Author Topic: Margaret LEGASS of Sutton Forest, 1834.  (Read 3265 times)

Offline majm

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 25,385
  • NSW 1806 Bowman Flag Ecce signum.
    • View Profile
Re: Margaret LEGASS of Sutton Forest, 1834.
« Reply #18 on: Saturday 17 December 16 00:29 GMT (UK) »
From the NSW Archives guide linked earlier :

No free land grants after 1831

In a despatch dated 9 January 1831, Viscount Goderich instructed that no more free grants (except those already promised) be given. All land was thenceforth to be sold at public auction (HRA 1.16.22) and revenue from the sale of land was to go toward the immigration of labourers. Likewise the practice of granting land as "marriage portions" to the children of colonists was discontinued (HRA 1.16.353, 793). The new regulations were notified in a Government Notice of 1 July 1831 and published in a Government Order dated 1 August 1831.

Following this, land was sold by public auction without restrictions being placed on the area to be acquired . After 1831 the only land that could be made available for sale was within the Nineteen Counties. This restriction was brought about to reduce the cost of administration and to stem the flow of settlers to the outer areas



Argyle was one of those 19 Counties.  The only option available at that time for a person to become the first 'owner' of that Crown Land was to buy it at a Public Auction.  If you look at the other notices in that same section of that particular Govt Gazette you will see that 5 shillings per acre was the usual offering.   John Coffey was simply following the 'rules' of the day as set down by the Colonial Office (in London)  and administered by the NSW Governor and his (non elected) Legislative Council.

JM
The information in my posts is provided for academic and non-commercial research purposes. 
Random Acts of Kindness Given Freely are never Worthless for they are Priceless.
Qui scit et non docet.    Qui docet et non vivit.    Qui nescit et non interrogat.   
All Census Look Ups Are Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
I do not have a face book or a twitter account.

Offline Roses254

  • RootsChat Pioneer
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Margaret LEGASS of Sutton Forest, 1834.
« Reply #19 on: Tuesday 10 October 17 13:46 BST (UK) »
Good evening

I have just discovered that Margaret Legass is my g.g.grandmother and reading there posts has been wonderful.
However if Margaret was born in 1807, arrived Sydney 1832 (25) married in 1834 and died in 1906 ... wouldn't she be 99 and not 94 as stated on the death notice?
Might she have been born in 1812 and was only 21 when she arrived in Sydney, to match her 94 years of age when she passed away?

I look forward to searching and researching this new ancestor, discovered via DNA ...


Offline Jaguars!

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 5
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Margaret LEGASS of Sutton Forest, 1834.
« Reply #20 on: Wednesday 11 October 17 21:51 BST (UK) »
Hi Roses,

What I found when I did this research is that the ages on the records are not always accurate. People forgot, or fudged their age for all sorts of reasons (Brides deducting a couple of years to look younger than their husband seems to be a common one.) Death certificates are particularly bad because they are filled out by relatives who might not know all the information. One of her grand daughters has three different ages between the birth, marriage and death certificates!

It's probably best to use dates from the earlier records. I think the emmigration record is best since Margaret herself supplied the date and there is no reason for her to change it.

If you're on Ancestry.com, someone has created a huge and very solid family tree with lots of pictures and records. IIRC, it's labelled the 'Bowtell-Stokes' Family tree. They thought that Margaret was most likely from the foundling home in Cork, but I had to stop there and haven't had the time to research further (much as I would like to ;D). It does mean that what she thought was her age might not be accurate either and she might not have had a birth certificate.