Please help? RANSOM Thomas 1820: MCNALLY Catharine; AMOS T: STIEGLITZ

[Wiggy]

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

[davclem]

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

[regross]

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

[majm]

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

[davclem]

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

[regross]

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

[majm]

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

[davclem]

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

[regross]

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