Ann Daley murdered 24th july 1839

[asilky]

Thank you Neil and MJ
okay this is what I have found I was trying to put someone that knew Sarah in later years at Erina Gosford and found by accident that the witnesses on Sarahs marriage Samuel Best and Maria had their first baby at Maitland 1842 now Sarah was about 11 yrs then, could they have taken her back as a servant to Gosford as their next baby was born 1844 Erina They also married at Erina as did Sarah .Could that be the answer you gave me the idea to look for the witnesses as her guardians
maybe?
silky

[majm]

Hi Silky,

You could well be on the right track there.    Of course, I have yet to find any newspaper cutting confirming that the 8 year old witness was named Sarah.   Perhaps the child's name was not noted by the newspaper reporters, or perhaps I am not looking in the right places. 

Cheers,  JM

[asilky]

Hi Mj
I will look for it and tell you the page
silky

[asilky]

Hi Mj
  Sarah daley in search...its page 2... 6th nov 1839 the very last article on page
Murder-Its -Causes .silky

[asilky]

Hi
Just one other thing because Sarah and husband Edward were close to Samuel and Maria Best  and both lived in Erina and Bellingen Sarahs son married Samuel and Marias Daughter later in years at Gosford where they lived George and Louisa Moulding.They are on my grandmothers marriage as witnesses .
silky

[majm]

Thanks Silky

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/32166178 The Sydney Monitor and Commercial Advertiser 8 Nov 1839
and
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/31723976 The Sydney Monitor and Commercial Advertiser 6 Nov 1839

The witness was a girl aged about nine years, daughter of the murdered woman: 
“What’s your name?”   
"Sarah Daly” 
"Is your mother dead”   
“Yes”

It must have been very confronting for Sarah to appear in court, and be asked those very direct questions.   I think she was very brave.

Cheers,  JM

[asilky]

Hi mj
the poor child also losing her mother in that way .I did find another piece in trove explaining that you couldn't recognize her face as it was so badly beaten.
If that Sarah is my relative she had a sad life.But what joy it would have been when George married Louisa Best
Silky.

[asilky]

hi all
found at last on ancestry 21st oct 1829
Anne Walker Edward 7 yr bond Bathurst .(in small writing hard to read)
Approving now that there are two Anne walkers by Edward .One of whom is already married and the supposition that the present was that individual of this application conveyed in my letter 31 aug
Granted 21st Oct1829
This means that the two were mixed up when application for marriage was applied for .
Which also means that my Anne Walker  didn't marry James Fitzpatrick
It seems the age was also confused.
silky

[majm]

Hi
My Anne Daley came out under maiden name Anne Walker I have she was found guilty with husband Thomas both stealing hats 1827.Anne arrived 1829 Edward sent to Patersons plains.Daughter Sarah born 1831 Derwick Grove via Maitland I presume its near Paterson or Morpeth.On records both copies Anne and Thomas are recorded as married to each other.Dont know which Mary Kelly as it doesn't say
Silky

The Anne Walker ex the Edward in 1829 is noted at the NSW SRO’s index  “Applications to Marry”
James FITZPATRICK ex the A D Charles, aged 34, Life Sentence, on a Ticket of Leave
and
Anne  WALKER, ex the Edward, aged 28, 7 yrs sentence, on a Bond.  Date of Permission 21 Oct 1829, Rev’d J E Keane, Bathurst

Anne WALKER ex the Edward  was issued with a TL (31/757) in the Paterson Plains district, born Tyrone County, a servant, tried Monaghan.
Her CF (341204) was issued 30 September 1834.
http://srwww.records.nsw.gov.au/indexsearch/searchform.aspx?id=68

The FITZPATRICK-WALKER marriage 16 Nov 1829, Kelso or Bathurst NSW, was C of E
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/XTCY-W3N
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/XTZJ-162

NSW BDM has the 1829 marriage indexed twice. 

Thomas DALEY ex the Mangles was issued with a ToL in 1833.    as per NSW SRO Convict indexes. 

Cheers,  JM

hi all
found at last on ancestry 21st oct 1829
Anne Walker Edward 7 yr bond Bathurst .(in small writing hard to read)
Approving now that there are two Anne walkers by Edward .One of whom is already married and the supposition that the present was that individual of this application conveyed in my letter 31 aug
Granted 21st Oct1829
This means that the two were mixed up when application for marriage was applied for .
Which also means that my Anne Walker  didn't marry James Fitzpatrick
It seems the age was also confused.
silky