Convicts (1788-1868) - Family History & Genealogy Message Board

Re: Jessie/Janet Stewart

fryerning — 2009-11-22 14:55:31Z

The cemetery records for Cornelian Bay Cemetery at -
http://www.srct.com.au/search.html
Search for Johnson Jessie, then use the active arrow next to the names that come up on seach to get location details. The Z1420 identifier for permission to marry is the number of the roll of film - not available as digitised image so you need to see it at the archives office in Hobart.

Fryerning

Re: ANN SMITH/TREBLE NSW AUSTRALIA

Roger_Denham — 2009-11-22 09:29:37Z

Hi, Francis Allsop features very prominently in our tree and if you have further information that we share with each that would be great.
Roger Denham/Black/Dixon/Allsop
iconcoins@gmail.com

Re: Free Look on Convicts

squinn5 — 2009-11-22 05:06:59Z

Thank you Kellie

I do think that the Arthur Hanratty (alias Clarke) is the same as mine, I just need to figure out how he got from Norfolk Island to Melbourne, which is where the Indian Ocean arrived. The thing with the Indian Ocean, is that it does not appear to have been a convict ship and it did come from the UK. I'll keep looking into that one.

Thanks for the bit on the Arthur Andrews alias Hanratty: Appears he has another alias.(possibily)..why he couldn't keep the same name is beyond me (and it's probably why I cannot find his death). I'll be looking into that a bit more to see what else I can find to connect them all and another reason for me to check the Maitland Gaol Records.

No I did not see the actual heading of that piece in the 1863 Gazette.

Looks like all around he was just a troublesome person..(I'm being nice...)

Why do you say that Mary Hanratty was on the Edward (1)? The Index to Convicts to NSW 1788-1842 CD, has both Ellen (alias Moran) & Mary listed on the Edward and arriving on the same date (26/04/1829).

Thanks & Regards

Sandra

Re: Free Look on Convicts

Sad_Mushroom — 2009-11-22 01:06:06Z

Hi Sandra,
I read through your research,,very detailed.

Where it has Arthur CLARKE or HANRATTY in regard to per "Indian Ocean 1853" that would probably be your Arthur on his return from previous sentence.
Sometimes, for whatever reason (maybe lack of communication) when criminals were sent to Cockatoo Island (or elsewhere) on return sometimes are listed as per the ship of return.
This is also the case with John CLARKE, the father of the CLARKE Bushrangers. Even the State Archives , The Australian Dictionary of Biography, all the Bushranger sites etc ALL have John CLARKE's arrival 1825 Royal Charlotte YET John wasn't even tried (in Ireland) until 1827!!!!
He actually arrived 1828 on Morley (5)
After he did arrive he was caught stealing copper from the Government and sent to Cockatoo Island. All records after that have him arriving on the ship he returned from Cockatoo Island on.

SO, there actually looks like 2 John CLARKES and I have seen tree's of different people tracing BOTH of them,,,and yet they are the same man!!!
***************************

The NSW Police Gazette 1863 that you have the write up about HANRATTY. Did you see the heading of that piece?? The heading was "Convicts Illegally at Large" So I guess that's is why he is listed in 1863 mentioning 1856 and 1859. They are describing him in 1863 and listing his offences as he has taken off and they are looking for him.

The Eleanor HANRATTY from Edward (2) is mentioned in 1834 Gov Gaz as being a runaway that was apprehanded during the week. (looks like she ran away from the Factory ?Female?)
She also seems to be mentioned in 1832 as Ellen, as laundress to J K M'DOUGALL, Baulkam Hills.

Mary HANRATTY arrived Edward (1)

NSW Police Gazette 1864-Arthur ANDREWS alias HANRATTY convicted on 2 counts of horse stealing. From Dr. Harris and Mr OAKES both of Parramatta. Tried April 1864 at Maitland Circuit Court, sentenced to 3years hard labour at Maitland Gaol.

I fully agree that sites like Ancestry etc are missing some of the information. Whether due to being missed by transcribers, or maybe the writing was unreadable at the time..who knows!!!!
That is why I also tell people to check BDM's and Church Records after a BDM CANNOT be found on the BDM CD's. SOOO many helpers keep telling people ""that birth/death/marriage was NOT registered as it is not listed on my CD"
The CD's do NOT have all the registered BDM's on them. The CD's even state that (if anybody ever bothers to read)

That is a major reason I keep stating that people need to get MORE than one persons input. I know a few people who gave up looking after being told "on this site by helpers" that the BDM was NOT registered as it was NOT on their CD!!!!!! Most of them ended up finding the actual BDM by checking sources other than the CD.

Even trusting books/papers that were written 50 or 100 years AFTER an event is just stupid. Like with the John CLARKE saga. I have even contacted Aust Dictionary of Biography and many other places,,,,telling them when John arrived etc and that I can send copies of TOL, COF, Re-offences etc and not ONE even bothered to reply to me. I have tried many times and even though ALL those sites know their information is INCORRECT, they refuse to change it. (I think I first emailed about 4 or 5 years ago)

I don't know what is going on sometimes,,,but it's just best to check everything before taking anything as fact!!!

Kellie

Re: Free Look on Convicts

davidbarronau — 2009-11-21 23:35:42Z

It is a great learning curve at the moment, though I have been doing this for quiet awhile I have just recently started to find major errors.

I think good communication prior to swap of information is essential. In my tree I know of 1 branch that I have put somebody else's gedcom straight onto my tree(I do not normally do this). It is part of my wifes family (I am not researching this branch yet) and she isn't overly interested but the person is trustworthy in my opinion from my dealings with him but none the less if anybody requests some of that info, I will always let them know that I cannot verify the accuracy and send them to the original person.

Most people will have some people on their tree that are still to be researched properly and are their because they look right at the time. My accurate tree with all confirmed sources is a lot smaller than the one I have online, but my idea is that other researchers might happen upon some of these names on full tree (it is fairly close)and some interaction will commence.

In the end I think you have to be wary of most sources and as Kellie has mention a couple of time, more sources and cross referencing is the key.

Re: Free Look on Convicts

squinn5 — 2009-11-21 22:45:34Z

Kellie & David

Firstly, I'd like to say I'm enjoying the discussion and I agree with you both. It's amazing how many people take things from the internet and just believe what they are reading.

For every bit of information I find on the internet that someone else has posted or has provided to me directly (via email), I always double check the source and information. I have in excess of 2000 BDM Certificates that I have purchased over the years and some of which (not many though) when I have received, have realised that it's the wrong one, but I still record those as a source to show what it is that I have done. I expect that others would do the same with information that I have provided them and it rather annoys me when some claims the research or source as their own.

I remember quite a few years ago, a woman contacted me via my website about one of my lines, she stated that she only been researching her part of the tree for a couple of months. I was happy to pass on further information. A couple of months later, my uncle arrived from Brisbane for a visit and he showed me a letter he had received from her. (she used the phonebook to send out letters). Within this letter she had all of the information that I provided as well as claiming that she had been researching her tree for many years and wanted to contact others.

I also have a couple of people, though in my tree, I am yet to fully claim them as my own. For instance, I have not yet been able to find the birth of my GGG grandmother, but her death certificate stated her father was a Arthur Hanratty (you can read his story here and all of the search I have done here: http://www.ancestryhost.org/baker1865/showmedia.php?mediaID=...)

On another point: Ancesty: (I might upset people here)
Though I do have some trees on Ancestry, I am rather reluctant to use any of the information as I don't believe that the information is quite accurate and it's rather annoying that we have to pay for something that is free elsewhere. It appears that many people think that Ancestry is the be all of finding your family history, when in fact it's not: I started doing this, back in the late 80's and started by going to the library (constantly) and to the State Records Office to search microfiche & microfilm. Yes, it's good that many things are starting to come online and it's easier but why pay for something when you get it for free? For instance the NSW Bounty Scheme (1826-1842) are on Ancestry, but my Ancestor who was on the ship Wilson which arrived in 1842, is not listed on Ancestry but is listed on the Bounty Reels (I have a copy), as well as the Bounty CD (held at the State Records office), and I confirmed again from the new Online Immigration Reels that the NSW State Archives has just release online (http://www.records.nsw.gov.au/state-archives/news/online-mic...)

It makes me wonder what is really accurate and what is not.

Just my thougths for the day.

Have a nice day

Sandra

Re: Free Look on Convicts

davidbarronau — 2009-11-21 20:11:26Z

Thats why I type all my information in so my software picks up some mistakes individually but I still have a lot of checking to do on my tree at the moment. A few weeks off work would be nice. I just could not believe so many people just copied the same tree without seeing a glaring error.

The likes of my James Barron, although I have put him in my tree I am still uncertain if I have the right one so if a gave my gedcom to someone they could start the same scenario. It shows to me I better pull digit out and finish inputting my sources into my software.

Re: Free Look on Convicts

Sad_Mushroom — 2009-11-21 20:10:21Z

Hi Northline,
You are not understanding the points in the discussion.

I am not saying anything bad about you.

I don't care if you email people. Just those people could be missing out on information that others could provide. Noone is going to research thoroughly when they don't know if you have already emailed the same information or not.

IF people want "private" information then let them pay someone to do their research (or do it themselves) and they can keep it private.

We all know the problems with people copying from trees etc,,,but these boards are NOT a tree. These Boards are to connect, get help/advice and share information.

Really and honestly go back and read the posts again.
Nothing I said was directed at you. They were general comments from my point of view.

Keep doing your research and helping.
There is no resaon you should stop.

Kellie

Re: Free Look on Convicts

Sad_Mushroom — 2009-11-21 19:57:11Z

Hi David,
I know what you mean..
In my tree I have a fellow born Scotland died Australia.
Every other tree (a heap of them) has this man died 1881 and his parents listed from the 1881 death on NSW BDM. They then have followed him back to Scotland, with those parents, and gone back a few hundred years. Of course this death date gives him a different date of birth and place of birth. (one of them purchased the death cert)

I have the cemetery photo's for this man who is buried next to his wife and he died in 1907,,of course with DIFFERENT parents listed than those on the 1881 death. His immigration records show his date and place of birth as different from those the other tree's have listed.

So even though someone purchased a death cert,,it was the wrong one and now all those that copied this tree have gone back hundreds of years following the wrong family.

Noone has bothered to check or confirm any of the information. They have used one source for the basis of their information and not bothered to check otherwise.

What is worse is they don't even know it.

It is actually very common.
There are hundreds of trees on Ancestry alone with children being born years BEFORE their parents were born!!!!

Kellie

Re: Free Look on Convicts

davidbarronau — 2009-11-21 08:54:18Z

It is funny you mention incorrect information as I have just been looking at some information on Cecil Mervyn Archdale and have found 155 tree on Ancestory.com (I cannot access them because I havent subscribed yet, soon though) and it appears over half of these trees have his dates incorrect by 500 years.

Re: Free Look on Convicts

northline — 2009-11-21 06:22:57Z

I have been doing my reseach for the past 2 years.
I have been able to dig up info that my other family members for been unable to find. Most of them have been doing it over 20 Years.
Most of my family are spread all the way down the south coast. Some of the info that i have found on websites,have been wrong as well.Dates for Deaths,marriages and other general info. I do not mean the one that you are on Sad Mushroom,but if i find wrong info, i will let you know.
All i was trying to do was help people.
Also some people do not like sharing info as well,that's why i said about emails.
I have shared info to others and got nothing in return.
or put it up on websites,only to have others claim my info as their own.

Henry Shoulders - Convict Ship: Planter 1832 - Family

squinn5 — 2009-11-21 05:28:56Z

Hi all

Wondering if anyone has access to the convicts families who arrived. I'm not sure if they are on CD or not but I think are on microfiche, otherwise I will wait until I go to the library in a few weeks to check. What I would like to know is if the family of Henry Shoulders came out to Australia with him and if possible the names of the children.I have a 'John Shoulders" (b1816 - 1858)and according to his death certificate he had been in the colony for 26 years which would makes his arrival to be around 1832, the same year that Henry arrived and no they were not the same person. (confirmed by the fact that Henry died in 1865 and John in 1858). I'm thinking that the possibility that they are father & son but I can't be sure.

Information that I have on Henry are:

When Henry arrived in 1832 he was listed as married with 1 male and 4 female children and aged 36.

He was convicted of Stealing Straw and given a life sentence due to a former conviction. (Sussex Quarter Sessions). In the 1837 muster, he was listed as being 39 years old. Henry was given a ticket of leave 9th January 1841 and 'allowed to remain in the District of Muswellbrook on the recommendation of the Muswellbrook Bench'. Henry was given a conditional pardon in 1848 and on the pardon he was as being married with 4 children. Henry died in 1865 at Muswellbrook (NSWBDM: 4782) and I think married a Rose Harris in 1857 at Port Stephens (NSWBDM: 2528).

Thanks

Sandra

Re: Free Look on Convicts

Sad_Mushroom — 2009-11-21 01:37:06Z

Hi,
If you search for them you should be able to find where they were sent to.
Ancestry has lists of convicts transported and there are alot of other free sites online.

Once you know where/which state they were sent to, ship and approx date of birth you should be able to follow them yourself.

NSW State Records
http://www.records.nsw.gov.au/

NSW BDM
http://www.bdm.nsw.gov.au/familyHistory/searchHistoricalReco...

Tasmanian Archives
http://portal.archives.tas.gov.au/menu.aspx?search=8

Those should cover most of your query.
When posting a query it is best to include as much info as possible and not to post such a large list of names just on one post.

Kellie

Re: Free Look on Convicts

davidbarronau — 2009-11-21 00:35:32Z

Ta Kellie
The register search was a good one. I have actually received some photos of a lot of those graves sites (another good reason for me to go down there). Ulladulla site is on my favorites and I keep going back periodically to check. Going to check out Ulladulla while I am down that way as well, more for the fishing and sight seeing than anything else.

I have actually recently made contact with some of James's great grandchildren but no one in the family had any information on James and Mary but at least they can fill a few other gaps and give me some good stories on goldmines, bushrangers etc.

David

Re: Free Look on Convicts

Sad_Mushroom — 2009-11-20 23:51:35Z

Hi David,
The Shoalhaven Cemeteries
http://shoalhaven.public-cemeteries.net/cms/index.php/help-a...

Has a section where you can click on a name and apply for more information,,online. Maybe contact them and see what other information is available for members you think maybe connected.

A good look at
http://www.ulladulla.info/history/
might help.

I would be follow the James on Norfolk too...He seems the most likely..

Kellie

Re: Free Look on Convicts

davidbarronau — 2009-11-20 22:35:35Z

Info I have so far,

Barron, James, age 30, 11 Jan 1830 29 May 1830 Lord Melville Convicted at - Warwick - 14 years, Master was Major M Morris of Gundaroo district - CFNo 45/0877 - 7 Jul 1845 Seems to old at time of arrival to start family in 1842 especially if Emma was part of same family, she was born in 1851

Barron, James, age 28, 14 Jul 1835 27 Oct 1836 Norfolk Convicted at - Northampton Assizes- 7 years, Master was J H Broughton, of Paterson district. - CFNo 43/1699 - 14 Oct 1843
NSW BDM- Marriage
V1847241 32C/1847 BARON JAMES to FOOTE MARY at Church of England Mulgoa, St Thomas.

I also have yet to purchase a death cert, 13356/1884 BARRON JAMES AGE 80 YEARS DIED SHOALHAVEN I have been a little slack.

There seems to be quiet a few discrepancies in the dates, hopefully when I start to get a lot of my own information rather than data from you kind folk it might all come together. The Mary Holly information is new to me, thank you. Yet another Mary to confuse me even more. I think I will follow Norflok JB through first and see where it takes me.
Thanks Kellie
David

Re: Free Look on Convicts

Sad_Mushroom — 2009-11-20 21:53:36Z

Hi again,
The other James from Lord Melville was born abt 1804. He applied to marry Mary Holly in 1843 and it was refused.

He was from Birmingham, occupation was ploughman/shepherd..LOL he was 5' 6/7, ruddy complexion, brown hair, grey eyes, small scar on nose, horizontal scar under right side of mouth, raised mole inner part of left eyebrow, LOL
He had a TOL by 1841 but had absented the area, so I guess that might be why he was refused his application to marry.

Kellie

Re: Free Look on Convicts

Sad_Mushroom — 2009-11-20 21:21:54Z

Hi again,
From NSW BDM- Marriage
V1847241 32C/1847 BARON JAMES to FOOTE MARY at Church of England Mulgoa, St Thomas.

This is the only marriage for a James BARON/(variants) to a Mary from 1830 to 1850. The convict application to marry states this James to be the James BARRON that arrived Norfolk. (The application to marry in 1847 lists him as 37yo and Mary as 31yo)

Re: Free Look on Convicts

davidbarronau — 2009-11-20 21:12:56Z

Not at this stage Kellie, I have found a lot of places that may have relevant data, Nowra Library, Shoalhaven Family History Society etc so though I am still throwing feelers out on free sites I have resigned my self to having to start spending a few bucks.

I an signing up to Ancestry finally and have already booked holidays in Nowra next September.

Am a bit worried that the more research I do I might find another James Barron as well, was a fairly common name. I am fairly confident that James arrived per the Norfolk in 1837 is the right one thru cross referencing with all tidbits of information.
David

Re: Free Look on Convicts

Sad_Mushroom — 2009-11-20 20:53:27Z

Hi David,
I have seen your site and your indecision with the 2 men.
Are you any closer to sorting the two out??

Kellie

Re: Kenny Convicted 1791 Co. Carlow

dogracer46 — 2009-11-20 19:21:14Z

yes but can you contact me at my e mail dogracer46@hotmail.com

Re: Free Look on Convicts

Provence84 — 2009-11-20 16:09:40Z

I am interested in the fate of these men from Suffolk who were transported to Australia jn 1836 John Jacob and George Hayward for life Samuel Finbow, Robert Girling, Walter Rayner, William Martin and James Morley for fourteen years, , and James Lay, Robert Larter and Robert Soames for seven years each.

Re: Kenny Convicted 1791 Co. Carlow

sarahekenny — 2009-11-20 12:28:04Z

I am so pleased to hear from you John!

Do you know any details in particular so that we can try and match the families up?

Re: Free Look on Convicts

davidbarronau — 2009-11-20 08:00:44Z

Hi Kellie
At this stage I have more resources to check etc than actual information. My information that I have on that branch at the moment is mostly via free internet sights apart from a few birth cert from James's son and grandson.

I have been doing this research for quiet a few years but very limited hours. I am always looking for advise and information. There have been a few bucks spent but at this stage most of my information has come via the free net. Now looking at starting to spend money so now asking where best to spend it.

I was never having a go at you. You have been quiet constructive and I have read and understood your viewpoint. With direct emails I also agree as it deprives others of valuable info, some times direct emails can help others in the right direction without infringing on copyright etc as long as info is limited. I do not thing any body in the genealogy community would be stupid enough to use information as gospel without confirmation from other sources (maybe I am gully able). I for one will definitely put it back out on the net after more research.

Regarding sources I am now going through a lot of pain trying to tie up all my resouces to individuals (inexperience can make a lot of work)and looking out for new software with a better setup for sources. No I do not have copy of application to marry that information came from a few people awhile ago(all these are on the forums of ancestry, genforum, rootsweb etc), until I have confirmed that I have got the correct James I have not spent money there. As stated before I have run into a brick wall on the free net.

I was not trying to start a major slang match and "pull your head in" was not directed at you, it was more generic at self righteous genealogist who bag others rather than try and help them with etiquette etc.
David

Re: Kenny Convicted 1791 Co. Carlow

dogracer46 — 2009-11-19 21:29:05Z

hi john kenny here trying to trace family ancesstors in Austrailia Names John and James im from Carlow ireland

Re: Free Look on Convicts

Sad_Mushroom — 2009-11-19 20:18:27Z

Hi David,
I agree with alot of what you have said but I think you are missing my point.
First I think when someone else mentioned you 'claiming work as your own' wasn't meaning YOU would actually do it,,but if you are not provided with the 'source' of the information then you cannot provide the source so that others know where the information actually came from.

That was why I asked could you post the 'sources' of your information.
Providing sources is a major part of genealogy. That way others can see and confirm,, comparing to their information. YOU can confirm the information sent to you.
ALSO other people may be able to find different information and you would need BOTH sources to work out which is correct.

I have seen people arrive in Australia on one list stating they are 54yo and the same arrival on another list has them at 29yo. A husband has his wife listed as Elizabeth on one list and then as Lillian and the same list but from a different source.

You need more that ONE person to give you information for you to be able to take it as FACT, no matter what the source. You need a variety of input from people and sources to be able to claim anything as FACT.

By using this email replying business, you are depriving yourself of one of the main rules of genealogy.

Also, there is more than one James BARRON in NSW at that time.
I actually transcribe for the Monaro area,,including Nowra/Berrima etc and may have information that could help you,,BUT I am NOT going to sit here reading over lists and searching databases,,then typing it all out when you may already have the information. How do I know??
IF replies were posted to the board I would be able to see what you have been sent and could probably fill in some gaps.

I guess you have exhausted your avenues as you limit your intake of research.
Some of us have been doing this genealogy so long we had to chase dinosaurs for dinner. So why limit yourself to replies from one single, quite new researcher???
Not saying anything bad about Northline, but her resources are limited, her knowledge is limited and she appears quite new to the game..
ALL cheers to her for helping,,,everything is a step forward. Credit where credit is due. I agree totally!!

I am trying to be constructive. I usually try.
There is just reasons why things are usually done a certain way and this is because it works, better for YOU!!

LOL,, and you cannot really tell people to be constructive and friendly when you are telling someone to ""pull your head in""

By the way, CAN you post the resources to your information you received? I noticed that keeps being avoided...
Oh, and do you have a copy of the application to marry??

Kellie

Re: Free Look on Convicts

davidbarronau — 2009-11-19 08:29:31Z

I feel that some very valuable points may have been raised with this little fiasco here, but maybe a little like DESTRUCTIVE criticism rather than constructive. Northline might have appeared to be a little behind the scenes with emails etc but with my dealings with her I have found her to be very careful with what information is given. She has pointed in the right path on where to purchase CD's and books directly related to the information I am looking for.

As far as initiative goes, I have exhausted most avenues on this branch on the free or cheap side (agents etc) and and now looking at spending money. Where to spend it is a nice place to start, Northline has helped me.

Passing off results as my own ..... pull your head in .... I give credit where it is due. People are all different and have different reasons for doing genealogy and many varied time and or money restraints so can we all please be friendly and helpful. Be constructive.
David

Re: Free Look on Convicts

Sad_Mushroom — 2009-11-17 20:01:27Z

Hi Liz,
Seems like the WELLICK might be the clue.
A Charles WELLICK of Ravenswood, Queensland was issued a Billiards License 6th SEPT 1879 and a Retail Spirit Dealers License 2nd AUG 1879.

Will send that through.
Kellie

Re: Free Look on Convicts

Sad_Mushroom — 2009-11-17 19:51:41Z

Hi Liz,
The deaths are listed in Charters Towers, Brisbane Queensland. They were Intestate notices (died without a will) that were printed in Government Gazettes. It is all probably the same Charles as they had to keep records of the money they either got in or paid out in regards to the death.

I have been checking each state in Australia and New Zealand, after 1871.
No marriages in NZ and only 4 deaths from 1911 to 1959.
http://bdmhistoricalrecords.identityservices.govt.nz/search/

Nothing in Western Australia.
http://www.bdm.dotag.wa.gov.au/_apps/pioneersindex/default.a...

No marriages in South Australia 1842-1916.
Nothing in Victoria 1889 to 1920.
The only births in New South Wales in 1901, no deaths to 1978, no marriages.
http://www.bdm.nsw.gov.au/familyHistory/search.htm

There is alos no war records etc on National Archives.
www.naa.gov.au

It appears the only place WELLOCK is mentioned really is in Queensland. Definately the only place a Charles WELLOCK is mentioned.

Although there are no births from 1871 to 1914, no marriages 1871 to 1929, 1 death of the WELLOCK 1882. (The death cert probably wouldn't have anything on it,,as the online search shows nothing)

There are WELLOCK on the Electoral Rolls but they begin in 1931 in Victoria and 1954 for New South Wales.
There are mentions of WHELLOCK,,,might have to check them out!!

Hold on,,,there is an arrival for C WELLICK ?? to NSW, 21st SEPT 1876, from Brisbane, Queensland on Governor Blackall.

I'll check again for WHELLOCK and WELLICK just incase there has been an error.

Kellie

Re: Free Look on Convicts

lizanddaviduk1 — 2009-11-17 10:50:02Z

I have tried some searches from the links you gave, no luck so far, except for the 1882 death record - presumably I could order a copy of that, but I am assuming it isn't going to tell me very much - is that right, not sure what other informaiton goes on to Australian death records! However, I'll keep trying. Do you have the date of death for the Charles Wellock whose death record you found? Is he the 1882 guy? Do you know where Charters Towers is?
Thanks again
Liz

Re: Free Look on Convicts

lizanddaviduk1 — 2009-11-17 10:00:33Z

Thanks for that info Kellie - I will follow it up. I had all but given up on finding anything about him but this looks promising, as Wellock is quite an unusual surname

Liz

Re: Jessie/Janet Stewart

mabelharvey1 — 2009-11-17 06:32:46Z

To Fryerning

Thanks very much for your help with Jessie.

I had looked on the Tasmaniana Archives some time ago but obviously they have been updated.

I had found the Con 40 document on Ancestry and from that had actually been able to work out that Janet Stewart 227 was my lady given that they had noted her indiscretions under her married name of Johnson as well. It made interesting reading and sounds like she was very "spirited" both by nature and in behaviour. I hadn't however previously found mention of here age and so much discription about here and now also know that although she was tried in Glasgow she is recorded as being from Edinboro.

II wasn't as yet able to locate the Permission to Marry rrecord on Z1420 that you quote but will have a look latter unless you are able to give me a link in the mean time.

Aalso whould you be able to tell me what the source was for Jessie JOhnson's burial as I would love to be able to have a look at it and see if I can find more from this line of enquiry.

Once again thanks heeps for your help. I do have a few resources for New Zealand and go back there from time to time if you have ancestors over there that you are requireing info on and would be happy to help.

Cheers Mabel

Re: Jessie/Janet Stewart

mabelharvey1 — 2009-11-17 00:43:46Z

Hi Christina,

thank you very much for your reply, however this appears to be a totally different Jessie/Janet Stewart than the two Janet/Jessie Stewarts that arrived in Tasmania in 1832 on the Hydery.

Mabel

Re: Free Look on Convicts

Sad_Mushroom — 2009-11-16 23:52:25Z

Hi,
There is a Charles WELLOCK that died intestate in Charters Towesr QLD..His age and birth place we unknown.

On QLD BDM it lists a WELLOCK that died 1882 aged 30yrs, born South Seas father WELLOCK. (obviously noone knew this Charles enough to fill in details)

(I am not sure if both listings are the same man or not)

A Charles WELLOCK registered a cattle brand in Ravenswood QLD 7th July 1887, and transferred it 11th Oct 1895.

Maybe checking QLD BDM
https://www.bdm.qld.gov.au/IndexSearch/BirIndexQry.m
or
QLD Indexes
http://www.archives.qld.gov.au/research/indexes.asp

Kellie

Re: Free Look on Convicts

Sad_Mushroom — 2009-11-16 23:14:41Z

Hi Northline,
I didn't say you were,,,,just that alot of people in here do..That is why the boards are supposed to be message boards and not email advertisements for lookups.

I was only providing some upfront main reasons (from my point of view) to David, as to why these 'select' threads with email replies are not only not thoroughly helpful to the poster, but of no value to other members who may be connected.

I think it is good you are trying to help people, but why help one person a bit, when you could help that person more by posting your replies so we could all chip in information you have missed OR help a heap of people who are looking for the same convict??

I have read your posts too and the ones with information have no links to point people in the right way. IF most of your info comes from the internet, why not post the links for them to follow?
I really don't understand when you have to reply by email and not post on the thread. Especially when you have stated """My Norwa books,have now turned up.
Can i grab your email addy as there is numerous data on your family."""
That is NOT copying (in any way)from books/CD's???

Really, keep doing your lookups and enjoy what you do.
Sometimes you just have to grow a tough skin in these types of sites.

Kellie

Re: Free Look on Convicts

northline — 2009-11-16 22:45:06Z

Hi
I have been reading your post.
i would like to say,that i get most of my info on the internet.
I try to point people in the right way.
i do have a lot of resource books and C'DS,and i do not copy them in any way. I do not break the law.
All iam trying to do is help people.

Re: Free Look on Convicts

northline — 2009-11-16 21:40:42Z

Hi All
After reading the current posts,i am appalled.I have a reading and writing problem. But its people like you that make it worse.
All i have tried to do is help,my hubby is 100% behind me. He loves me for who iam.
No wonder people are like they are now,not wanting to help other people.
After today i will not be offering my services.
Thank you Julleigh,for your uncalled comments.

Re: Free Look on Convicts

Sad_Mushroom — 2009-11-16 20:48:13Z

Hi Dave,
Don't get me wrong,,I am not saying anything about Northline.

I actually have NO convict CD's to do lookups. ALL my replys about convict stuff comes from databases online, mostly free ones.
As far as immigrants to Australia, convicts are probably the easiest as their details were so well documented. You just have to know where to look.

My comments about these 'select' threads would be clear if you checked some of the other 'select' threads. They are fine at first but the Original starter usually disappears in time so you end up with endless people still posting (for years) then us regulars have to jump in and try to sort them all out.
Also, people like me don't usually like coming into someone elses 'select' thread,,so information we may have never get posted. Then with the email replies etc, we have no idea what information was sent,,,so we don't chip in our information which MAY just be the clue someone is looking for.

The other thing that worries me with replies by email is that some of the information being sent may be from copyrighted sources,,,and UNLESS that is explained fully to the recipient, then they may use that information (unknowingly) in a way that may see them in serious legal trouble. That is usually why people prefer to email the information,,,because they are using copyrighted material that they CANNOT post in here without suffering the consequences.

Posting information in a thread not only helps you, but anyone else who may be looking for the same person. Sending it by email means that others are missing out.
Posting where the information came from helps others to help themselves.
Giving you the information may help you and satisfy you BUT giving you the link etc from where the information came from means you can search for other information connected and further your own research.

The information on CD's is limited and not all information is online free. What if your convict re-offended in Australia?? Would you like to know?? What if he/she was given a land grant!!! What if he/she owned a business!!
What if he/she deserted the family!! Maybe remarried in another state!!!

That is the information that SOME people in these email reply threads will be missing out on. Some of us have access to those details BUT there is no point in spending a few hours searching and typing when we have no idea if it was already emailed or not.

ON an off note,,you may find some people that do the email replying thing,,recommending where to purchase CD's/books etc because they are 'affiliates' of the companies providing them. Which means they gets a small % off everything that you buy. Problem is,,ALOT of that stuff will be freely available online at no cost to you at all.
That is why it is all done by email. As if they did it in a thread their posts would be removed.

To prove my point I would like to ask where the information provided to you came from..NOT the information itself,,but the actual SOURCE of the information. Do you feel confident enough that you could provide the sources??

Kellie

Re: Free Look on Convicts

Julleigh — 2009-11-16 10:18:18Z

Hi
I have been more than a "litle" amused by reading some of Northline attempts in which questions have been answered by more questions. Still I gues for those with little initative any help is help and the results can always be passed of as the recipients work. DIY is much more interesting.

Re: Free Look on Convicts

davidbarronau — 2009-11-16 09:45:16Z

I was just having a read of this thread and am a little amused. I have found Northline to be very helpful and has offered information (data) as well as where I could purchase relevant CD's & books with there titles etc. that have a lot of material that will be useful to my search.

Some of us do not have enough time to really get into this genealogy as much as we would really like to so we do rely on people to give us a hand or a push. With that said do not underestimate our passion.

Thanks again Northline for your assistance.
Dave

Re: Free Look on Convicts

davidbarronau — 2009-11-15 18:26:20Z

I noticed you now have my email address Vicki.
Thanks
David

Re: Free Look on Convicts

northline — 2009-11-15 11:34:34Z

Hi
My Norwa books,have now turned up.
Can i grab your email addy as there is numerous data on your family.

Take care
Vicki

Re: Jessie/Janet Stewart

fryerning — 2009-11-14 08:18:05Z

Hello,
The Permission to Marry records are on film Z1420 in the archives, and give the convicts number with the name. Janet Stewart #227 (that's Glasgow Janet) marries Robert Johnson #194.
Janet Stewart #228 (that's Perth Janet) marries Richard Groves #486.
Jessie Johnson of New Town is buried in a paupers grave at Cornelian Bay Cemetery 16 Nov 1901, age 87 yrs. If the age is correct, she is born ~1814.

http://search.archives.tas.gov.au/ImageViewer/image_viewer.h...

Fryerning

Re: Thomas Jones - convict from Wales

Julleigh — 2009-11-14 07:19:21Z

Hi K and K
The answer Kate is looking for lies in what/how her grandfather told her the story. I have a thing about words. Alone they convey a meaning, their choice conveys much more.
Grandfather had said the family "was sent out with him ( the convict)". "With" is obviously incorrect, critical is "sent out". Not came or arrived or immigrated but "sent out" just as the husband had been and clearly by the same authority. As said this can only have been at the request of the convict.
Kate, if the reference I gave you is only half as good as it seems, finding your GGGG? grabdfather in a quite restricted field should be easy and if successful would give you his wife's name and any siblings of Thomas junior. With this lead back into the Cardigan family - marriage of Thomas senior, you are on your way to 17th century. I know I have done it.
Regards Denis

Re: Thomas Jones - convict from Wales

Sad_Mushroom — 2009-11-14 04:50:58Z

Hi Kate,,
I couldn't find anything positive in the 1895 QLD Electoral Rolls but in 1903 there is a
Thomas JONES (might be his son)a labourer, at 173 Alfred Street, Brisbane,,polling place Fortitude Valley.

also Thomas John JONES, Francis Street, Bulimba, Brisbane,,polling place Fortitude Valley..(a vanman)

This is way to late for Thomas,,,but at Bulimba Cemetery (just incase it fits with something else)
Ada NICKSON d.25 JUL 1959 aged 72years. My son our brother Thomas JONES 7th FEB 1967 aged 44yrs; also our mother and grandmother Nellie JONES 14th DEC 1977 aged 87yrs.

There are quite a few JONES at Bulimba but not all have inscriptions.
There are a few at Toowong,,but no dates suitable for your Thomas.

There are a heap of Thomas JONES that left wills etc 1859-1900...If you have the dates of the 3 you think may be him,,I might be able to narrow it down.

There are just so many of them.
Will see what other QLD stuff I have.

Kellie

Re: Thomas Jones - convict from Wales

Julleigh — 2009-11-14 04:15:11Z

Hi Kate and Kellie
Sorry about that 1.49/1.52 - thought I hadn't and made sure I had.
Going out on a limb - Kate I believe the story of your grandfather with one difference which is that the family didn't arrive with him but later. That the convict was not Thomas 1832 but his father and that the family arrived as a convict's family at government expense. If this is so the records should provide definite evidence or at least reduce the field a lot.
Had a quick look around and found the site:-
//investigator.records.nsw.gov.au which describes a file NRS1190 - a list of convict applications and details of their families arriving from 1837 onwards. It is not on-line but on film held by the NSW authority - it did say where but I didn't note it, couldn't go there anyway.
Kellie do you see any chance of finding a researcher who could?
Cheers Denis

Re: Thomas Jones - convict from Wales

Katkinkate — 2009-11-14 03:17:37Z

Hi Kellie,
Yeah, the quarryman is my g.g.granddad. He was in partnership with his wife's (Catherine) relative Stephen Hamil (Hammill) in the quarry business. (I'm not sure if he's a brother, cousin, or an uncle, but I know he's not her father.) I'm sure as far back as the quarryman, but I can't find his mother's name: their marriage certificate didn't have information on parents and there are 3 possible candidates for death records in the Qld Registry and I'm steeling myself to buy 3 death certificates (over $100) hoping one of them is mine and has some further information on it.

There's so many possibilities. His son and g.grandson were both amateur gold prospectors. Who knows, maybe they got the bug from the quarryman who headed of to Ballarat chasing gold and died there instead!

Thank you for your help, Kellie.

Regards,
Kate.

Re: Thomas Jones - convict from Wales

Katkinkate — 2009-11-14 03:02:12Z

Thanks Denis,

Yeah, the Welsh records are a dead end. Even if I knew Thomas's (1832) mum's name, she's probably not recorded under her maiden name. There's so many with just first names or just Mrs Jones. So frustrating!

I've had a go at the Immigration records and found no really good matches, nothing definite. There's a few possible families, but their religion's usually CofE or Protestant, while my family's Roman Catholic. I'm surprised actually at how rare catholics were in general, but I suppose I shouldn't be.

The other possibility I've thought of is if Thomas snr was actually [Some other first name] Thomas (that wasn't recorded) Jones. I'll keep looking. Thanks for your helpful suggestions.

Regards,
Kate.

Re: Thomas Jones - convict from Wales

Sad_Mushroom — 2009-11-14 02:54:14Z

Hi Kate,
Between all the different sites with convict records,,,,they are pretty accurate and very valuable.
The problem is,,there are just soooo many Thomas JONES to choose from.
Collecting all of them,,,from Wales,,,IF you are sure it is the one from Wales,,,then following them until you narrow them down is about the only way to go. (barr purchaing all certs etc)

I was looking into other stuff and Thomas JONES was a quarryman, in Jane St..(I think he may have lived on a corner,,or moved round the corner,,or maybe even the street names merged/changed, as I think I can follow him)

Are you sure you traced back correctly or maybe tried to match things up with grandpa's story???

Who is the closest person to you (in that line) that you know for a fact is the right person??
Maybe if a few of us follow it back (using all our different resources) we will either come to the same conclusion and know for sure,,OR,,come up with different endings that will open more options..

Kellie

Re: Thomas Jones - convict from Wales

Katkinkate — 2009-11-14 02:37:06Z

Hi Julleigh,

Thanks for replying. Sorry it took me so long to get back to you. I've been drowning in Thomas Jones for a few weeks now and getting nowhere. I'm starting to doubt anything my granddad told me.

I was hoping I had a smarter, more genealogically-devoted cousin out there somewhere that had already looked into all this and had figured it out, but thank you for confirming it's probably not Thomas (b.1832). There's only one probability I could find for his father, but there's no way to confirm he's the right one, or granddad's stories are false, or some records are missing. Do you know how complete the convict records we have available are?

Regards, Kate.