about lunatics - and yes, there often wasn't much wrong with the people incarcerated. It is definitely worth keeping in mind. I've noted it!
Much to do today. Must away.
Wiggy
-
Umm,
http://www.law.mq.edu.au/sctas/html/1840cases/RvManning,1840.htm
John McNall, a solicitor's clerk in VDL in 1836 was a witness. The case got to the Supreme Court in VDL in 1840. Presume that this clerk was NOT the same John McNall/McNabb from two decades previous.
EDIT TO ADD
On the First Family 2001 archived website, John McNall, solicitor's clerk, born Ireland, died in Melbourne abt 1843. He had a wife named Sarah Jones.
JM
-
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,390323.0.html
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,386064.0.html
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,393268.0.html
These threads all support Wiggy's search for Catharine McNally.
-
Wiggy,
don't worry about how long or how may pages. jthis is growing to .
I just found a thread on rootschat 42 pages long !!
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,300953.30.html
very interesting too.
Robyn
-
Hi Robyn,
Been pretty busy being a grandmother lately - looking forward instead of back. The time off has given us time to gather our thoughts and think again more clearly.
Haven't found anything new re Catharine pre VDL - but bits about her life in Tasmania. Chasing off bushrangers, having stuff entered into the Great Exhibition in London and also, a few years later, in Paris -( gloves in both cases! I wonder if she made them herself?) Being proprietor of an Inn and chatelaine of Killymoon. She had an interesting life it seems.
I doubt if we will ever find her past - as you yourself commented quite early in the thread. Unless, that is, something new comes to light with new records made available. I'm pretty sure she was not a convict - but that is not new! :) That has been my position most of the time - not blinded, but just what I've been led to believe. Also the more I find out about Frederick, the less likely I think it that he would have married an ex-convict. ( Not impossible but . . . ::) Unless he married her before finding out - he only arrived in VDL after Thomas died it seems.) Trying to find him leaving the colony to return to Ireland now! He was still here early in 1858. He didn't muck around 'cos he married again in 1859.
Ah well! I'm going sideways now and finding out as much as I can about her life and times. Interesting to put her in context. It will be interesting to see if something just drops into the picture which really clears things up. While looking for other things, that might just happen. Not giving up, just going more slowly.
Many thanks for yours and JM's interest and assistance on this thread. You've been a great help. We've surely turned up many, many Catherines and managed to knock out quite a few of them . . . . and if anything else turns up - well, the thread is here to add to!
I appreciate your research skills and your access to things to which I don't seem to have entree.
Cheers ;)
Wiggy
-
Hi,
JM
The John McNall who died in Victoria in 1842 was aged 35 and a presbyterian, so was his wife Sarah who died in 1848 aged 37 no parents names are given in the index. est dob 1807. I fell that the unnamed McNall in the index who died in 1838 is their child also presbyterian. This is the earliest McN*L* death in thr index. Only on elivineg birth in the indexes 1842 a son John McNall to John and Sarah McNall. So I feel no go on this man at any connection to Catherine Christina McNally.
Quite depressing looking at the death sof so many young people!!
Robyn
-
Hi Julie
I am a descendant of Dr William Paton mentioned in your transcripts. I wrote a biography of Paton many years ago and never found the documents you have transcriped. I would be very interested in the location of the originals. I knew about Gregson's problem with Gregson as I found secondary sources that mentioned it and I found brief entries in some court SC registries but never the detail that you have
regards
Jeff
-
Thanks to Julie, Trish, David and Floozy for their input - didn't mention them before and should have - been re-reading thread to remember the important bits - every little thing helps in the great search!! ;)
152nd Anniversary of Catharine's death today!
Wiggy
-
How about this, Wiggy?
Patrick Allen (1800/1 Muster) a shoemaker lived at Paramatta with Captain Cummings.Remember him!
Allen was implicated in the Irish Uprising at Paramatta in 1800 according to the testimony of Peter McCanna or McCann (Minerva).Both Allen and McCann were assigned to Capt Cummingsat Paramatta where the rebellion was to begin. Cummings from Co Kildare was apossible sympathiser. The rebel plan was given away by Roger Gavin who later lived with Caterine Kearney in VDL. Other Marquis Cornwallis people in the conspiracy included James Mc Nally.
McNally and Nicholas Cregan guilty of cow stealing Trim Assises Meath 1793 transported per Marquis Cornwallis, but not recorded on indent. Previously 1790 aquitted of receiving stolen goods, previously aquitted for arson of a mill, but not tried for a murder. McNally probably one of the Defenders, "who fought in the battle of Coolnabinch1793, in the struggle for freedom".
ToL granted 1801. In 1799 McNallycharged with the attempted assault of Mary Mulett alias Talmage while he was drunk-ordered to be of good behaviour. ".
Sourced from "A desperate set of Villains " by Barbara Hill.
Cummings and McNally go way back! and continue to Port Dalrymple in 1819!
David
-
David and Wiggy,
Would that be Catherine Kearney, a Dairy Farmer of Hobart Town 1808-1813?
Try this link for details of a book about her
http://www.tasfamily.net.au/~schafferi/index.php?file=kop6.php
JM
-
Wiggy
another reference to James McNally in astralian records.
http://colsec.records.nsw.gov.au/indexes/colsec/h/F24c_har-haz-12.htm
However Henry Kendall the Australian Poet has a McNally link see
http://www.middlemiss.org/lit/authors/kendallh/poeticalworks.html and
http://gutenberg.net.au/dictbiog/0-dict-biogI-K.html
Then see this re Leonard McNally (Do a google search for him and it is very interesting.)
http://www.upperswale.co.uk/room5.html
http://gutenberg.net.au/dictbiog/0-dict-biogI-K.html and
http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/andrew/1798.html
http://www.ianson-international.org.uk/england/lass.htm
http://www.ianson-international.org.uk/england/ma-ia01h.htm
Can't see a connection their children were Frances, Elizabeth and William. The girls are certainly not Catherine as ther marriages are noted further in, although their deaths are not known!!!
ELIZABETH MCNALLY was born Aft. 1789 died Unknown and married unknown to THOMAS SIMPSON.
ELIZABETH MCNALLY and THOMAS SIMPSON had one child: R. H.SIMPSON, b. Unknown; d. Unknown.
Still a mystery woman is Elizabeth,
Frances McNally bef 1802 married John Hampton Lewis in 1833 and died in Anglesea Uk so is definitely out.
regards
Robyn
-
Bit More,
If Catherine Kearney and Catharine Christina McNALLY were/iwas the one person, then perhaps its important to remember that Catherine Kearney arrived in VDL 1808 ex Norfolk Island (per Lady Nelson), perhaps she met Thomas RANSOM back before 1808 ie on NI.
JM
-
Hi all,
Ummmm . . . . Been looking at all the references you've variouusly given and ummmm . . what to make of it all I do not know! Her meeting TR on NI would make David happy I think!
Far from solved though? Not sure there is anything I can add at the moment, but will keep watching and looking!
Cheers, Wiggy
-
I think that the answer to the identity of Catherine lies in the connections to Capt Cummings- We have to accept that her name was Catharine. There is no indication that Mcnally was her maiden name and ,if it was ,where is any reference to her as Catharine McNally in Hobart before birth of Thomas Jnr in 1820. So it was her married name. Accept that she was born 1789 , that we have reference to a John McNally and a Catherine having a child John in 1810 in Sydney and that Capt Cummings employed John McNally and his wife in 1816 to go to Port Dalrymple in 1816, and that they are all in the PD Muster in 1819, but that Cummings had advertised that his wife Ann had shot through, then it is a reasonable probability that her servant Catherine McNally went with her to Hobart. There she was frail with Thomas Amos, had Ann, later Ann Ransom aam 22 in 1840. named after her mistress and friend Ann Cummings. Ann Cummings returned to her husband, but Catherine was not going back to husband John McNally,andstayed in Hobart under the protection of Thomas Ransom, who was the "wife" he shewed on the 1819 Muster. Ann born after October 1819, so not shown as child on Muster.
I dont see a NI origin for Catharine- given she was born c 1789,and all Catherines on Norfolk appear accounted for. We need to determine where the Mcnally name came from before we can search for her maiden name. So, born 1789, married 16+ and John born 1810 = married 1805-1810. If John /James McNally was either Boddington or Marquis Cornwallis, he was , born, say 1773,and if he was the impediment to marriage with Thomas before 1829, then he died 1825-1829 aged 50+. He either died in VDL or he left after 1819 Muster and shuffled off the mortal coil elsewhere.
Comments please . David
-
Ref. to NI was harking back to bad old days! JOKE :)
Makes sense - I think - will have to let it stew more.
I also think the answer lies in connection with Cummings - it is the most reasonable solution - not in itself concrete evidence, but we have to start somewhere.
Big sticking point for me is Anne's age. She said she was 22 when she married in 1840. Women have a thing about their age - believe me! ( On the other hand - and arguing against myself here - maybe she wanted to seem more worldly wise and closer in age to Francis than she really was - already 6 years if 1817 is correct.) Could she have still been in PD at 1819 muster time? - doesn't seem likely does it? - Just thinking aloud.
Trouble is, if Anne was correct about her age, where does that leave us?
Given that she isn't recorded in Hobart - but I've just remembered - when I did the search in Hobart, I searched under Ransom and McNally - not Amos - Hmmm - I wonder??
Gosh, I might have to give way here!
Wiggy
-
David,
I think you summed it up nicely. The thing now is to find the McNally death!!! If not in Australia then where? He probably couldn't go back to the UK. Did he join the military and go off adventuring in England's foreign wars? MAnyex convicts did just that.
There was a Robert Mc Nalley in the 40th regiment
http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~garter1/m40th.htm
and a James McNally in the 80th regiment
http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~garter1/m80th.htm
Also the McNally/Kendall mix has brought more McNally references to light
http://melindakendall.wordpress.com/category/convicts/ focus on Patrick McNally but scroll to the bottom and some one has posted details from the Colonial Secretay's index:
1822 Aug 2
MCNALLY Appointed overseer of the party to clear land for John Harris of South Creek (Reel 6009; 4/3505 p.208
1822 Aug 24
MCNALLY. Soldier tried for desertion at Montreal With assistants, fenced Revd H Fulton’s Glebe (Reel 6055; 4/1761 p.131)
1824 Apr 26
MCNALLY, Mrs Re order for payment of money (Reel 6060; 4/1777 p.141)
1818 Sep 10
MCNALLY, Julia. Came free; of Castlereagh ? On list of persons to receive grants of land in 1818 (Fiche 3266; 9/2652 p.50)
1820 Sep 18 On list of persons for whom grants of land have been handed over to the Surveyor General for delivery (Fiche 3266; 9/2652 p.59)
seems to have been more McNally's around than in the BDM's!!
regards
Robyn
-
Those are interesting sites Robyn.
There sure are plenty of McNallys around when one starts looking!
Wiggy
-
Team Catherine- the theory
"NOTICE-Whereas Anne Cummings, my wife,having absented herself from me for some years past, without any cause or provocation,although often requested to return to her home: and as I have been credibly informed she means to leave this colony, I hereby caution all Masters and Commanders of vessels, and all otheres whomsoever, from taking her away from the colony, or assissting her in any manner in the same, as I am determined to prosecute with the utmost rigour of the law all such person or persons who in any way may harbour, conceal or maintain her: all persons are therefore likewise cautioned not to give her any credit on my account, as I will not pay any debts of her contracting "LAUNCESTON JOHN CUMMINGS HTG Saturday 29th May 1819- And, HTG Oct 2 1819, The sloop "Martha" About to sail for Port Dalrymple in the course of a few days, all claims against John Cummings are requested to be immediately presented for Payment
I have been editing the RootsChat posts . And what leapt out as the likely scenario was(1) that Anne Ransom (married 1840 aam 22) could be the daughter of Anne Cummings(nee Boyton) and Thomas Amos, (2) she was left at Hobart with Catherine McNally ( the servant who had fled with her) when Anne returned to Capt Cummings in Port Dalrymple, as(3) Catherine was now in the household Of Thomas Ransom. So Anne was” adopted” by Catherine and Thomas . This also solves the short time frame between the presumed birthdate of Anne (1819) and the recorded birth of young Thomas in late 1820. This fits withJohn , son of John and Catherine McNally , born 1811,Capt Cummings employs John McNally and wife to go to Port Dalrymple 1816, and 1819 Port Dalrymple Muster, John McNally, and child John McNally, and an “empty” entry for McNally in womens muster ( just the name McNally, no detail)
If John McNally is per Boddingtons or per Marquis Cornwallis, then both are Irish, probably Defenders, and transported 1792-3, assume 20 in 1792 , so born 1772, so 53 in 1825 and 58 in 1820- ready to fall off perch and release Catherine to marry. David
Comment from Team Catharine?
-
Comment from this member of team,
There are too many John Cummings in play! Get rid of some - or explain them away! :)
Been trawling - the John Cummings from Port Dalrymple is still selling meat to the Gov't long after Cap't Cummings is dead! Cap't John dies aged 82 in 1825. Mr John is still around - maybe he is the Captain's son, and Anne Cummings is his wife - in which case the rest may stand - maybe. Makes more sense anyway - I think! :D
Wiggy
-
Certainly Capt Cummings age is a bit of a worry, based on an age of 82 at death in 1825, But- we have a Mrs Ann Cummings- Ann Boyton married John Cummings 27/10/1805 at Alvestoke Hampshire. Capt Cummings was back in England then, on Isle of Wight (Hampshire) in 1807 in command of a detachment of NSW Corps, a right little pillock according to Colonel Leslie. In 1819 at Port Dalrymple they had George 14, james 12, Ellen 10, which is consistent with a marriage in 1805. I cannot locate the source off hand , but one of the boys had two names, and one of them was really John, I think it was George, probably used George in family to differentiate from father John. In 1825 , son John would be 19 and so could be selling beef after the Captain died. Ann ( Boyton) Cummings was his mother. I haven't checked whether John Jnr married an Ann
David
-
Also, it probably doesn't matter how many John Cummings there are - it is John McNally we are worried about is it not? Took my eye off the ball for a moment there. (It came to me in the night! ;) )
Wiggy
-
Wiggy,
Yep, easy to get off the track in this. But Dave has put forward a good explanation for the "adopted" child Catharine is supposed have had. It is quite rational and certainly fits all the known facts. Now to find out what John McNally had done to earn such a harsh opinion of his actions on Catharine who was held in high esteem. AND hopefully his death.
Robyn
-
Just going over the ground again - and again and -
"NOTICE-Whereas Anne Cummings, my wife,having absented herself from me for some years past,
has just jumped up and hit me - that means that Ann could have met Thomas Amos in Sydney before they came to VDL and become pregnant to him then - after which she withdrew her favours from John - she may have come to VDL but not had anything to do with John. He does speak of her having absented herself for years you notice. And his reason for leaving it so long to go chasing - he's just heard that Thomas Ransom has adopted the issue of Ann and Thomas Amos' liaison. That would be good for my belief that Anne was born in 1817!!
I've always wondered why John would leave it years before making a palaver of Ann leaving! Do you reckon this might be any good?
Just a thought - comments?
Wiggy
-
Because of various committments, I haven't been able to get to the Ref Library- so I haven't ben able to check the 1821 and 1822 Port Dalrymple Musters, for John mcNally or the Cummings household. But the following has turned up online in the Archives Office "Departures" index
'John MacNally, seaman, 28 January 1818, from Hobart,per" Governor Macquarie", to Port Dalrymple and Port Jackson"
OK- is this our man? and what are the circumstances? and was he just going to Port Dalrymple or right through ( leaving) to Port Jackson? Last first- if he is our man , then he was in the October 1819 PD Muster so he wasn't leaving the island in 1818. Is he our man- our suspect seems to have crewed on a number of sealing ships before being employed by Cummings in 1816, so " seaman" is good, the name is right, and the date is OK. The circumstances? Anne Cummings has left the nasty Captain Cummings, and in 1819 he is still advertising for her and saying she's been gone some years, well, lets say a couple, and we have surmised that Catherine McNally her servant went with her- so was husband John McNally looking for her, did he find her, told to get lost, or didn't find her, but in any event is returning to work and the children at Port Dalrymple ?
And.... if he had found her, did he try for a reconciliation again,say in 1820(by which time Anne Cummings had returned to Captain Cummings, but Catherine was still in the household of Thomas Ransom) ,and the result of the attemped but unsuccessful reconciliation was Thomas McNally1820, which might indicate an error of judgement by Catherine , but at least he was her legal husband and it eliminates the taint of promiscuity from Wiggy's Great.
Different thought- to release Catherine to remarry again in 1830 , John Mcnally has to die /disappear between 1825-1830, so is the death in 1825 of the by now completely gaga Captain Cummings a significant factor? If McNally was still part of the Cummings household, did he then have to move on?
As a footnote, forget all about Catharine Rook , even if she wasn't massacred in 1809, because she was Catherine Rourke per "Sugar Cane" 1793, and was born c 1772, making her a touch old to be our Catherine producing young Thomas in 1820.
David ( but call me Obadiah, or was it Ishmael?) Moby Dick..Whales,seals... its all too much !
-
HTGazette 24 Jan 1818 "The brig Governor Macquarie arrived from Port Jackson 19th January after a 10 day passage...will sail for Port Dalrymple on 27th January...the Commander cautions the Public against giving credit to any of the officers or crew of the vessel''
HTGazette Saturday 24 Jan 1818 " The Ship Chapman , Captain Drake, sailed again on Sunday last. It is reported that she anchored in Storm Bay Passage with a view to clandestinely receiving on board a young woman who was formerly secreted on her and taken out on her arrival here, but the vigilance of the police prevented the intention"
To the Woods! HTG 28 February 1818 " My wife, Jane Martin, having withdrawn herself from her home without any just provocation and having absconded into the woods with Benjamin Gibbs, an absentee, I hereby caution all...de blah, de blah, blah , blah etc. Joseph Martin, Constabule. Benjamin was the provocation, I would have thought.
These rivetting random snippets seem to indicate that absconding was a commonn marital pastime in early VDL society, and of no great consequence. I do note however, that there appear to be no advertisements by abandoned wives wanting their husbands back.
David
-
Hi, I have only just joined this site so this is all new to me and I'm not sure exactly how this works... but I am a descendant of Capt John Cummings (Jnr) and Ann Boyton. I know Captain John Cummings father died in 1825 in Tasmania. I have a lot of information about this family and their descendants and was intrigued by the posts that had included their names. Maybe we can swap information?
-
Hello Cathy,
Welcome to Rootschat! Very helpful people you'll find here I'm sure - I certainly have.
John Cummings and the family came up incidentally in our efforts to find Catherine McNally - we have found reference to John Cummings and family taking John McNally and 'wife' to Van Diemans Land in 1816. I'm so glad you have cleared up the fact that he was son of John Cummings who died in Hobart in 1825 - we've suspected as much, but there seemed to be several of them around it was hard to pinpoint them.
We don't know the McNally wife's name but, by process of elimination, think it may have been Catharine. She is our real target on this thread - if you have any information which can help us in that direction it would be very helpful!
I am not descended from the Cummings but from Catharine McNally.
Wiggy
-
Captain John Cummings and Anne Boyton were heading to Australia in 1808 and were in Hobart in 1810 so they aren't the Cummings associated with your ancestor. His father Captain John senior died in Hobart in 1825 and his son John Jnr (George)was born in 1805 and moved to Victoria in 1838, where he married Ann King. Ann Cummings (Nee Boyton) drowned in the South Esk River in 1820.
-
Well that is very interesting - we'll have to do a very big rethink!
Thank you for that. We found John and Ann's marriage in 1805 wasn't it - in Hampshire - the rest was just trying to work out who was where and when! Did you Cummings live in Hobart then? We noticed there was a family of them on the south of the island. - - - Curious - - - But we did find Anne's drowning from the papers of the time.
-
Just thought - the notice we found in the Sydney paper said they were returning to VDL in 1816 - that is what made us think it was the same family. Certainly we had all the children's names right - with John George being the eldest and Ellen, and Phillip born in 1818 - correct?? And another boy - James was it?
Wiggy
-
Does the newspaper article mention the childrens names? In that case it could be them, I have records of dealings in VDL up until 1812 but then not again until 1818, so that may be right. John (George) was born in England in 1805, James (My ancestor) was born at sea in 1808, Ellen (Who went on to marry a convict) was born in Sydney in 1809 and Phillip was born in VDL in 1818. We have often wondered about Phillip, but I have his marriage certificate which names Captain John Cummings of the 102nd regiment as his father.
-
Cathy,
AS Wiggy said, the focus of the thread has been to find the origins of Catherine McNally, but I have become severely sidetracked by Capt John Cummings ( haven't I, Wiggy). I have Capt John Cummings attempting to burn down the Kings bench Prison,, Capt John Cummings and brother William in the NSW Corps and involved in the Vinegar Hill rebellion, and Bligh's arrest, Capt John Cummings in the West India Regiment in Dominica, Col Cummings with son John in Madras, John Cummings in the Colonial Secretarys Index, in the Historical Records of Australia, William and wife Ann Oates who died c 1810, I am awash with John Cummingses, all called John and in one military capacity or another! From your comments it is obvious that your family is connected to our search, but we have not been able to correlate all the information we have gathered.
Can you help by clarifying your Cummings family tree and movements between ,say, 1760-1830, then we can see what of our research appears relevant and what is just a coincidence of name and place. Welcome to the thread- Be warned, Wiggy has the capacity to get people involved!
Hope you don't mind me poking about in your family history, but "Capt Cummings" is almost a cult figure in the Catherine McNally search.
David
-
Cathy, You may be interested in the following reference in Historic Records of Australia
Source;HRA3 Vol 4 pg 625
Captain Montagu to Colonial Secretary Goulburn
Secretary’s Office, Hobart Town 12th November 1825
Sir, I am directed to have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of 18th September last,with its enclosure requesting a Certificate of the Death of Mrs Cummings, the Wife of Lieutenant
Cummings of the 102nd Regiment, and which I herewith inclose,together with a Copy of a Letter which I have received from the Reverend John Youl, Chaplain of Launceston , on the subject.
I have, Sir, etc JOHN MONTAGU, Secretary
Enclosure No 1
Reverend John Youl to Lieut-Governor Arthur
Launceston 31st October 1825
Sir,
I have the honour to report further particulars relative to a Mrs Cummins as to the time of her demise. Having seen Mr John Cummins, late a Captain in the MSW Corps, his deceased wife’s name previous to her marriage , was Ann Boynton, born at Nottingham, was married to Captain John Cummins in a Church near Gosport. She has left 3 children by her marriage, not well provided for.
From the date the Lady died , as stated in the Right Honourable Earl Bathurst’s Letter, I am of the opinion that it must have reference to the wife of Lieutenant William Cummins, lately deceased who was in the same Corps, and who came into the colony some time before the arrival of captain John Cummins. His wife’s name previous to her marriage , was Ann Oates, daughter of a respectable family. She was born in the isle Of Man. Her death is as far back as 1810, or thereabouts. There are several persons at Port Jackson who are likely to give the time of her decease, particularly the following- Mrs Broughton of Appin, Mr Hume of the same place, and Mr Kennedy of Windsor
I am etc, John Youl
Enclosure No 2
CERTIFICATE OF DEATH OF ANN CUMMINGS Nee BOYNTON
Page No 3
Ann Cummins , Wife of Mr John Cummins of Paterson’s Plains was Drowned July the 27th, Aged 38 Years, was Buried at Launceston, July 29th 1825
By Me, John Youl, Chaplain
-
Hi David,
Mary Ann Oates was Cpt John Cummings (Jnr) sister in law. Briefly, the relationships of this Cummings family in the time frame that interests you:
Captain John Cummings Senior of the 8th West Indian regiment b about 1743, buried in Hobart on 26th March 1825. His son William Cummings arrived on the third fleet in 1791 on the ship 'Queen" on which he was an ensign. He married Mary Ann Oates who was also on board. They had one known son James John who was christened in 1788 on the Isle of Mann. It is not known if this son came to Australia. Mary Ann's burial is recorded at St Phillips church, Sydney as having taken place on 29th August 1811. A death of William Cummings in Sydney in 1824 appears as if it is this William Cummings.
Captain John's younger son Cpt John Cummings Jnr - arrived in 1808 as previously stated. He married Ann Boyton in Hampshire on 27th Oct 1805, and had the children described previously. He was an officer with th 102nd Regiment and there is a letter in existence written by Bligh describing him in an unfavourable way. The 1819 muster of land holders at Port Dalrymple shows that John Cummings had 200 acres and a wife and three children, listing the names of the elder three. John Cummings Jnr's death & burial were unknown by family members when I last researched this, but he was known to be alive and living in Tas in 1834. The three male children all moved to Victoria where they married. The daughter Ellen married convict George Richards and stayed in Tasmania.
The letters you posted are very interesting - I'm not sure about the burial date in the letter, I have an extract from the pioneers index as follows: Ann Cummins (sic) Sex-Female Spouse name- John Aged 38 Event- buried on 29 JUL 1820 Reg place Launceston Reg details 1820/460/34
I would love to have details of the newspaper article describing their return to VDL.
Cathy
-
Hi Cathy,
I think the death date for Anne was a typo - you are right, definitely should have been 1820!
The ad you wanted to see is at reply no 131 on this thread - it doesn't mention children's names - think that was a later muster where they were mentioned.
Your comment re the doubts about Phillip are interesting. We are looking for a missing registration of a child born about that year - but ours is a girl - odd though, that you had doubts about a child born at about the same time. You say you have the registration of his marriage though. I found his birth year through the IGI.
It is interesting that the letter quoted by David says 'three children, not well provided for' Yet there were apparently four children. Also you say that the 1819 muster shows only 3 children - all very worthy of further investigation.
Wiggy
-
Cathy,
Thanks for the background,which is highly interesting and which I am absorbing. I'm glad that all my researching on the 8th in West Indies Regiment is relevant.
Wiggy found Captain John Cummings trying to burn down the Kings Bench Prison in 1793- same man, John sen? Google "Navarre Complete Newgate Calender" and search for Cummings in the General Index.
Just a frivolous note-my grandson has in his ancestry ( through his mothers line) the Lieutenant Governor of the Isle of Man (Smelt) and also the Bishop of Man and Sodor(Crigan) at about(must check) the time James John was baptised there in 1788. This RootsChat is just one big family
Cheers,
David
-
Wiggy,
Cathy has made contact because of her connection to John Cummings which reference has obviously spiralled off through cyberspace from this thread.How about we scream THOMAS S AMOS solictor Sydney 1816-1819, and also scream LEO STIEGLITZ Re Thomas Amos and Ann Ransom Killymoon- perhaps Leo might hear us and make contact- we need to contact you , Leo.
David
-
David,
Good idea - but how about starting a new thread with those names - this one is getting a bit unwieldy!! What do you think to that?
Wiggy
-
Wiggy,
No, don't agree, its all part of the story of the search, and even what isn't directly connected to the origin of Catherine McNally has a relevance to that search. But, its your relly and your search, so your decision. But to have RANSOM and MCNALLY and AMOS and CUMMINGS and STIEGLITZ in one thread links them together, and look what happens- up pops Cathy to join in and clarify our thoughts.
David
-
Hi all,
VVV interesting reading.
Has anyone else picked up onthe WEST INDIES connection?
Very early on Wiggy mentioned that Catharine may have come from there post 4:
Catherine McNally - may have come from the West Indies - hard to find a trace on her.
then from Cathy yesterday pos t311 this:
Captain John Cummings Senior of the 8th West Indian regiment b about 1743, buried in Hobart on 26th March 1825.
How does this sit with Daves theorizing that Catharine's husband (who ever he was) must have died before she was free to marry Ransom reply 291:
if he was the impediment to marriage with Thomas before 1829,
regards
Robyn
-
Bit More,
Robyn's thoughts are well worth following up. May I suggest that a summary should be put in this thread of
a) what we know NOW and
b) what questions are currently outstanding
That would certainly help me to continue to help searchings....
But, tis Just Moi Opinion, of course.
JM
-
Welcome back , Robyn and JM, Team Catherine is coming back together !
I checked the IGI for West Indies and found Elizabeth McNally born 16/12/1791 dau of John McNally and Margaret. She could have had a sister Catherine or Christina I suppose, but no trace. Aso Captain John Cummings (sen) was in the WI in 1802 and in 1812,so we could assume that John joined the 8th Regiment as a batman, and came with Capt John Cummings to VDL in 1816, but to make the Catherine Mcnally connection stick ( as there is no record of a Margaret McNally in VDL musters) either he married again to a Catherine,or the 1816 newspaper notice was wrong and it was John McNally and daughter, not wife
Wiggy is convinced that (a) Catherine was not a convict and (b) that the impediment to marriage between Thomas and Catherine lay with Thomas being married in England ( to Elizabeth Durrell?) before trial in 1786, so that when Thomas died 1829 then she was able to marry FL Stieglitz. Both points of view seem reasonable given no evidence to contrary. But this would mean that our theory that Catherine was the wife of John McNally per 1816 notice requires her to be only the common law wife of said John McNally, so that by absconding with Ann Cummings she was still a single woman, per birth record of Thomas Ransom 1820 when mother named as McNally. I like that better than a West Indian Catherine as a daughter wrongly described as a wife.
We are advancing forward while marking time on the spot- so good to have you back looking at it again
David
-
Nice thoerising.
Now It is possible that Catharine was born in the West Indies to John and Margaret McNally and not been recorded (pluasible) and (curse my imaginitis) married at 12 or 14 ( not uncommon back then and may be not with her consent) or ran away with John Cummings senior!!!! When and where did his first wife die?
Must say I tend to believe McNally is her maiden name. It seems it was not uncommon to refer to married women by their maiden names and not just as MRs XYZ.
just putting out ideas
Robyn
-
Must say I tend to believe McNally is her maiden name. It seems it was not uncommon to refer to married women by their maiden names and not just as MRs XYZ.
Yes, twas almost the "norm" at least from what I can find on my own forebears in NSW in Macquarie's time. For example, I have one set of ggg parents arriving as part of Regiment, and they married by banns in 1817 in Sydney, yet I could not find the wife on the muster ... till I searched by her maiden name... there she was, listed under nee name, employed by her husband and with several children by 1825, all children listed with him, not with her.... but all at same address !!!
So HOW to find Catharine .... Ummm .... perhaps go back through the VDL musters and find Thomas Ransom (senior) and then cross check who else was at same address .... it twas not easy to find my Sydney based lass on the Sydney musters, but I did eventually find her, and when I shared that info with other family members who had been on that HUNT for decades, they said 'NEVER THOUGHT TO GO THROUGH EACH PAGE" Cheers, JM
-
How about not her maiden name (father) but her mother's name- often the case in Scotland, or in the case of trying to lose your identity but holding onto a basic truth. So we need a Catherine born c1789 to a mother McNally/Macanally/Mackinulty etc
I have dissected the VDL Musters and Lists till I'msick of the sight of them!! may be missing something ,but don't think so. Have also cross checked all Catherines I could find in VDL 1814-1820 irrespective of surname, and they all seem accounted for.
I can find no single women free or convict in VDL called Catherine or McNally, born 1779 (1789 +10) or later that is not accounted for- so she must have arrived within a couple of years or so of the 1819 Muster when she appears as a wife of Thomas Ransom-
Of course, if she was not a Catherine at all, then we have a real problem
Remember the 1816 Cummins notice of taking John McNally and wife to VDL is bookended by the 1811 birth of John McNally to John McNally and Catherine, and by the 1819 Port Dalrymple Muster showing a male John McNally and a child John McNally but no wife McNally, while the Hobart Muster shows an unnamed Ransom wife, whoappears from nowhere. Yes,I am fixed in a groove, but I am holding onto facts, even if my interpretation may be wrong.
David
-
HI all,
This I think may be the most pivotable piece of evidence from Dave
Remember the 1816 Cummins notice of taking John McNally and wife to VDL is bookended by the 1811 birth of John McNally to John McNally and Catherine, and by the 1819 Port Dalrymple Muster showing a male John McNally and a child John McNally but no wife McNally, while the Hobart Muster shows an unnamed Ransom wife, whoappears from nowhere. Yes,I am fixed in a groove, but I am holding onto facts, even if my interpretation may be wrong.
AND I have a Corporal James Emms with wife and children in PJ c1825 with the 39th regiment and still haven't found wife's or childrens names at all, just referred to as Mrs Emms/wife an children!!! (was in NI for a time too)
So not having John McNally's wife's name may not be unusual for the time.
regards
Robyn
-
So - looking for Catharine Christina McNally - common-law wife of Thomas Ransom - approx 1819-1829.
Suspected to be with John McNally in Sydney as mother of John born 1811
Assumed to arrive in VDL with John, as un-named wife, coming under contract with John Cummings 1816 - to PD.
1817-19?? Catharine is mother of Ann 'Ransom', fathered by Thomas Amos - no proof of this other than family history as per Leo Von Stieglitz - and we haven't found the time frame to back this up yet. (However you don't get this family story without some historic reason - you don't just 'make this up' specially when we have evidence of a Thomas Amos being in the colonies at the time.)
Catharine is presumed to have left John about 1818ish - He seems to disappear from VDL, but John Jnr shows up in Sydney 1822 muster with another woman Ann Clemens. (Has John gone off sealing again - he is listed somewhere as seaman.)
1st definite appearance in 1819 as un-named 'wife' - no children in evidence at this muster.
2nd definite appearance - birth record for Thomas McNally 1820 - Catharine listed as unmarried.
3rd definite record - Mrs Ransom donating to the Wesleyan mission 1823.
Thomas and Catharine move to Green Ponds due to 'not being married'!
4th recorded as being at Green Ponds - Royal Oak Inn during court case - 1829 - refers to her presence in 1828.
Recorded as beneficiary and executrix of Thomas's Will 1829
5th Marriage to Frederick Stieglitz Feb 1830 hereafter known as Christina.
6th in paper receiving probate for Thomas's property - Nov 1829
Present in Martin Cash's book as being chatelaine of Killymoon
7th named as sending exhibits to London and Paris Exhibitions 1850s.
8th named in paper at her death - (Catharine Stieglitz). On grave stone and in another paper as Christina Stieglitz. Aug 1857
As previously commented:
Lack of paper trail suggests she was a free woman.
Lack of evidence of McNally marriage suggests she was common-law wife of John McNally - but, she and John both named as McNally in birth of John McNally junior - so does that make her a McNally by birth? - probably not on this evidence.
Odd though that she signs that she is McNally, unmarried, at Thomas's birth in 1820 - (or is that just to show that the child is not John McNally's.)
Catharine does not appear in 1822 muster - are their children listed with Thomas in that muster - David, can you remember?? We know they are there, but are they listed? I can't remember!
I think I have everything!!
Wiggy
-
Great synopsis , Wiggy, and I spotted the deliberate mistake- you left out 1837 as the Martin Cash date! What about the Hermit in Van Diemens Land reference, the courting of Catherine by Fred. 98%, Top of the Class.
The 1822 Hobart Town Muster of Women does not include a Ransom or a Mcnally.
It includes 23 Catherines - 7 were born in the colony, 7 came free, and 9 were freed by servitude.
5 of the Came Free arrived Hobart after 1819, of the other 2 one arrived 1803 ( Potaski) and is accounted for- leaving Catherine Dogherty , who was not include in the 1818 Muster Free women
Of the 7 Born in Colony , only Belbin is unaccounted for and not in 1818 Muster- 4 were in 1818 muster as married ( Clarke(m Morgan) Crahan, Potaski(nee Sullivan) Tedder(nee Cullen), Wade( nee Morgan) , while Crahan and Williams were not married but were listed in 1818, so would have been known under those names
of the 9 Freed by servitude, Pindergrass (arrived1790) and Murphy (1791) are too old, 4 arrived on the Catherine (!) in 1814, and would have been well known under their names(Coghlan, Egan,O'Brienand Quinn), leaving Kingswill (arrived 1815-so knownunder that name) and I think Wiggy vouches for Catherine Kearney.
But... and I have noted this in the margin before("where she come from?") but apparently not followed it up, which I will do after posting this- "Mrs McAnley Came free Calcutta 1803". She does not appear in 1819 Land and Stock Muster as a land owner, nor in the 1818 Hobart muster of free women. How has this slipped through?
David
-
yes but are their children noted at the muster in 1822??? :) You are the one with the muster records! If they aren't, then to my mind they were 'home with Mum' and that lends weight to the fact that she missed the muster!
I don't suppose she would have gone to Sydney and appeared on a PJ muster would she? Just had that thought! doesn't seem likely - busy Inn to run and all! Still - cover all bases!
Wiggy
-
Hi Robyn,
I think I have given up on the West Indies connection - been looking around there but have found nothing worth thinking about - will hold it at the back of my mind though. it is interesting the way it keeps rearing its head isn't it - maybe there is something there
Wiggy
-
1822 Muster of Women- Hobart - Mrs McAnley C/Free Calcutta 1803
To be born in 1789, she was 14 in 1803, so a young wife or daughter of ships personnel, marine personnel or of a civil officer. She was” Mrs” McAnley in 1822 , so she was either married when she arrived, or married after arrival. In either case her forename must be Catherine. The closest surname matches on the Calcutta are McAllenan, convict and a bad lot, and McAuley, a paragon of a Sergeant of Marines. There were no female convicts on board, and no women among the “ships personnel” There was no reference to a Catherine among the Civil Officers and their families No reference to Daniel McAllenan (convict) being married before he disappears from the records in 1808 .Sergeant James McAuley was married to Mary .Other marines were married ,but none to a Catherine . In the 1819 Land and Stock Muster James McAuley is listed as a Constable with a wife on Stores, contemporaneously with Thomas Ransom also with wife on Stores. McAnley could sound like Mcnally, but is a colonial typo for McAuley, her name was Mary and she was taken by husband James in 1819. Not Catherine McNally.
Pity really, but glad I hadn't been sloppy
David
-
I realise the limits of The IGI,and we all know the dangers of wasting time on constructs based on unproven relationships. However, the IGI is very limited on anyCatarine McNally entries between 1780-1820 and even more so on Christina McNally- so I perked up when Cathrina McNally came up as born in Hertforshire in 1781 ( a liitle early, but possible) and a marriage of a Catharine McNally came up in 1807 to John Bowen in Manachester,and the NSW BMD showed a death of a John Bowen (not Bowen Of Risdon Cove ) in Sydney 1809. Well that would have got a widow Catherine McNally into Sydney in 1809. How can I check upon Mr and Mrs Bowen getting from Manchester 1807 to Sydney 1809- possibly a marine? David
-
Umm,
I can get a Marine named BOWEN to NSW and N Island and VDL earlier !
BOWEN, John. Lieutenant, H.M. Ship "Glatton"
1803 Mar 18
Appointed Acting Lieutenant Governor of Norfolk Island; appears as James (Reel 6037; SZ990 p.111)
1803 Mar 29
Directed to form establishment at Van Diemen's Land (Reel 6037, SZ991 p.2; Reel 6039, SZ756 p.23)
(Col Sec index to 1825)
EDIT TO add, Presume he was the Rison Cove chap - thought he had a lady friend named Mary...
JM
-
Umm, lots of BOWEN in these colonial waters from first settlement -- this link takes you to 1825 !
http://colsec.records.nsw.gov.au/indexes/colsec/default.htm
Cheers, JM
-
Umm, who was this lass (no one else here at the present, :'( )
NSW bdm, 1805 christening? daughter of Peter and Mary....
V1805883 4/1805 MCCANN CATHARINE PETER MARY
Perhaps this is the marriage of her parents at Parramatta in 1804
V1804567 3A/1804 MCCANN PETER FITZGERALD MARY A CB (I'm guessing twas by Rev Marsden !)
Cheers, JM
-
Bit More,
And how did this Mary Fitzgerald (poss mother of a CathArine) get to VDL by 1809 had to come to NSW firstly... ???
FITZGERALD, Mary
1809 Apr Received grant of 30 acres at Port Dalrymple (Reel 6001; SZ757 p.44a)
1809 May 9 On list of all grants and leases of land registered in the Colonial Secretary's Office (Fiche 3268; 9/2731 p.174)
Cheers, JM
-
Bit More, - DAVID, for you to look up please...
Catharine Buchannan - apparently a lass by this name is on one of the Musters... not sure of the year, or the spelling of the surname...
Cheers,
JM
-
Thanks,JM,for the hard work, but, yes, he was the Risdon Cove man, the initial settlement of VDL in 1803. I have checked the Cols Secs Index, negative, Have checked Sydney Gazette 1807-1809 only 4 hits and all William Bowen, and the others were too early- Catherine and John Bowen married in Manchester in 1807, so if the John Bowen who died in Sydney 1809 was the same man they only arrived 1807-1809. Don't spend too much time on this-it is only a wild speculation on my part based on connecting 3 completely separate records, linked only by the double use of the names Catharine and Mcnally and the double use of the name Bowen within the appropriate time frame, stimulated by the fact that the original birth record in 1781 was for "Cathrina" which is a nice portmanteau of Catharine and Christina. But if it grabs you too, any help is gratefully received!
David
-
Hi David,
Do NOT rely on the Early Church Records on the NSW bdm site... These are NOT civil registrations, these are only for those recorded in the Church records, it was NOT compulsory, it was not well managed, and there are lots of indications of the mess in the records and of Lachlan Macquarie's efforts to provide for proper administration (took another 40 years after that for it to start to be administered by civil authories)... thus it could well be a quite different John Bowen who died in NSW in 1809 from the one you think it is... No way of telling just by looking at the indexes.... Also, the Col Sec indexes do NOT include everyone who arrived, its an index of the Correspondence received by the Col Sec... not a list of who was in the colony...
On other hand, what's your thoughts about that 1805 birth for a CathArine McCann....
Cheers, JM
-
Hi JM,
Why are you thinking about a 1805 birth of Catharine McCann - have I lost something here? That would be much too late for our Catharine. Did you have something else in mind for her? Daughter of . . . ? Even then it would be pushing it Our Catharine would have been 15/16.
Wiggy
-
Oops, finger slipped!
too continue...Catherine McCann would be too young . Our Catherine was at least 31 in 1820
David
-
15/16 in 1805 I meant!
Wiggy
-
Umm, that 1805 record would be her CHRISTENING, could have been born several years before that, ie before her parents married.... you would not know unless you had the ECR in front of you... But that NSW BDM record is definitely for a christening, its NOT for a birth...
Cheers, That's probably put cat among pigeons, but that twas not my intention...
JM
-
Umm, that 1805 record would be her CHRISTENING, could have been born several years before that, ie before her parents married.... you would not know unless you had the ECR in front of you... But that NSW BDM record is definitely for a christening, its NOT for a birth... Cheers, That's probably put cat among pigeons, but that twas not my intention...JM
All the NSW BDM records before say mid 1850's are ECR, Early Church Records, none are civil registrations, sometimes you will notice three or four entries for the one event...., I have four transcriptions for the ONE christening of one of my forebears born NSW 1818.... - there's the one from the regiment's log, the one from the back up of the regiment's log, the one from the church, and the one from the Col Sec's log... Anything on NSW BDM with a "V" (for volume) is ECR, hence there are MANY births, deaths, marriages that do NOT appear on the NSW BDM website... simply because the information did not get back to the Rev W Cowper.. particularly in the decades before say 1821.... Macquarie's orders re these issues are found online at the Sydney Gazette at the National Library's website....
-
Well that's worth knowing JM! - thanks for that -
just that when you said birth - I thought you meant birth! :D Now I understand!! I've been sitting here trying to think of all the things I know with the acronym ECR - forgot about early church records - that was the one I'd missed - silly me!
So that 1811 date for John could be wrong too then - that isn't going to make life any easier! On the other hand - it could be right.
I can hardly wait to visit the libraries in Tasmania and look at the musters for myself - David has said that Thomas appears with 'wife' in 1819 - but then in 1822 he has looked up the women list - I want to see if she appears as 'wife' again and if the children are listed as 'children'. It is odd, but I only just realized that the counts were done on different days - so why does Catharine appear as 'wife' on one and then get listed - (or not as is the case) - differently next muster. Do you see what I'm getting at? Not making myself very clear here.
Wiggy
-
I'm understanding what you are getting at... its much clearer than how I was trying to explain about CathArine McCann and that 1805 record I spotted...
I'm quite sure there was too much time spent doing silly admin tasks back in those days, rather than actually being adminstrators... but umm, has anything really changed, except the tools used to establish and maintain the records of this century ;D
Cheers, JM...
-
Wiggy and JM,
The original musters and lists are on microfilm, which I have referred to in order to check the printed record in the book "Land Musters, Stock Returns and Lists Van Diemens Land 1803-1822" by Irene Schaffer.
The relevant ones appear to be
Free women on General Muster Hobart Town 1818 which lists maiden name and name of spouse It includes 16 Catherines (see my previous post)
Free Children Off an Off Stores Hobart October 1818 includes no Ransom or McNally children
The Land and Stock Muster VDL 1819 includes Thomas Ransom at Hobart with a household of 3, comprising 1 proprietor, 1 wifeand 1 Government Servant, all on the stores, 400 acres downto pasture, 40 sheepand 300 bushells of grain inhand
GeneralMuster of proprietors of land and stockat Port Dalrymple 11-15 October 1819 includes John Cummings with 200 acres under pasture, wheat, barley and potatoes, 58 cattle and 250 sheep, himself,a wife and 3 children ,none on stores.. James McNally had 70 acres,12 cattle, 400 sheep, a wife and no children, both of them off stores
Wives of CivilOfficers, Settlers and free people Port Dalrymple 11-15 oct 1819 included Ann Cummings came Free [entry 64]and (just) McNally[entry 72]. Catherine Kelly and Catherine Lynch are included-noMr Kelly or Mr Lynch appears in theGeneral Muster of Land and Stock above,so they are "floating"
Children of Free people at Port Dalrymple 11-15 October 1819 include Ellen 10, george(John George) 14 and James 12 Cummings, and Elizabeth and John McNally no ages and John McNally[ entries 54, 40 and 96 ]
The general Muster of Civil Settlers and Free men at Port Dalrymple 15-19 October 1819 includes John Cummings Came free, , James McNally (nothing else) [ entry 127], and John McNally per Boddingtons tried Antrim August 1792, 7 years.[entry 20]. But the Boddingtons manifest shows James (not John) McNally as the convict
Hobart Town Muster, Women, 1822 includes 23 Catherines ( see previous post), no Ransom and no McNally
David
-
For Cathy48
Historical Records of Australia Maquarie to G A Gordon pg 714
14December 1811 Land grant and Live stock for J Cummings
“You are to direct the Acting Deputy Surveyor to locate 200 acres of land in some eligible situation at Port Dalrymple to Mr John Cummings ( late capt in the 102nd regiment but now permitted by me, on his resignation,to become a settler on this island) in lieu of 200 acres of land some time located to him at the Derwent, but which he now relinquishes and reverts back to the Crown…..’
It goes on to detail arrangements for swopping two cows and any increase therefrom which “he received some time ago at the Derwent” by the same from the Government herd at Port Dalrymple, plus another 2 cows and 80 ‘Ew sheep” subject to a bond for repayment in 2 years.
David
-
Thanks for all those muster records David. That makes it very clear about the PD and Hobart records and who was where, when.
Are there any records in 1822 of the men? and of the children? E.G. where is Thomas listed in 1822? - or has that record been lost down the years? I know I'm sounding like a broken record on this - but Catharine/wife was listed WITH Thomas in 1819 - did they change the way of taking the records by 1822? I don't know, so I'm asking - politely! Seems the best way to find out! I bet you've given this answer before and I've forgotten.
Wiggy - (not trying to be obtuse - really)
-
Thanks for that last bit of info David. I have also printed out the report from the Newgate calendar that you directed me to, I found it very interesting and it has inspired me to do some further research. I have been going through old newspapers on line and found several interesting articles about both Cpt and Ann Cummings, also an interesting entry about Capt Cummings and wife Elizabeth? in 1832. I have started corresponding with a distant cousin, descendant from Captain John's eldest son, she has been writing a story about the Cummings' early years in Tas and has a lot of info. She is in the process of writing it up to send to me, if there is anything at all mentioning any of the names you have been looking for, I will post it here.
-
Thank you, Cathy, I"m glad that Team Catharine has been able to help-as part of the search forCatharine,the Cummings family story has become quite connected,so if I can help any further with any query that comes up, please post it and I will check my files- you are probably aware from this thread that the connection started with the newspaper notice about Ann Cummings (Boynton) absconding. I will post asummary of a number of items from the HRA and newspapers and other sources for your research in a day or two. David
-
Hi Cathy.
I found an IGI entry for Capt John Cummings born 1743 d 1825 Hobart some time ago, and his wife was Elizabeth -(Clark I think) - is that right according to your family history. But I can't find any 1832 entry for Elizabeth - and John died 1825 so . . .
Love to know which paper you were looking in? Do you think that may be a different family - or is it definitely yours?
Wiggy
-
Have also been looking at Col Sec's Papers and found a long list for Cap't John Cummings, and six other and apparently iindividual Johns, 8 apparently individual Williams, 1 James C, and another J.C..
I say apparently because, when one person is referred to, all the letters are listed together (as in John Snr) - but I don't know for sure. 4 Johns seem to be in NSW and 2 in VDL; 1 of the James is in VDL the other NSW. Most of the Williams seem to be in NSW.
This could get to be a tad confusing.
Wiggy
-
Just had a thought - I wonder if John jnr married again after Ann died - could explain the 1832 newspaper entry?
Wiggy
-
Umm,
If you were to consider ordering transcripts of the 1805 christening that I mentioned earlier, you can get that for around $15, at least one of the NSW transcription services has a 10% sale on until Dec...
V1805883 4/1805 MCCANN CATHARINE (her father PETER) (and her mother MARY) or V18051455 1A/1805 MCCANN CATHARINE PETER MARY (two records of the same event.... One at line 5883 of Volume 4, and one at line 1455 of Volume 1A) notice in both instances the spelling of Catharine.... with "A" ....
Transcription services can send their info via email as a pdf file.... very quick responses... its a simple process, please consider reading the NSW resources thread especially http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,300394.0.html
Also, not found any entry to NSW for a Peter McCann on or before 1805 ! but spotted a Mary Fitzgerald, who by April 1809 was at PORT DALRYMPLE with her own land grant.... Was she Thomas RANSOM's (de facto) mother in law via Catharine ....
Cheers, JM
-
Thanks again David, I haven't found the notice of Ann absconding and would love to see it. I probably wrote the previous post the wrong way- the entry about John Cummings and Elizabeth was separate to the newspaper items - I found it in the Archives office of Tasmania search portal - the colonial family links database on that site has this entry and it shows Phillip as their child which has confused me.
-
HTG Saturday 29th May 1819-
"NOTICE-Whereas Anne Cummings, my wife,having absented herself from me for some years past, without any cause or provocation,although often requested to return to her home: and as I have been credibly informed she means to leave this colony, I hereby caution all Masters and Commanders of vessels, and all otheres whomsoever, from taking her away from the colony, or assissting her in any manner in the same, as I am determined to prosecute with the utmost rigour of the law all such person or persons who in any way may harbour, conceal or maintain her: all persons are therefore likewise cautioned not to give her any credit on my account, as I will not pay any debts of her contracting "LAUNCESTON JOHN CUMMINGS.
Cathy- this is the link between Catherine McNally and John Cummings referred to in the thread-theory is that Catherine McNally was the wife of John McNally employed by Cummings in 1816 and she went with Ann, but while Ann eventually returned after an affair with a visiting Supreme court solicitor Thomas Amos and producing a child in late 1819 Catherine remained in Hobart with Thomas Ransom, and catherine and Thomas adopted the child of Ann and Thoams Amos,namimg her Ann.
David
-
Cathy - that's David's theory!! But we won't fight over it! (And it will probably turn out that David is correct - just that Anne's great great grandson/nephew doesn't think so!)
Actually Catharine's other descendants think the child, Anne, 'adopted' by Catharine, and Thomas Ransom, was in fact Catharine's -with Thomas Amos. But the scenario remains the same with these two women hightailing it to Hobart without their spouses. So keep finding any connections - but add Thomas Amos and Anne 'Ransom' in to your thinking.
Cheers, Wiggy
-
Bit More,
Just to remind everyone, Thomas Sterrop AMOS, Solicitor, died in Sydney NSW aged 42 and buried 11 November 1819.... leaving two orphans at school in Sydney . http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/2179080?searchTerm=%22amos%22,
He did travel from Sydney to VDL on several occasions to be a legal representative in Justice Field's court...
He had arrived "down under" by Jan 1817 when he was admitted to the Governor's court (This roll records the date of admission and the full name of the attorneys sworn and admitted to practise in the Governor's Court. The seven names and dates on the roll are: Frederick Garling, 15 October 1816; William Henry Moore, 15 October 1816; Thomas Sterrop Amos, 2 January 1817; James Norton, 7 December 1818; Thomas Deane Rowe, 11 October 1821; Charles Henry Chambers, 15 March 1822; and George Allen, 25 July 1822. )..... http://investigator.records.nsw.gov.au/Entity.aspx?Path=%5CSeries%5C4562
I leave it to others to detail the dates when he was in VDL ::)
JM
-
Thanks JM- as requested, I have only found one trip to VDL of Thomas S Amos- arrived Hobart per "Derwent" with his fellow Solicitor on 19thJanuary 1819 , William H Moore, and left for Sydney per ship "Surrey" on 7 April 1819. Source Hobart Town Gazette and confirmed by Rev Robert Knopwoods Diary "Tuesday 19 January-The Derwent , Captain Carr, arrived from Sydney, the Solicitors came in her, Mr Amoss and Moore". "At 6pm on Friday 5th Feb The Judge of the Supreme Court and Mrs Field, Major Bell, Lieutenant King, Mr Amoss and Moore etc and self dined with Mr and Mrs Abbott" on 9th February at 9am the Deputy Judge Advocate, self and Mr Archer met at Mr Abbots office. Mr Loane and his solicitor came" Wed 10 March " Mr Kent and Mr Amoss came and took a pipe with me" Monday 15 march"Mr Kent and Mr Amoss called upon me" Monday 5th April "Mr Kent and Mr Amoss called upon me".Wednesday 7th April "This morning sailed the ship Surrey with many passengers"
Leo Stieglitz suggests that Ann ( later Ransom, adopted daughter of Thomas Ransom and Catherine McNally) was the daughter of Thomas Amos and Catherine mcNally, but this is disputed by yours truly- in any event he died later in 1819 in Sydney and probably was unaware of either the pregnancy or the birth.
Thomas Amos baptised 12/1/1776 at Spitalfields , son of John Amos and Elizabeth and married 9/8/1806 to Elizabeth Howe at Old Church, St Pancras.
-
For the Record re Post 328 Mrs Mcanley/ Mary Mcauley, per Calcutta 1803 with husband Sergeant James McAuley-just in case any descendent taps in, The Diary of the Reverend Robert Knopwood is choc a bloc with references to both of them , including James' death in 1822, which ties in with the entry for Tuesday 5th September 1826 in the Diaries of John Helder Wedge
"Surveying up the Clarence Rivulet- Mrs McAuley - a fat round faced widow about 38 years of Age -a round face, a small round ended nose, around and round altogether- a more hearty welcome or a more plentifully filled table no one ever met with- it was about 5pm when I arrived and within about 5 minutes I saw before me a large cold round of beef and one of the largest legs of Pork I ever beheld a bottle of wine and a bottle of brandy- what more could a man wish for?"
Apart from the poltical incorectness of the Government surveyor committing descriptive disparagement, I wonder whether he asked her to wash his shirt!
David
-
Bit More,
On that short visit to VDL, Thomas S Amos was likely lodging at the address noted in this advertisement from http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/655975?searchTerm=%22amos%22
MR. T. S. AMOS intending to proceed to Sydney by an early Opportunity, requests Claims may be presented at Mr Haywood's, Macquarie Street... The Hobart Town Gazette and Southern Reporter Saturday 13 March 1819
Umm, WHO WAS MR HAYWOOD .... is he mentioned in the Rev Knopwood's diary perhaps ....
Cheers, JM
-
Good one, JM, nice eye for detail
Henry Haywood of Macquarie Street appears to have been a factor or commercial agent- many people or vessels leaving the colony advertised for all claims against them to be presented to Henry. I haven't checked Mr Kent yet, who seems to have visited our Bobby once or twice with Thomas Amos.
Interesting!''seems that Thomas Amos intended to leave earlier than he did- he adverised on 6 Feb 1819 that he intended leaving for Sydney on the "Derwent' requesting all claims etc, but didn't leave until early April on the Surrey- what could have chnged his plans? Work or a dalliance. My guess is work.
In passing I noticed the following, Wiggy, 9 September 1820
GENTEEL RESIDENCE.--To be LET,
that very neat substantial built House lately erected by Mr. RANSOM upon his own Premises in Murray-street, adjoining the Rivulet. The Situation is most eligible for a small private Family, or any Person carrying on Trade. --Apply to the Proprietor, Mr. Ransom
David
-
Yep - have that one attached to the family tree! I've done those papers to death I reckon!
I'm watching the activity with interest. Makes you wonder what Ann Cummings did with baby Phillip, b 1818, when she left for Hobart though doesn't it? And again remember that John accuses her of being gone for years - there is something odd here which needs to be sorted out - was John exaggerating or . . . . or what?
Wiggy
-
Bit More
a) about TS Amos... and his two orphaned sons.... they sailed back to England Feb 1820 on the Admiral Cockburn...
b) 8 Jan 1819 TS Amos is shown as a passenger going to Batavia on the ship named DERWENT.... (image on Ances*** online)...
c) he seems to have been a widower when he arrived in NSW around 1816 ish... - I'll try to sort that out and edit this post...
EDIT TO SORT OUT POINT C) above
T S Amos was definitely still in the UK in Oct 1816, as that's when he sought permission to emigrate to NSW... (google books, richest 200 in Australian colonial era... etc) Also his migratration to NSW was probably the arrival on April 10, 1817 of the ship 'Morley' ...
I presume that no-one was inspired by that 1805 christening of a CathArine Mc..... at Parramatta... with her probable mother in VDL by 1809 .... oh well, I doubt if I can contribute much more to this very very very long thread... Good Searchings to you all,
Cheers,
JM
-
I think you are right JM - he was certainly a widower when he died in 1819. Children mentioned as orphans.
Going to Batavia on the 8th Jan and to Hobart on 19th Jan?? What's going on? I know some sailing ships were fast but . . .
David, re you comment post No 360 - I've noticed when looking for people coming and going via the newspapers that they seemed to advertise their going for a very long time. Same occurred when Cummings were coming to VDL. I wonder why - waiting for a suitable ship? Surely there were more frequent sailings than the time lapse would suggest.
Wiggy
-
Wiggy,
your comment Post 363 re mine in 360 about long lead in time of ads before the passenger actually leaves misses the point- Amos specified he was leaving on Derwent in February, but left on Surrey some 6 weeks or so later- that is a change of mind, not a long lead in time.
JM- as a widower he was entitled to a dalliance-thanks again for that further detail, which is where the devil resides!
david
-
Yes you are right - but he does advertise twice during March also - as if he is trying to go - I expect that is what tricked me.
Wiggy
-
Umm,
Perhaps there were two ships named Derwent... or perhaps when he realised the return to PJ was to be via Batavia he waited until there was a passage on the Surrey, or perhaps he needed to tally in VDL for law court work... if important to this thread, perhaps Wiggy or David could check out using AMOS as a keyword on the National Library of Australia's newspaper site...
http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/home ::) ::) ::)
No one wants to consider that 1805 christening, or her probable mum in VDL in 1809 .... :'(
This thread is very very long.... but, re AMOS, could that have been Adam AMOS who had VDL land grants in pre 1825 era ...
Re "dalliance" - that's a good word ... but it does not depend on his being a widower...
Cheers, , as I mentioned earlier today, Good Searchings. to you all.... JM
-
Thanks for much help and useful information JM - you've been a great help - and yes it is getting very long.
I've noticed you helping many others as I browse round Rootschat looking for clues. Thank you again for all the assistance.
Wiggy
-
Been through the papers as JM suggested - only seems to be one Amos around. We have the information which matters - but it doesn't give us any more help.
Wiggy
-
Been through the papers as JM suggested - only seems to be one Amos around. We have the information which matters - but it doesn't give us any more help.
Wiggy
Adam Amos, Swan Port Police Constable... Australian Bio online could he have been there earlier than Mar 1821 when he settled with his brother in that district.... you know, selecting his land, perhaps.... and several years later, he confronted the bushrangers ...
I understand his grave is in Tasmania .... and that the AMOS family is still in that district.... - this I gleaned from a google search this evening....
I can definitely see MORE THAN ONE chap with surname Amos.... sorry that it didn't give you "any more help"... try the papers again, both the PJ and the VDL ones.. I am sure that Swan Port was VDL
Bye.... JM
-
JM,
You seem upset that Catharine McCann has not been explored. What suggests to you that she is a possible- what are we missing in your information- she was christened in Paramatta in 1805,so on basis of aad, photographs and family tradition that she was born c 1789, she would have been 16. OK, why not. So when did she arrive in Hobart between 1805 and 1819 and not appear in any Musters as McCann?Any Catharine/Catherine/Cathrina/Christina is a potential suspect, and many have been raised and eliminated. Why do you especially feel drawn to this one? Youmay be right, so we can't let her slip away without checking, just like Mrs McAnley!
David
-
Hi there, :)
Strange word "upset", so no, I am not upset.... I just think that a person christened at Parramatta in 1805, and with given name Catharine, spelling it with "A", and family name McC and with mother's name being same as name of a VDL land grantee in 1809 would be of interest.... and a transcript of either that christening or the marriage of Mary Fitzgerald to Peter McCann may progress the search for Catharine... We have already established that in that penal era that women often retained their nee surnames... I am not a great one for collecting bdm documents without exhausting other avenues first, but in this instance, for less than $20 it is possible that some of the questions that form the initial posting on this very very very long thread may be answered... It is only my opinion, and I have no "hidden" knowledge of any of the many names that have been canvassed throughout this thread... It could well be that Catharine McCann is another of the lasses that were considered but set aside for they are not found on the VDL musters... ... I read in various Sydney Gazette cuttings of Macquarie's frustrations with the lack of accuracy about those musters... And also Commissioner Bigge's comments too... It may well be that the 1805 christening for that particular Catharine Mc lass was for a child say under 1 year, but it could just as well be for an adult woman... Perhaps the transcript will provide that clue... ::) and a pdf file sent by email seems to me to be a better solution than snail mail... :D
I enjoy family history research, and particularly the ease of the 21st C researching via RChat and the many indexes available online, BUT I value the days when I can spend time with original records, or at least with digitised images of those records... for it is there that the "detail" can come to the forefront....
I do not know of how I can contribute further on this thread, for it seems to me to be a mammoth task just going back to see if anyone has already considered a particular clue .... however, tis Just Moi Opinion, ;D
Hence I again add Good Searchings to you all. Cheers, JM ;)
-
Wow,
I go away for 3 days and come back to more fascinating research.
Wiggy, I am sure that all ideas and finds are helpful and your later synopsis is a great help. Perhaps adding any relevent later material to this would be useful and may be a list persons eliminated and why might be useful too.
If all else fails a new thread started withthe two synopsis and linked to this thread could be another way to go. We have uncovered too much to stop and I feel that somewhere in the dark dusty confines of our archives in either NSW or Tassie a clue leading to the sloution of this puzzle will eventually be found!!!
So frustrating that it is so hard to have the time and access to physically check all the ORIGINAL documents as microfilming and transcribing of originals may have seen some pieces of paper etc "missed"
great work all
Robyn
-
Bit more,
Just spotted two pages digitised images online commercial subscription site .... recalling somewhere on this thread there's mention of this chap, John McNally BUT please read on.... possible sighting of RANSOM on that voyage... I could well be wrong, ....
On 4 Oct 1817, a crew member named MCNALLY, (John ???) was discharged from the vessel "Macquarie" somewhere in VDL ..
The vessel was "colonial brig of Governor Macquarie" on round trip (s ???) from PJ to the Derwent and Port Dalyrmple... returning to Sydney 7 Jan 1818 or thereabouts...
At line 7 of crew list John McNally details "birth NW" (perhaps North Wales ???)...
BUT wait .... there's also a list - passengers... I cannot read it clearly, but seems to be
at line 10 Mr (could also read Mrs) RANSOM (or Ransoe) Bengallee was from the (cannot read that next word, name of a ship) & NSW discharged from the Elizabeth Henrietta (name of ship) by D Smith 29 Dec 1817....
Second page seems to be list of convicts on same voyage...
GOOD LUCK,
JM
-
Two questions araise from this:
Was this Catharine Christina as Ransom's partner or was it his first wife?
Surely she would not have been listed as Mrs Ransom if her husband McNally was on board???
so as the cheshire cat said curiouser and curiouser.
Robyn
-
To all who have been helping on this topic - I am going to lock it and start a new thread so we can find things more easily - please join in on the new thread if you have things to add to the research.
I'll call the new one Catharine Christina McNally. Kris says link it - not sure how to do this but . . .
Wiggy
Edit to show new link: Searching for origins of: MCNALLY, Catharine Christiana
« on: Today at 16:09:47 »
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,412225.0.html