Australian mystery

[Mary from Italy]

Just received an Australian birth cert which I can't fathom out at all.

Arthur Inman married a widow, Sarah Allen née Holland, in Muswellbrook, NSW on 20/03/1893 (I have the cert).

Sarah already had 5 children by her first husband, John, between 1879 and 1886. He then presumably died, and she had an illegitimate child, William Reginald Allen, born in 1889 (no father named on the cert).

Arthur and Sarah had 3 children between September 1893 and 1898, when she died. I have their first child's birth cert, and there's nothing unusual in it.

I've now received the birth cert for their second child, which is really weird. The child was born in 1896, and is named as "Reginald George Holland or Inman (illegitimate)". Arthur Inman's named as his father, but under "Date of marriage" it says "not married, only living together". The informant was Sarah (who originally called herself Inman, but her surname's was altered to Holland in the register).

Sarah and Arthur were married 3 years earlier, so why was the child shown as illegitimate? They went on to have one more child before Sarah died, so they weren't separated.

If Arthur Inman is the person I think he is, he wasn't actually free to marry when he married Sarah (his first wife was still alive), so the marriage was bigamous. I suppose somebody might have found out, but as far as I know he was never prosecuted for bigamy. Anyway, if that were the case, the third child's birth cert would have presumably have shown him as illegitimate too, which it doesn't.

Can anyone think of a plausible reason for this very strange cert?

[Kit]

Maybe she only found out about the bigamous marriage around the birth of the second child and she temporarily left him.

All the children were illegitimate if he was already married. I can't imagine a mother wanting that on the child's birth cert though. Maybe someone else at the registration knew this so she had to tell the truth.

Your Aussie connections are strange though.

[marquette]

I have one for an illegitimate child - the fathers name was written in then crossed out "Details given in error, they were not married" was written by the clerk/reigstrar across the column. If I remember correctly there was not a separate column for childs surname, and the fathers was inferred/assumed unless no father was given. It sounds like it was amended at some time. Who was the informant and who was present at the birth ? Who registered the third child, Reginald ?

I can only think that someone found out or knew about Arthur not being free to marry Sarah, but was not around at the time of the third child's birth, or maybe Arthur registered the third child ?


This could be John Allen's death

10970/1885 ALLEN JOHN (father)ALEXANDER (mother) UNKNOWN MUSWELLBROOK - which might make his 1886 child posthumous or illegitimate.


A report from the Maitland Mercury Thurs 31 Dec 1885

"A man named John Allen, died on Saturday last. He had been long suffering from what is called " Internal Hemorrhage." Deceased leaves a wife and some young children." (Which means he died on Boxing Day, how sad for his family)

That's a very strange report in itself "what is called an internal hemorrhage" - why is called an internal hemorrhage ? isn't that what it was really ?




Di

[Mary from Italy]

I have one for an illegitimate child - the fathers name was written in then crossed out "Details given in error, they were not married" was written by the clerk/reigstrar across the column. If I remember correctly there was not a separate column for childs surname, and the fathers was inferred/assumed unless no father was given.

The cert is a transcription from an authorised agent, and it gives the child's christian names and surname in the name column.

Who was the informant and who was present at the birth ? Who registered the third child?


The informant was Sarah, and present at the birth was a Mrs Winsor. Mrs Winsor was also named as present at the birth of the first child, Amelia, who was registered by Arthur in 1893, just a few months after the marriage.

The third child, Arthur, was born in 1898, and registered by his father Arthur. A Mrs Cribb and Mrs Hodgers were present at the birth.

It sounds like it was amended at some time.

It does; unfortunately the transcription doesn't say when, although I do have another cert (relating to one of Arthur's first wife's children by one of her bigamous marriages) which shows the actual date when the register was changed to remove Arthur's name and show the child as illegitimate.

I can only think that someone found out or knew about Arthur not being free to marry Sarah, but was not around at the time of the third child's birth...?

I suppose that's possible, although Muswellbrook was a small place in those days (population about 1500, I think), so even if the Registrar had changed between Reginald's birth and Arthur's, you'd think word would have got round.

This could be John Allen's death

10970/1885 ALLEN JOHN (father)ALEXANDER (mother) UNKNOWN MUSWELLBROOK - which might make his 1886 child posthumous or illegitimate.

Yes, I'd seen that, thanks - so far I haven't got the cert, because I've already spent a fortune on certs for this family to try and untangle their relationships :)

A report from the Maitland Mercury Thurs 31 Dec 1885

"A man named John Allen, died on Saturday last. He had been long suffering from what is called " Internal Hemorrhage." Deceased leaves a wife and some young children." (Which means he died on Boxing Day, how sad for his family)

That's a very strange report in itself "what is called an internal hemorrhage" - why is called an internal hemorrhage ? isn't that what it was really ?

Ooh, brilliant, I'd missed that. An internal haemorrhage could be due to a lot of things, I should think. I don't think the phrase "is called" is necessarily significant, although you never know, I suppose.

[Mary from Italy]

Maybe someone else at the registration knew this so she had to tell the truth.

Yes, I think you and Di must be right about that - I can't think of any other explanation.

Your Aussie connections are strange though.

They certainly are :) The Inmans are fun to research because they're so complicated, but it's frustrating that I shall probably never find out the whole truth about them.

[Mary from Italy]

By the way, Arthur was evidently illiterate; when he registered Amelia's birth he made his mark, which was witnessed by Dr JV Foley. He also made his mark when he married Sarah. However, when he registered Arthur's birth, there's no mention on the transcription of him making his mark.

[Phoenix]

Where was Arthur's previous wife in all this? Her death would not make his bigamous marriage valid, but it would take the pressure off the situation.

Would the registrar have been the same in all three cases?

[marquette]

You should keep checking back with the NLA newspapers - they are only up to 1893 in the Maitland Mercury, which was as big a paper as the Sydney Morning Herald at that time, for information on the Inmans. Maybe that's why you did not find John Allen's death before, I am sure they have added more MM lately !!

ooh, I just found Clara Dawson's marriage notice - now I have the exact date, and Alfred's full name !


Di

[Mary from Italy]

Where was Arthur's previous wife in all this? Her death would not make his bigamous marriage valid, but it would take the pressure off the situation.

His first wife, Lydia, died in the 1940s, a few years after Arthur's death. They both married bigamously twice - Arthur married again many years after Sarah died. No idea where he was in the intervening period; I had speculated that he might have been in prison, but I haven't found any evidence of that at all. I think he probably abandoned Sarah's children after she died, because they appear to have been brought up by other people.

Would the registrar have been the same in all three cases?

No idea - the Registrar's name isn't given on the official transcriptions I have.

I'm still not 100% certain that the Arthur who married Lydia is the same one who married Sarah; this is what I'm trying to find out. I'm about 95% certain, but unfortunately his parents aren't named on the marriage cert to Sarah, and his birthplace isn't stated.

However, it's given as Bradford on the third child's birth cert, which makes it pretty certain that it's my Arthur.

[Mary from Italy]

You should keep checking back with the NLA newspapers - they are only up to 1893 in the Maitland Mercury, which was as big a paper as the Sydney Morning Herald at that time, for information on the Inmans. Maybe that's why you did not find John Allen's death before, I am sure they have added more MM lately !!


Yes, I do check every so often - I shall have to make a list of what I need to check regularly. I hadn't noticed that there was more to come for the Maitland Mercury - that should be interesting. All I've found so far for Arthur is an arrest for drunkenness in Muswellbrook.

Do you happen to know if the Armidale papers are going to be added to the site?

[marquette]

I don't know what the local Armidale paper might be - I can't see anything on the NLA of newspapers planned for 2010, unless its the Northern Star But it does say the Maitland Mercury is continuing to be added to (but only up to 1893, so that must be nearly all done).

Libby, Harry's mum, might know what the local paper is - Tenterfield's in that area.

I saw that article on the arrest of the drunken Arthur - thought it must be him. If he was the one registering the last child, perhaps the register didn't ask any questions about it.

[Mary from Italy]

I don't know what the local Armidale paper might be

The Armidale Express, which began publication in 1856.

it does say the Maitland Mercury is continuing to be added to (but only up to 1893, so that must be nearly all done).

Ah, that's a pity, I was hoping they'd go a bit further.

I saw that article on the arrest of the drunken Arthur - thought it must be him.

I'm assuming it was him; there were a couple of other Arthur Inmans in NSW, but I don't think they were in the Muswellbrook area.

[Mary from Italy]

Just looking at the newspaper coverage pages - I assume this means that the Maitland Mercury will eventually go up to 1950:

http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/title/8

[Ruthie]

Have you tried looking on Trove?

[HarrysMum]

The Armidale Express has been around since the 1850s (from memory). I'll try to get to the library tomorrow and see what we have, otherwise it will be next week.

I'll check our paper just in case. I know we have that digitised.

[Mary from Italy]

Have you tried looking on Trove?


Yes, thanks, that's where I found Arthur's conviction for drunkenness, and Di found John Allen's death. I haven't found anything else yet; the Maitland Mercury online only goes up to about 1890, but if there'd been a bigamy case, I imagine it would have made the Sydney papers.

[Mary from Italy]

The Armidale Express has been around since the 1850s (from memory). I'll try to get to the library tomorrow and see what we have, otherwise it will be next week.

I'll check our paper just in case. I know we have that digitised.

Ooh, that'd be great, thanks. If it's been digitised, do you think they'd consider putting it online?

[HarrysMum]

Ooh, that'd be great, thanks. If it's been digitised, do you think they'd consider putting it online?



Mary.................lol

I wish they'd put the library catalogue online......lol