RootsChat.Com
Scotland (Counties as in 1851-1901) => Scotland => Stirlingshire => Topic started by: EBrand on Thursday 05 September 19 09:06 BST (UK)
-
Hey Rootschatters,
I have a conundrum that my uncle and I have been trying to solve for many years. I'm hoping that some fresh eyes could point me in the right direction, or pick up something we've missed.
The Problem: My ancestor, George Brand was a convict transported to Western Australia in 1855. He was a resident of Larbert, Stirlingshire in the 1851 Census with his wife Isabella and four children (David, George, Isabella and Andrew). The family came out a couple of years later to Western Australia, where I am today. Trying to trace his ancestry is the problem, His death certificate gives his age at death in 1872 as 55, a birth year of late 1816 or 1817. However, many family histories compiled of this family quote his birth year as 1820- going by how the 1851 census has his age.
So now there are two prospective Georges, one born to a David Brand and Janet Spittal in Culross, Perthshire in late 1816, and one born to a John Brand and Isabella Anderson in St. Cuthberts, Midlothian in 1820. Both my uncle and I believe it is the former, but once again there is no conclusive evidence to link it to either.
The evidence:
The 1851 Census has his age as 30, putting his birth year at around 1821. However, his birth place is noted as Culross, Perthshire. At this time they reside in Larbert, Stirlingshire.
His marriage in 1840 to Isabella Duncan in Denny, Stirlingshire. His first four children are also all born in Denny, Stirlingshire.
He was an employee first as a carter and then as a porter of the Scottish Railway Company, and it was from there that he orchestrated his crimes.
I cannot find him in the 1841 Census so far, but he would have just been married.
All other family histories note his parents as John Brand and Isabella Anderson, but without any plausible evidence. Even after I have enquired, people have admitted they don't have proof to show me (frustrating).
There is a precognition record (still kind of unsure of what this is) in 1819 for a David Brand and an Alexander Spittal (note that Spittal is David's wife's maiden name) for the crime of housebreaking in Alloa, which is one of the districts George would later target in his crimes. That leads me to think that maybe it ran in the family, as Isabella Duncan's (George's wife) cousins George and Joseph Donnelly took part and were convicted with George in 1852.
My Additions:
George's children's names follow the traditional Scottish naming pattern:
1st daughter= mother's mother (Isabella)
1st son= father's father (David)
2nd son= mother's father (Andrew)
3rd son= father (George)
From the OPR, Isabella Duncan was born in Muthill, Perthshire on Jul 4 1818 to a Andrew Duncan and an Isabel Kay. This naming pattern fits in perfectly with the David Brand and Janet Spittal theory.
Furthermore, it makes more sense to me for 1816 George to make the journey (presumably by horse and cart) from Culross to Larbert (approx. 4 hours) than for 1820 George to make the journey from Edinburgh to Larbert (approx. 10 hours).
This is a lot of info, but please let me know what you think. Any help is much appreciated!
Thanks,
EB.
-
Hi,
Could this be George & Isabella on the 1841 Census - https://freecen1.freecen.org.uk/cgi/search.pl
Denny, Stirlingshire,
Catscleuch
George Brand age 20 born Stirlingshire
Isabella Brand age 20 born Stirlinshire
David Brand age 11 months born Stirlingshire.
Looby :)
-
Denny, Stirlingshire,
Catscleuch
George Brand age 20 born Stirlingshire
Isabella Brand age 20 born Stirlinshire
David Brand age 11 months born Stirlingshire.
Meant to add - I know the place of birth for both is not correct - it should be "outside census county" - but the wrong info may have been supplied or recorded. Unfortunately this transcription doesn't have an occupation noted for George.
I would agree if George has given Culross, Perthshire as his place of birth on the 1851 Census then it's highly unlikely he was born in Midlothian.
Looby :)
-
Hi,
Could this be George & Isabella on the 1841 Census - https://freecen1.freecen.org.uk/cgi/search.pl
Denny, Stirlingshire,
Catscleuch
George Brand age 20 born Stirlingshire
Isabella Brand age 20 born Stirlinshire
David Brand age 11 months born Stirlingshire.
Looby :)
Hi!
I think that's right! It makes sense as David would have been born late 1840/early 1841!
Thanks for that!
I can get an image from ScotlandsPeople, right?
EB
-
Yes, you should be able to find the original record in Scotlands People.
I did a search on Freecen for the name Brand in 1841 in Culross and there is a David Brand age 70 a blacksmith. There is no Janet. I would assume she had died.
Looby :)
-
Did George & Isabella have any further children after the four listed on 1851 Census?
Looby :)
-
Where and when did George BRAND commit criminal offence...what was the offence for which he was transported.
Inquirer and Commercial News 29 Oct 1856 p3
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/66005987?
from Government Gazette - Detained for bearing insufficient stamps -
Mrs BRAND, Larbert near Falkirk, Stirlingshire Scotland.
WA BDM birth
6111 /1861 BRAND John parents George / DUNCAN Isabella @ Victoria Dist
-
Denny, Stirlingshire,
Catscleuch
George Brand age 20 born Stirlingshire
Isabella Brand age 20 born Stirlinshire
David Brand age 11 months born Stirlingshire.
That David's baptism in free index on SP
BRAND DAVID
GEORGE BRAND/ISABELLA DUNCAN FR740 (FR740)
M
16/08/1840
476/30 215
Denny
This shows mother's maiden name & full record may also show father's occupation. Strangely I cannot find this family in 1841 in the free index on SP
-
Hi everyone, thanks for getting back to me!
Looby, they had two more children out in Western Australia. John born in 1861 (who I am descended from) and Irene, who I believe was stillborn.
Wivenhoe, according to a summary of charges compiled by a researcher in archives. These are the major offences for which he was transported, however he was charged approx 14 months earlier for housebreaking (if I remember correctly, don’t have the info in front of me right now)
1st Charge (13-14 Sep 1850)- Greenhill Junction near Falkirk Station.
2nd Charge (16 and 17 Oct 1850) but doesn’t say the place.
3rd Charge (18 and 19 Feb 1851) no place listed.
4th Charge (18 and 19 Sep 1851) Goods train near Powis Wood, Stirling.
5th Charge (18 and 19 Sep 1851)
Goods train near Greenhill, Falkirk.
6th Charge (26 Oct 1851) no place listed.
7th Charge (31 Oct and 1 Nov 1851) no place listed.
Other charges- goods stolen from a house in Larbert (18 and 22 Sep 1851)
- articles stolen from a house in Port Street, Stirling (27 Oct 1851).
What would bearing insufficient stamps mean??
Josey,
Thank you for that!
That was the problem my uncle and I ran into last night- hence why I couldn’t find the record for the 1841 census on Ancestry or anywhere else.
It’s strange because that entry on FreeCen is pretty accurate, but how come it’s not there on SP or Ancestry??
Thanks for all your help!
EB
-
Hi EB,
You just caught me before I called it a very late night (2am) and headed to bed.
The family are listed as Branch on the 1841 Census on SP. Can only assume the writing is poor. But not like SP to be wrong. You can, if you want to, advise them of the error and they'll double-check it then change the index.
Bearing insufficient stamps :-\ ? That sounds as if Isabella hadn't put enough stamps to cover postage on a letter - but it can't be that surely??
Looby :)
-
Hi EB,
You just caught me before I called it a very late night (2am) and headed to bed.
The family are listed as Branch on the 1841 Census on SP. Can only assume the writing is poor. But not like SP to be wrong. You can, if you want to, advise them of the error and they'll double-check it then change the index.
Bearing insufficient stamps :-\ ? That sounds as if Isabella hadn't put enough stamps to cover postage on a letter - but it can't be that surely??
Looby :)
Hi Looby,
Legend. Thank you for that. I had a feeling the names could have been poorly transcribed. And yes that was the first thought that came to mind about the stamps- but didn't realise it was such a big deal haha. Will grab that census and report back!
Have a great night Looby!
EB.
-
from Government Gazette - Detained for bearing insufficient stamps -
Mrs BRAND, Larbert near Falkirk, Stirlingshire Scotland.
Hi EB,
I took a wee look into the above piece of info supplied by wivenhoe.
I had read this as Mrs Brand from Larbet near Falkirk had been detained for bearing insufficient stamps ::) and thought it strange to arrest someone for not having enough stamps on a letter! Although knowing the petty crimes some souls were transported for it maybe it wasn't so strange !
However I've discovered the original snippet on Trove in The Inquirer and Commercial News (Perth W.A.) on 29th October 1856. Transcribed below.
The snippet is headed Government Gazette
October 28
The following list of unclaimed letters is published.
Coin, Mr Thomas ; Fowler, Mr Robert; Freeman, Mr Joseph
Detained for bearing insufficient stamps - Mrs Brand, Larbet near
Falkirk, Stirlingshire, Scotland.
From this I now realise that it is the letter which has been detained not Mrs Brand ! ;D
So either Mrs Brand sent a letter which had been detained In Australia until full postage paid or more likely the letter was to be sent to Mrs Brand in Scotland and didn't bear enough stamps.
Phew, at least Mrs Brand not in prison for the lack of a stamp.
Looby :)
-
Hi EB,
I took a wee look into the above piece of info supplied by wivenhoe.
I had read this as Mrs Brand from Larbet near Falkirk had been detained for bearing insufficient stamps ::) and thought it strange to arrest someone for not having enough stamps on a letter! Although knowing the petty crimes some souls were transported for it maybe it wasn't so strange !
However I've discovered the original snippet on Trove in The Inquirer and Commercial News (Perth W.A.) on 29th October 1856. Transcribed below.
The snippet is headed Government Gazette
October 28
The following list of unclaimed letters is published.
Coin, Mr Thomas ; Fowler, Mr Robert; Freeman, Mr Joseph
Detained for bearing insufficient stamps - Mrs Brand, Larbet near
Falkirk, Stirlingshire, Scotland.
From this I now realise that it is the letter which has been detained not Mrs Brand ! ;D
So either Mrs Brand sent a letter which had been detained In Australia until full postage paid or more likely the letter was to be sent to Mrs Brand in Scotland and didn't bear enough stamps.
Phew, at least Mrs Brand not in prison for the lack of a stamp.
Looby :)
Aha! Now that makes sense. Thanks for making heads and tails of that. I'm happy to hear that she wasn't detained.
Just waiting to hear back from my uncle, who will be grabbing the 1841 census for me.
Thanks Looby :)
EB
-
Yes, you should be able to find the original record in Scotlands People.
I did a search on Freecen for the name Brand in 1841 in Culross and there is a David Brand age 70 a blacksmith. There is no Janet. I would assume she had died.
Looby :)
Unfortunately that option is one I had looked at before. That David is living with an Elizabeth and John Forrester (at first I thought it could have been an option because David and Janet had a daughter named Elisabeth) but upon attaining Elisabeth Forrester's death cert, it turns out her mother's maiden surname was Ferguson, not Spittal like it should be.
I should mention that David Brand and Janet Spittal had 6 children.
Jean Brand born 16/06/1808 Culross
David Brand born 01/02/1810 Culross
Janet Brand born 02/05/1813 Culross
Elisabeth Brand born 1815 Culross
George Brand born 03/11/1816 Culross
Euphemia Brand born 14/06/1818 Culross
EB.
-
Okay so I am officially quite confused.
Looby, in the census search you did and found David Brand age 70, he was living with a John and Elizabeth Forrester. At first I thought this was a lead but on discovering Elisabeth's mother's maiden name was Jane Ferguson, and not Janet Spittal, I dismissed it. I have the image of that 1841 census for John and the Forresters, and the ages are definitely as they are listed in the index.
HOWEVER, I just looked at George Brand's brother David b.1810. His wife is called Janet Ferguson. I know this is accurate as one of his daughter's is named Janet Spittal Brand.
Am I not seeing something here, or am I looking too closely...? ??? ???
EB.
-
Hi EB,
You got the maiden name of Elizabeth Forrester (Brand) on her death certificate.
Who was the informant of her death?
Remember the information provided on a death certificate can be inaccurate ::)
The info is only as accurate as the memory or knowledge of person providing it. Perhaps the person didn't know Elizabeth's mother's maiden name and guessed (using another name in the family) or misremembered. It happened and no-one at the registrar's would double check it.
So don't rule them out yet as father and sister to your George ;D
Looby :)
-
Hi EB,
You got the maiden name of Elizabeth Forrester (Brand) on her death certificate.
Who was the informant of her death?
Remember the information provided on a death certificate can be inaccurate ::)
The info is only as accurate as the memory or knowledge of person providing it. Perhaps the person didn't know Elizabeth's mother's maiden name and guessed (using another name in the family) or misremembered. It happened and no-one at the registrar's would double check it.
So don't rule them out yet as father and sister to your George ;D
Looby :)
That could very well be the case, Looby.
The informant was her niece, a G. Day.
She died in 1889 aged 83, which would have left her birth at 1806 not 1815 like in the parish records.
I just wish there was something concrete :P
EB.
-
Just to clarify a point from your original post - A precognition is a formal interview of a witness (or witnesses) before a trial or other legal procedure to determine the strength of the evidence.
-
[/So don't rule them out yet as father and sister to your George
i]
Then again ::) perhaps they are not. Although I'm sure the Culross Brands will all be related.
I've just found John and Elizabeth Forrester on the 1851 Census and Elizabeth's age is recorded as 44 , giving her a year of birth 1806/07. Which obviously is a good few year before the Elizabeth Brand born to David Brand and Janet Spittal in 1815.
When did she die and what age was recorded?
Looby :)
Added - I see you have given me that info , thanks.
-
Just to clarify a point from your original post - A precognition is a formal interview of a witness before a trial or other legal procedure.
Hi Falkyrn,
Thank you for that!
So then, they may not have been involved in the crime at all?
EB
-
Hi again.
There was an Elizabeth Brand born in 1806 to David Brand and Janet Jean Fergus - https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X1NL-RVF
This must be Elizabeth Forrester on the 1841 with her father.
Looby :)
-
Hi again.
There was an Elizabeth Brand born in 1806 to David Brand and Janet Jean Fergus - https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X1NL-RVF
This must be Elizabeth Forrester on the 1841 with her father.
Looby :)
Thanks Looby!
I'm glad I can rule that one out now.
I'm now going through George's siblings to see if I can see something I didn't before. Having a hard time finding the female siblings to be honest, you'd think someone called Euphemia would be easy to find...
EB.
-
I think Euphemia is in service with a Catherine and Mary Birnie in Culross on the 1841 Census.
Her name has been badly transcribed on Freencen to Euphemsa Brased ;D
She is still with Mary Birnie on the 1851 Census
Looby
-
Hi Falkyrn,
Thank you for that!
So then, they may not have been involved in the crime at all?
EB
Sorry but reading the entry in the NAS Catalogue shows its a precognition of the witnesses in the case against the accused David Brand, & Alexander Spittall , carters of Culross.
PS although the crime is Housebreaking it does not mean that they broke into someones house it may have been a warehouse shop or other storage building. Scots Law classes them all under the definition of a "house"
-
I think Euphemia is in service with a Catherine and Mary Birnie in Culross on the 1841 Census.
Her name has been badly transcribed on Freencen to Euphemsa Brased ;D
She is still with Mary Birnie on the 1851 Census
Looby
Wow what terrible transcription ;D
That seems about right, now I just have to hunt down the other siblings. You would think calling two of your children Jean and Janet is just asking for trouble, right?
-
Sorry but reading the entry in the NAS Catalogue shows its a precognition of the witnesses in the case against the accused David Brand, & Alexander Spittall , carters of Culross.
PS although the crime is Housebreaking it does not mean that they broke into someones house it may have been a warehouse shop or other storage building. Scots Law classes them all under the definition of a "house"
As weird as it is to say this, that is great news! If they're accused, it bolsters my theory that little bit more. I'd like to think the criminality ran in the family.
Thanks for your research!
EB