Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Minera

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 ... 12
19
Lancashire / Re: Catherine Maloney
« on: Tuesday 15 May 12 19:45 BST (UK)  »
 :) ritson is very close, I think this is looking good.
Going to check the other daughter and the pos son of Catherine and James.
Gosh if this checks out you deserve a medal, Thank you so much xx

20
Lancashire / Re: Catherine Maloney
« on: Tuesday 15 May 12 19:31 BST (UK)  »
Wish I had asked about Catherine when I was a child Lol
Will check that address, don't recognise it straight off, wish enumerators and families had learnt to write and spell. Will check out the younger child, I think Caths son Peter called one of his daughters Caroline, they tended to name children after family members even if they were inlaws.

21
Lancashire / Re: Catherine Maloney
« on: Tuesday 15 May 12 18:58 BST (UK)  »
Looking at the 1881 census you have for James McFawn 16 Isis st that looks very likely it's the area where the Dease family lived for several generations and is a stones throw from St Clements church which features strongly for both families, James has two children with him Caroline, who we have and Mary J McFawn who is new.
So we are looking for Elizabeth's death or a since between 1873-81 which is when Catherine would be free to form a new relationship. Still not seen the 1901 but if these two census returns are linked ie it's the same James on both I think it's a match

22
Lancashire / Re: Catherine Maloney
« on: Tuesday 15 May 12 18:08 BST (UK)  »
Have not found that 1901 census for James, Catherine and son James yet  was there an address , area or occupation for anyone ?

Have found a James Mc Fanham marriage ironically on the same page as the 1964 marriage of James and Elizabeth,

Have also found a James McFawn marriage 1906 Toxteth park which could be the sons marriage

23
Lancashire / Re: Catherine Maloney
« on: Tuesday 15 May 12 17:27 BST (UK)  »
 :) thought so I have
John b) 1863
David    b) 1866    (bab ) 1972  d)  1872
Sarah    b) 1868    (bap )          d)  1872
James    b) 1871    (bap) 1871. d) 1872
Caroline  b) 1873.

Middle 3 are all baptised at St Clements and all to James and Elizabeth.
Will try to find the other two baptisms, don't think they were baptised as a job lot due to likelihood of death as David shows as 72 but James 71 if any of these were Catherine's it would be Caroline and that should have shown on the 81 census for the Dease family which it doesn't.
I would estimate that they are all the children of James and Elizabeth and that  Elizabeth died between 81 and 90
Think  the 3 Dease children are to the same father based on their looks.

Sorry  have just realised there is a second James if the 1901 census is right so yes he would I think be the son of  James and Catherine. Will see if I can find anything for him. As between the 81 and 91 the 3 Dease children have all married and there is none are with Catherine. Ok back to drawing board

24
Lancashire / Re: Catherine Maloney
« on: Tuesday 15 May 12 16:35 BST (UK)  »
 :)We thought either most frequent port of call or family support having had her first child for the move from Poplar to Liverpool.  From what I know of Poplar the family would have been as well accepted there as in Liverpool.  Though arguably Liverpool is closer to Ireland I don't think it was the proximity to Ireland or the acceptance of a mixed race family. Am inclined to think they were getting away from Poplar or coming to Liverpool for a reason. But that's just gut instinct, and it could be way out

Am going back to my tree to see if I have James jnr right back in a bit

25
Australia Lookups completed / Re: Bigamy Question
« on: Tuesday 15 May 12 13:09 BST (UK)  »
The first marriage was legally binding untill the death of the first wife, the second was bigamous though no charges brought,  the third was legal as the first wife had died and the second marriage was not legally binding as it was bigamous. In order for the second marriage to be legal there would have had to be a second marriage between the couple after the death of the first wife. Had the original couple at any time decided to have a reconciliation they would not have needed a ceremony as they were still legally man and wife.

Children of first marriage legitimate with claims to both parents and both parents families.
Children of bigamous marriage not legitimate with claims to both parents if recognised by father plus claim to mothers family but not fathers.
Children of 3rd marriage same as first marriage, depending on steps taken to legitimise any born outside the marriage.
All depending upon any wills in place at the time.

26
Lancashire / Re: Catherine Maloney
« on: Tuesday 15 May 12 11:49 BST (UK)  »
Have ordered the birth cert for Peter Augustus Deas 1865-1938 b) Poplar think that's the best choice as do not have baptism records for him. Assume that the parents were married, cohabiting and using fathers surname or he was present, or would have been registered as Maloney. ( mmn)

The other two have Liverpool Lancashire Catholic baptism records as follows
William Arthur Deis 1868 parents Petri Deis x Catherina Maloney
Rose A Des 1872 parents  Petri Des x Catherina Maloney
 
Over time the name has been shown as Deis, Dees, Des and finally by 1891 Dease
Empathis on pronunciation was always adhered to so they would say its spelt like this but pronounced as this as its Portugese not Irish but it was also told that the Irish spelling was more acceptable so was used from 1891.

Presumably Peter Augustus spent enough time with his father to speak a fair bit of Portugese , records indicate that the father may have died between the conception of Rose and the 1881 census when Catherine shows as a widow. So Peter would have been 7-16  he in turn taught some of this to his children, including his stepdaughter.
The family lived for several generations within a small area and were always classed as Portugese / Irish.  So though not much re documented evidence but think enough to persuade me that the Portugese element is correct.

Heamoglobin results indicates Mediterranean ancestry, as do family photographs . But can't rule out the father being born in a Portugese settlement outside Portugal they are still known in the area they lived in Liverpool as the Portugese Dease's rather than the Irish Dease's.

27
Lancashire / Re: Catherine Maloney
« on: Tuesday 15 May 12 10:07 BST (UK)  »
Hi yes he was definately Portugese and a sailor we have photos of his children and grandchildren. I grew up with my gran who was  brought up by his first son. Peter Augustus from 1886 she told me in 1956. What we don't know for sure is if he was ever officially registered here or not, as being a sailor he could have just met Catherine in Cork, Poplar or Liverpool. Many of the families of seamen would only see their fathers when they were in port. We can't rule out that he wasn't Portugese but from one of the Portugese colonies. Hope by working through Catherine we can get more on Peter.  If they cohabited rather than married then he may not be traceable, we do know that the name was changed and that was deliberate. There was a Dease family here from Ireland who went onto America, and another Irish Dease family in Manchester but they are not connected to ours.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 ... 12