Which William Sutton

[majm]

Attaching snip of part of a baptism record from St Johns C of E at Parramatta. 

I am doubting that Sarah's son, Phillip, was known by the surname PEMBER. 

It is possible that the burial reference is NOT for Sarah's son, but on the other hand, it may well be him, it is indexed with the year as 1852.   

.... NSW BDM has the burial as 1852 and as Volume 118, line 985,  and as Phillip MURPHY, aged 29.   

I can see on the NSW Coroner's Index that it has, in 1853, at item 7063,  listed a Phillip MURPHY, accidently Killed and that locality is likely to read 'South Creek' although Ancestry seem to have transcribed it as .... Lomsh Creek.    There is a date of 8 January (1853) associated with that entry, and the outcome of L C North's inquiry is dated 25 January 1853.   

I rarely suggest anyone seeks to obtain a copy of the Early Church Records of the NSW BDM.   They are scant on family history.    But an official transcription of the 1852 document will include the date of burial and the cemetery and the denomination, and that info may lead to searching within that cemetery for his mother, and hopefully take our OP to Sarah.

South Creek, the locality, is a former name for Rev Marsden's landholding at Mamre, near St Marys near to the NSW State Archives facilities at Kingswood.  South Creek, the water course, flows through today's St Marys and enters the Hawkesbury River near Windsor.  landholders in the early to mid 1800s would refer to South Creek in a broad sense, so quite a large district, from say Narellan, through Badgery's Creek,  St Marys, and onward north to Windsor.   

JM   

[majm]

Where on the image you have linked to support the notion that Sarah and her daughters are in Parramatta with her husband Henry, umm .... where does it actually show you and all of those following your thread ... errr ....  that Mary Ann, or Margaret or Susan were living with Sarah (their mother) and her then husband Henry.  I agree it lists Catherine.  I have already posted a snip showing Henry and Sarah with Catherine Murphy and Phillip Murphy.  I note that the image has the Porpoise as arriving 1801, not 1799.

JM

.....
In 1828 she was included in the census living at Parramatta
Murphy, Sarah, came free, Porpoise, 1799, wife of Henry Schwoles, Parramatta
Murphy, Mary Ann, 1808, born in the colony
Murphy, Margaret, 1814, born in the colony
Murphy, Susan, 1817, born in the colony
Murphy, Catherine, 1819, born in the colony children of Sarah Murphy, Parramatta
https://www.ancestrylibrary.com.au/imageviewer/collections/1224/images/CSAUS1828A_081763-0022?treeid=&personid=&usePUB=true&_phsrc=LxO748&_phstart=successSource&pId=525
/quote]

 

[maddys52]

Maybe Harriet in 1790 could have been his. Harriet of the Derwent. Mary may have been another father after William had gone. She may have stayed with her father in England as only Sarah and Harriet came with Ann to Australia. The other thing I thought was odd was the gap between Edward and Sarah. Eight years between the two and only two years to Harriet. Perhaps there was another child in that eight year gap. Not sure how we could ever find out.

I really think you need to reconsider the information I'm guessing has come from other family trees about the family of William SUTTON.

As has been discovered here, there are a few possibilities for the father of Sarah, and if you do decide that her father is the man who was convicted in 1789 at the Old Bailey then that limits his 4 children to being born before that date.

I'm not sure how you can be sure there was an Edward or a Mary?

You have mentioned a baptism of Sarah at Stepney in 1789 (reply #11), this family William SUTTON, smith, and Ann of White Row, also have a son baptised in 1791, so her father is clearly not the 1789 convict either. You need to start with the information of which you are sure and then work backwards. 

JM's find on the census that Sarah's age looks like 46 in 1828 is an excellent find! as I haven't seen any other sources with a possible year of birth for her?

[NevilleTB]

I will try and answer a few questions raised in the last few posts.

Where on the image you have linked to support the notion that Sarah and her daughters are in Parramatta with her husband Henry

This is the source. Not sure how reliable it is.
https://australianroyalty.net.au/tree/purnellmccord.ged/individual/I30642/Catherine-Murphy

I'm not sure how you can be sure there was an Edward or a Mary?

You are absolutely correct. That information comes from other trees and I cannot find any corroboration.

You have mentioned a baptism of Sarah at Stepney in 1789 (reply #11), this family William SUTTON, smith, and Ann of White Row, also have a son baptised in 1791, so her father is clearly not the 1789 convict either. You need to start with the information of which you are sure and then work backwards.

I agree. Once again, relying on other trees without corroboration.

JM's find on the census that Sarah's age looks like 46 in 1828 is an excellent find! as I haven't seen any other sources with a possible year of birth for her?

Agree. That would make her year of birth 1782. When William was convicted she was only 7. When she had a son William Wilkes in 1808, she would have been 26.

[majm]

So in fact you do NOT have Sarah on a 1828 NSW Census listing under SCHWOLES or with her daughters:  Mary Ann,  Margaret, or Susan.  The link you gave is clearly for Sarah with Henry Schooler and  Catherine and Phillip (her daughter and son).

.....
https://www.ancestrylibrary.com.au/imageviewer/collections/1224/images/CSAUS1828A_081763-0022?treeid=&personid=&usePUB=true&_phsrc=LxO748&_phstart=successSource&pId=525
....

JM  ADD  ... See my reply #68 and the attachment there, it is sourced from familysearch using a live link I provided earlier in this thread. (further add,  see #69).

[majm]

I will try and answer a few questions raised in the last few posts.

Where on the image you have linked to support the notion that Sarah and her daughters are in Parramatta with her husband Henry

This is the source. Not sure how reliable it is.
https://australianroyalty.net.au/tree/purnellmccord.ged/individual/I30642/Catherine-Murphy
....

     

That is a new link, and it is a submitted tree.   The link I questioned in your post is to  Ancestry.   

[Jomot]

I'm getting a little lost, so apologies if this has been posted/referenced already, but the attached shows Sarah Murphy of the Porpoise "wife of Henry Schooler" along with her daughters Mary Ann, Margaret, Susan & Catherine (Murphy).  The archive reference on the image is H10/20, which is the 1825 muster. 

[majm]

Thanks Jomot,   that's a huge sighting, the 1825 Muster.   Many thanks.

Also many thanks Maddy,  I was starting to doubt own eyes,  I do think that could be 46 on that 1828 Census.

JM

[Jomot]

But just to confuse things, the 1828 muster (HO10/26) has Sarah as aged 40, whereas the census says 46: