RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Suffolk => Topic started by: Roy G on Sunday 06 November 11 20:29 GMT (UK)
-
A book about the life, Eliza(beth) Haryett, born in Brighton in 1823, says she spent her youth (c1828-c1838) in Great Yarmouth. By 1839 she had run away with a Jockey (Jem Mason) and was living in London. Her parents (Joseph and Elizabeth Haryett, also born Brighton 1804) are believed to have remained in the area and actually turn up on the 1861 census in High Street (Road?) Mutford, Gorleston, Suffolk. They are listed as Joseph Hargett decorator of Brighton and wife Elizabeth. RG9/1189/140
I am trying to find the parents in that area on the 1841 & 1851 censuses but I believe they may have been incorrectly indexed or used false names. I have found no evidence of them ever changing their first names or Brighton as a place of birth, so wonder if there is any possibility of tracing them with such limited information? Roy G
-
Noticed a tree (yours, perhaps?) on Ancestry showing the illustrious career of Elizabeth jnr - what a fascinating story she would have had to tell!
Will post on here if I can find anything useful for you.
Regards,
GS
-
Thanks GS, I know the tree, but it's not mine.
The problem is that Eliza was a successful working class groupie who mingled with the aristocracy and was free with her favours. During her rise from mistress to Countess she created a false past and many historians have been suckered into retelling her story as she told it. I'm after the truth, especially as she appears to have had a second child (perhaps by Napoleon III) who gets baptised in 1847, and then disappears from the records. That's why I would like to find her parents in 1851, for it is my belief that they returned from Suffolk to Brighton falsely proclaiming the child was theirs and left again. They were not new to this practice because four years earlier they pretended Eliza's first child was theirs. Roy G
-
What a wonderful story - already I am hooked! I will go off and search with renewed vigour ;D
-
What was the name of the second child, Roy, and where was it baptised? The more info I have, the more likely it is that I might find something of use.
-
I am assuming that Martin Constantin Haryett (Comte de Bechavet) was not the son of Clarence Trelawney, as Martin was born in 1842 and Elizabeth married Clarence in 1854. Hmm, wonder who Martin was living with in 1851....?
-
The first son Martin, was a child of Major Mountjoy Martyn who was already married. His baptism at Holy Trinity Marylebone, was 27 Sept 1842 and birth date stated at that baptism was 16 Aug 1842. The nearest equivalent was a Martin Mountjoy born in the Strand in 1839, but I am sure the vicar could destinguish a month old child to one aged 3 years. Martin and his mother joined Napoleon III in France prior to 1851 and he grew up there to become Martin Constantine Haryett, the Earl of Bechevet.
Even though his grandparents (Joseph & Elizabeth Haryett of Brighton) lived in Suffolk and had their last child 20 years earlier, a second child, William Alderton Haryett was still baptised as their son in Brighton in 1847. William also had no known birth registration and like his grandparents, fails to appear on the 1851 census. I would like to say the grandparents and William also moved to France to join their daughter in her Chateau in Versailles, but as the 1861 census verifies, the grandfather remained a decorator, listed as Joseph Hargett of Brighton and wife Elizabeth living at High Street (Road?) Mutford, Gorleston, Suffolk. RG9/1189/140. The grandfather came into wealth after his daughter's death in 1865, returning to Brighton where he reappeared not as a tradesman, but listed amongst the town's gentry.
Roy G
-
I saw the baptism record of Martin online, Roy. I see Joseph is shown as a plumber and their address is given as Upper Fitzroy Street. Do you have any idea where that street is? I was wondering who was living there in the 1841 census.
-
Internet lists Upper Fitzroy Street in the St Pancras distict of London (1841 census ref HO 107/686 book 9 folios 31-32 ). Now need someone with access to the 1841 census who is willing to trawl the folios above for a Joseph & Elizabeth, aged 35-40 not born in this county, or an Eliza(beth) or Harriet aged 18 also not born in this county (n.b. Elizabeth took the stage name Harriet Howard) Roy G
-
Unfortunately the 1841 census is not very good at supplying info: it doesn't give the place of birth, merely whether or not the person was born in the county in which they are currently residing. If I get a chance I'll look through these; I've already been through the 1851 census for Gorleston and haven't found the family.
Regards,
GS
-
I have looked through Folio 31 and found nothing regarding your quarry. Certainly seems an interesting area though: inhabitants include Charles Landseer, who gives his occupation as 'historic painter' and Philip Gaugain who is down as 'portrait painter'. Lots of musicians, surgeons, bankers and even a Page to the Queen.
At that time Elizabeth would have been 18 and her child would not be born for at least another year (theoretically). Do you know if she went to London to become an actress or if she went as a servant and thereafter changed her career path?
-
Thanks for looking GS.
Your findings at least suggest the address where her first son was born was a significant one rather than a backstreet. More an address for a mistress than an impoverished young actress who was acknowledged to have stunning looks but no talent.
Yesterday a colleague found what we believe to be that same child on the 1851 census (HO 107 1046) indexed as "Henyett" which once again seems to rewrite another aspect of her published biography. In 1851 Martin Constantine Haryett (later the Earl of Bechevet) was recorded as being in France with his mother gaining a private education alongside Napoleon's two other illegitimate sons, not as it now looks, working as an assitant in his uncle's tailors shop in Brighton.
I suppose when people told lies in the past, they never dreamed that future generations would ever be able to access an entire range of documents that would help disprove their imaginative stories. Roy G
-
Certainly the area in folio 31 seems particularly affluent; I will now go off and start on Fol 32. How very interesting about Martin working in his uncle's shop. Will get back with any info I glean from my next trawl of the census.
regards,
GS
-
Dont put yourself to an excess of inconvenience on my behalf, I was just hoping that Eliza would turn up on the 1841.
Unfortunately, her courtesan profession dictated that she lived and worked under many guises. Was she simply enumerated as 18 year old Eliza Haryett with its numerous variations of spelling, the actress Harriet Howard, falsely as Mrs Mountjoy, or as the wife of another temporary lover and living under his name? (Note Major Mountjoy was in Horse Guards in 1841)
Of two of the many other contradictory resources I have been reading about her, one places her around 1841 still living with Jem Mason at an address at 277 Oxford Street, London, and another at 9 Berkley Square. We homed in on the Upper Fitzroy Street Address because that was the address that appeared on her son's baptism in 1842, but she does seem to have moved around conciderably from conquest to conquest.
Roy G
-
Well, this is very interesting in the 1841, Harley Place, Cavendish Square:
Capt Martyn, 30, Ind
Mrs Martyn, 23
I've already found Capt Martyn at Horse Guards but this might well be him too!
Ref: HO107/676/8/33 -15
St Marylebone; Middx
-
The probability is that Horse gaurds was not properly enumated, they just accepted the names of all those who happened to be on regimental strength.
I now have to ask if there were any children with Mrs Martyn. My reasoning is that I know they had a daughter Maria Louisa (for she eloped to marry Weatherly in 1857) but am unsure of exactly when she was born. Roy G
-
Is Mountjoy Martyn the same person as Francis Mountjoy Martyn of 17 Charles Street, Hanover Square?
-
Captain Francis Mountjoy Martyn of 17 Charles Street, Hanover Square (born Calcutta India, c 1810) must be him. He was an extremely wealthy man who in later years was promoted Major, then Lt Colonel. But was he living there with his legitimate wife?
I do know he married an Ann or Amelia in the Chepstow district late 1837, but cannot say whether she travelled with him to London thereafter. If there was a woman saying she was his wife at the above London address in 1841 without an "A" as an initial, it suggests she was a mistress, perhaps Eliza Haryett, also known as Harriet Howard. Roy G
-
I don't think the woman with him in the 1841 is Amelia though at the mo that's just a hunch. It seems, looking at the later census returns, that he and Amelia didn't live together and after he died, in 1874 Amelia remarried within months.
1837 - marriage to Amelia Jenkins, Chepstow
1851 - F M Martyn, married, 41, Major, living at 17 Charles Street, Hanover Square
1851 - Amelia Martyn, married living at 132 Mount Street (with servants, no husband)
1856 - PO Directory: Lt Col F M Martyn, 17 Charles Street, Berkeley Square and Fern Cottage, Windsor
1861 - Francis M Martyn, married, 51, Colonel, Army (no wife in household)
1871 - trans as J M Martyn, married, 61, Colonel retired (no wife in household)
1874 - death of F M Martyn 24 January
-
Thanks once again. Do the census records show any children of this separated couple at any address? Roy G
-
Hi guys - I have just bought a painting from 1839 titled 'Mrs Mountjoy Martyn'.
I have been searching for Major Mountjoy Martyn's wife with no luck until I stumbled across the site. I would love to see a photo of his wife (Amelia Jenkins) if anyone is able to access one. The portrait that I have bought looks somewhat like Wikipedia image of Harriet Howard.
The portrait was painted in London so if she was living as his illegitimate wife, that could match up. I've attached an image of the painting.
Any other info or images would be much appreciated :)
Cheers
-
Re The Countess of Beauregard, formerly Harriet Howard, born Eliza(beth) Ann Haryett of Brighton (1823 -1865)
Unless Major Mountjoy Martyn's wife and mistress were clones of each other, the picture you have is almost certainly his red haired mistress Eliza(beth) Haryett formerly of Brighton, who the major's circle of wealthy Londoners and titled aristocrats knowingly addressed as his wife.
Although your picture has a date of 1839, the probable age of the lady, the quality of her clothing and her acquired jewelery makes me think it may be from a little later. In 1839, Eliza was only in her late teens and better known as the actress Harriet Howard, and at the most, had only recently come 'under the major's protection' and been accommodated at a separate address from him in Mayfair.
Re: Two other known images of Mrs Mountjoy Martyn.
I leave it to you to decide whether it is possible that your picture is is predated by one used in the Countess of Blessington's book on Health & Beauty published 1841. I believe the picture of Mrs Mountjoy Martyn shown on the following website comes from that: http://www.old-print.com/cgi-bin/category.cgi?item=B3761870214 It shows Eliza as a voluptuous female with poise, beauty and adorned by simple trinkets, perhaps explaining why so many wealthy admirers were attracted to her.
The picture you have is better suited to being a few years on, for a more mature Eliza now sports the expensive (but in my opinion a little tasteless) jewelery that had been showered upon her, possibly as rewards for her favours after her association with the major had waned. These may have been the very jewels she later sold in order to fund Napoleon III's return to France.
Lastly there is the magnificent portrait of her as the Countess of Beauregard (Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harriet_Howard ) by which time this simple shoemaker's daughter from a Brighton backstreet had risen from poverty, and having negotiated repayment for her earlier loan (and perhaps discreteness?) gained a title and a French Chateau. In that final picture she somehow seems to radiate the satisfied grace and opulence of those deemed to have come from an aristocratic bloodline.
I have seen it suggested that due to Napoleon IIIs rekindled interest, her unfortunate early demise was engineered by a representative of the French government "Napoleon III and the women he loved", but no evidence to substantiate that has ever emerged. Roy G
-
Hi Roy,
Thanks for your reply. I agree, the painting looks very much like Harriet Howard. The painting is definitely from 1839 or earlier as it was published in the 1839 edition of Heath's Book of Beauty. The photo of the painting and the poem that describes it (from Heath's Book of Beauty 1839) are on the back of the painting. You are correct about the painting of Mrs Mountjoy Martyn in the 1841 edition of Heath's Book of Beauty.
The artist was a well known socialist painter of the time but if this is Harriet Howard she would have only been about 16 years old. Interesting stuff but I guess we will never really know. I have read quite alot about the life of Harriet and it would be nice if the painting was of her!
Thanks again for your reply. Appreciate the info.
-
Yes its the age thing that bothers me too. As you say, in 1839 Harriet was about 16, and the painting does not look like a 16 year old. By 1839 Harriet had only recently parted from Jem Mason the Jockey and from what I have read, had become a rather talentless actress, who was making additional income in a tavern renowned for its gaming facilities and pretty but light fingered wenches. I believe her association with the major may only have just started in 1839, hence the point I made about being skeptical about her already being known as Mrs Mountjoy Martyn when so young.
There are two probable Harriet Howards in the 1841 census that could be her. One in Islington and the one below which I favour because that would tie in with an address in Mayfair. Harriet Howard: Female Age: 18 Birthplace: Middlesex
Registration District: St Marylebone Sub-district: Christ Church Civil Parish: St Marylebone
The likeness and red hair however still convinces me that the picture you have was of her and not the major's legitimate wife Amelia Jenkins who he married in the Chepstow district in 1837. Unless of course Amelia was another red haired beauty. Whatever the outcome, I'm sure you and I will never come to blows over it.
I have looked back at my notes to try to put an age on Amelia Jenkins and find any other info that might help differentiate one from the other. All I have at present is a marriage in Oct 1837, between Captain Francis Mountjoy Martyn and Amelia Jenkins, dtr of the late R Jenkins [Sir Richard JP formerly of Bicton Hall?] of Beachley Lodge, that took place in Tidenham, Gloucester. Amelia MAY have been born in 1819 (IGI). The couple produced a daughter Martha (aka Marie) Louisa Martyn who subsequently eloped and then married Frederic A Weatherly in 1857.
You say you have read quite a lot about Harriet Howard. My research using censuses, parish records and early street directories, suggests that over the years quite a number of falsehoods about her have been published and then accepted as fact. Some earlier researchers also seem to have overlooked a probable second child of hers (William Alderton Haryett) who appears out of the blue and then goes missing, never to be heard of again. He was born c1847 so could either have been Napoleon IIIs or impinged on the relationship Harriet was having with him. No birth under the above name was ever registered, but he was baptised as a child of his elderly grandparents, just as his half brother had been several years earlier. Send me a PM with your e-mail address, and I'll forward you a copy of my research as it stands at present with a few supporting references I have managed to find.
Roy G
I am adding a probably totally unrelated postscript, but it is a time-slip coincidence well worth mentioning.
The picture you possess also shows the lady holding what seems to be a large pearl. One notable excessively large pearl in those times was 'La Peregrina Pearl' then known to be in the possession of Napoleon III. If the painting had been from marginally later, I would think the artist (who may never have seen the actual jewel) was in a way, trying to infer something by its strategic placement.
The history of 'La Peregrina Pearl' however, is well documented and was known to be in the possession of Napoleon III during his exile in London, before being sold to the 2nd Marques of Abercorn to help fund Napoleon's return to France. In 1968, the same pearl was on the market again, the purchaser this time was Richard Burton who presented it to Elizabeth Taylor. If my theory about date of the picture being a little later held water, this would have provided you with a great after dinner conversation topic.
Roy
-
Further to the rather lengthy message I have just written, I have been looking into things a little deeper and need to ask a question.
I found a copy of Chalon's painting from 1839 advertised on the Internet, which the Gallery called:
"Lady Mountjoy Martin" a 1839 Watercolour, 31x23 cms Illustrated in "Heaths Book of Beauty."
Is this an error by them, for up until now, everything I have seen, including yours is entitled, "Mrs Mountjoy Martyn?"
Could it be that the gallery has titled it incorrectly, or could the artist have produced two paintings, one of the titled wife (Lady) and later the mistress (Mrs) perhaps with subtle changes? I am of the opinion that the legitimate wife was the daughter of Sir Richard Jenkins JP, so being know as 'Lady' would befit her.
Unfortunately the internet image is tiny and from an oblique angle, so I am unable to say whether the image shown is identical to the one you possess, nor do I know whether that artist had a penchant for also producing mischievous alternatives. What do you think?
http://www.artfact.com/auction-lot/alfred-edward-chalon-1780-1860-british-lady-btq28tcns5-6-m-50c2fa7d1e
Roy G
-
Hi Roy,
Sorry for the delayed reply. I will send you my email address as I would be really interested to see the information you have. All I have to go from is the information I can find on the internet.
The painting name is an error. The painting in your link is the same one that I have purchased and I was told it was titled 'Lady Mountjoy Martyn' as well however the hand written inscription on the back of the painting reads 'Mrs Mountjoy Maryn' and below I think it says 'Rich Hill Delf London 1839' (not sure about Delf)
After receiving the painting I am sceptical that it is the same as that featured in Heaths Book of Beauty 1839 as there are subtle differences between the picture and the painting so it may have been painted from the image in the book.
I can see what you mean about the pearl that she is holding. I had never picked up on this before.
I will send you my email address and look forward to reading your information.
Cheers
-
Just trying to reconnect with abc12345, for several recent PMs and e-mails direct to him/you have gone unanswered. I would like to use the illustration you posted on this website in an article being published in the June edition of the Sussex Family Historian and am asking again if you have any objection to this?
Roy G