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

[Wiggy]

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

[davclem]

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

[Wiggy]

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

[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

[davclem]

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

[davclem]

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

[majm]

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
 

[majm]

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

[majm]

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