RootsChat.Com
Ireland (Historical Counties) => Ireland => Cavan => Topic started by: Garnethill on Monday 06 May 19 15:37 BST (UK)
-
My search shows their marriage in 1873 while they were at the Bailieboro Workhouse and also 3 births of 4 children (twins) while there. The last birth was 31st March 1880 but it's noted that the father, John was deceased at Drogheda while wife is still showing at Bailieboro Workhouse?
I searched and found a John Reilly deceased at Drogheda Workhouse in December 1879 but age doesn't match and also states he is a Bachelor.
My question is, does anyone know of any reason why someone (the husband only) would move or be moved from Bailieboro Workhouse to the one in Drogheda. Perhaps there was different medical care or ?
I have all the records for the above information and could post links if allowed.
I am new here and hope my post is correct and in the correct place. Thanks for any help.
-
Links are allowed and are extremely useful as others can view the ones you've found and that you are mentioning!
-
I searched Marriage results for John Reilly of Bailieboro from 1873 to 1873
No results found on Civil Reg
-
The marriage cert doesn't' say they were in the workhouse just that John was a pauper
https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/marriage_returns/marriages_1873/11271/8133948.pdf
Men and women were separated in the workhouse so it more likely Mary went to the workhouse hospital to give birth each time.
-
Then Searched
SR District/Reg Area - Bailieborough
Marriage of JOHN REILLY and MARY MACKEN on 04 June 1873
https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/marriage_returns/marriages_1873/11271/8133948.pdf
both Paupers!
So not Medical Staff which might have explained move to Drogheda!
-
The last birth was 31st March 1880 but what was child's name??
Birth results for REILLY of Bailieborough from 1880 to 1880
Displaying results 1 - 29 of 29
Posting the child's name would help.
-
It's more likely Mary never registered John's death, than he moved to Drogheda.
-
Joseph birth (attached doc) and also
The only John Reilly I could find who died at Drogheda Workhouse (attached doc).
Do you think this is him? if so, the record of his death has 2 errors, i.e. his age (according to his age at marriage it should be 50) and also the fact that he is listed as a Bachelor?
p.s. Is it better to post the pdf attachments on this Forum or the links to the records please?
-
Joseph
https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/birth_returns/births_1880/02874/2053012.pdf
so it says John deceased Drogheda.
Not Drogheda workhouse.
-
Also, a Labourer.
-
The marriage cert doesn't' say they were in the workhouse just that John was a pauper
https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/marriage_returns/marriages_1873/11271/8133948.pdf
Men and women were separated in the workhouse so it more likely Mary went to the workhouse hospital to give birth each time.
ok, I realise that the marriage cert doesn't say that. She was listed as at workhouse for the other births also (1874 and twins in 1877)
Thanks for helping.
-
Was it a workhouse then or a hospital?
-
Then Searched
SR District/Reg Area - Bailieborough
Marriage of JOHN REILLY and MARY MACKEN on 04 June 1873
https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/marriage_returns/marriages_1873/11271/8133948.pdf
both Paupers!
So not Medical Staff which might have explained move to Drogheda!
Sorry, not sure what you mean. Are you saying he would be sent to Drogheda for medical treatment rather than hospital at the Bailieboro Workhouse?
-
No....at the time I didn't know he was a Pauper!
-
Joseph
https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/birth_returns/births_1880/02874/2053012.pdf
so it says John deceased Drogheda.
Not Drogheda workhouse.
Right, but the informant was the Chief Res. Officer of the Workhouse
p.s. could you please tell me how to reply to a post without hitting the quote button?
-
No....at the time I didn't know he was a Pauper!
Sorry, I should have said. On the various bits I have gathered, they are paupers and labourers. I am new at this. I assumed, maybe wrongly, that the lived at the workhouse.
-
Hit the Reply button to Reply...
-
It looks to me like the couple lived in Bailieboro, got married, didn't have much so Mary, as many women did, goes to the workhouse to give birth, a midwife at home would have expected payment, John doing his best to provide for his family had to move around sometimes to find work and sadly died while working in Drogheda.
It's also possible he would have gone to the workhouse if he was ill before he died, if there was no room in Bailieboro he may have been sent to Drogheda, but if that was the case I would expect it would say of Bailieboro on the death cert.
-
No....at the time I didn't know he was a Pauper!
Sorry, I should have said. On the various bits I have gathered, they are paupers and labourers. I am new at this. I assumed, maybe wrongly, that the lived at the workhouse.
No problem!
We had to go looking at records to see what was on them!
-
You didn't live at the workhouse, existed would be closer to the mark, you wouldn't be allowed to live as a family at the workhouse, they did all they could be make them as uncomfortable as possible because you were costing the Union money by being there.
http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Bailieborough/
-
http://www.census.nationalarchives.ie/pages/1901/Cavan/Bailieboro/Crocknahatten/1053234/ ??
-
You didn't live at the workhouse, existed would be closer to the mark, you wouldn't be allowed to live as a family at the workhouse, they did all they could be make them as uncomfortable as possible because you were costing the Union money by being there.
http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Bailieborough/
Yes, I understand. They obviously spent some time together as did many others I noticed - who were there and had children. I don't understand why he was then able to move to Drogheda, or they moved him while his wife was pregnant and he died just before his wife gave birth. What do you think? and do you think it's just errors re his age and his marital status?
Cheers
-
Maybe he just went there to look for work??
-
Have you tried looking for her on 1901 Census?
There are possibles like this
http://www.census.nationalarchives.ie/pages/1901/Cavan/Kilnaleck/Crosserlough/1065404/
but I don't know names of children.
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01nrc/ gets all Widows aged 48 (+/- 5 yrs) in 1901
maybe she returned to her home area after husband's death???
-
Did you find a Death for Francis?
-
Is it better to post the pdf attachments on this Forum or the links to the records please?
Either.
You can post a PDF or a Linkto the PDF
Images aren't allowed apart from snippets as they breach Copyrights...
-
It may not be his death cert. You shouldn't assume he has one.
-
It's also possible he would have gone to the workhouse if he was ill before he died, if there was no room in Bailieboro he may have been sent to Drogheda, but if that was the case I would expect it would say of Bailieboro on the death cert.
I think you had to be resident in the area to stay in a particular workhouse. If there was no mention in John's admittance records then such information wouldn't appear on the death registration. There's no way of telling who gave details to the workhouse clerk so if that person thought he was a bachelor, etc. then that's what they had on file.
Don't think these links have been posted yet?
Bailieborough Workhouse- http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Bailieborough/
Drogheda Workhouse- http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Drogheda/
If you scroll down on each page and look under 'records' Guardian Minute Books are listed but not Admission & Discharge records- perhaps check National Library catalogue to see if they have them?
-
I'd be inclined to agree especially since Landlords within the Union had to pay Rates to fund them.
For example the Land Improvement Act.. I'd imagine the Landlords would "insist" that locals were employed.
https://archive.org/details/op1246509-1001/page/n231?q=Bailieborough for example
-
I had already read a lot of info on the Workhouses on the Workhouses dot org website before joining this Forum. I am slightly confused though: The rules of the workhouses seemed to say that males and females were separated. My couple that I am researching, paupers, married and had 4 children (3 births, 1 was twins) and always shown address as Bailieboro Workhouse. So, how did that work? Was the husband resident in the Workhouse and she not, but only went there to deliver her babies, or, were they both there? At one point I think they were both shown as labourers, address Workhouse. In the end, at the birth record of their last child in 1980, address is shown as Workhouse but with a notation that he had already died before the birth in another workhouse in Drogheda. So, in closing, I would like to know how it worked for a couple to marry and have children while recorded as at the workhouse?
I do appreciate all the help from everyone who responded to my post.
-
Yes...they only show there because Births were there...doesn't mean they lived there!
-
If you could tell us the names and dates of the other children we could look at the certs.
Does it say Workhouse under the father's name on each cert
or
Does it say Workhouse under the date of birth?
-
Yes...they only show there because Births were there...doesn't mean they lived there!
ok. So they may have lived in the area and the wife went there to give birth?
-
If you could tell us the names and dates of the other children we could look at the certs.
Does it say Workhouse under the father's name on each cert
or
Does it say Workhouse under the date of birth?
I think I posted all the records above. I have a record for their marriage, and 3 births of 4 children and one for his possible death in the other workhouse in Drogheda (wrong date for age and marital status is wrong too). Let me know if you need a link not found in previous posts.
Thanks for any help
-
I can only see the marriage cert and Joseph's birth cert, both of which I found my self.
Maybe it's me but I can't see even the names of the other children.
-
Yes...they only show there because Births were there...doesn't mean they lived there!
ok. So they may have lived in the area and the wife went there to give birth?
As has been said already.
I think you need to read over the thread from the start, it looks like you have missed some posts, which can happen on a busy thread.
-
I can only see the marriage cert and Joseph's birth cert, both of which I found my self.
Maybe it's me but I can't see even the names of the other children.
I don't see them either... I think you or I found one so apparently there are twins born at some time and another child but whether it was before or after I don't know,
-
Grrrrrrrrrrrr...they were born before the found one!
-
Further info: 1. I made a list of John Reilly and Mary Macken's entries that I found. I will attach it here and hope it's readable.
2. Important: My Grandfather, James Reilly in Glasgow with these parent names: I thought that he was the John Reilly twin shown on the list but using the name James. New information has come to light that James is indeed James and his brother John is found as staying at James' address in Glasgow when he married! So now, I don't understand why there is no James showing in Ireland to these parents. Both James and John in Glasgow, show the same parents names. On 18 Jul 1898 James marries in Glasgow and his age shown as 24. On 1st Jan, 1907 John marries in Glasgow and his age shown as 28, so born c1878? Since no record of a James, perhaps Patrick born 1874 was named Patrick James ... or should I look elsewhere other than Co. Cavan to find another John Reilly and Mary Macken as parents? I am not sure how to proceed now.