It just doesn't make sense! HELP!!!?

[Bellejazz]

Hi all,
I have (yet another) troublesome ancestor ... surprise, surprise!
First of all apologies for the scroller, this is long and complex.

It is my Great Grandfather Roy Michael Appleby, on his death certificate it says he was born in NSW, just NSW, no town. and parents unknown. Roy served in both World Wars, I found his War Record on the NAA site and it says birthplace Jembaicumbene (which is very near Braidwood). It also says NOK; Mother: Kate Appleby.

A search of NSW BDM produced only 1 Roy Appleby, born to Joseph & Kate in 1890 (makes him the right age to be my Roy) in the district of Braidwood. ref: 7889/1890

There are a six other children which appear to also be the offspring of Joseph and Kate but under similar names, Catherine as mother rather than Kate and last name Applebee rather than Appleby.

Further searchs show:

A marriage for a Joseph Appleby to a Kate O'Neill in Braidwood in 1889. ref: 4011/1889

Two Joseph Appleby's born in Braidwood:
one to Elizabeth & Thomas Appleby (convict) in 1863 ref: 5790/1863
and one to Miriam & Richard Appleby (son of Thomas) in 1868 ref: 7109/1868

Two Kate O'Neills:
one born to Edward H & Kate O'Neill in Sydney in 1865, ref: 2157/1865
and the other to William & Charlotte in Quenbeyan  in 1860 , ref: 11437/1860

I also searched on Ancestry and the internet and everything I read led me to believe that the Joseph who married Kate O'Neill and had a son Roy was the same Joseph born to Elizabeth and Thomas Appleby.

So I ordered the certificates. I got Kate O'Neills birth certificate, Kate & Josephs marriage certificate, Roy's birth certificate, all good so far, all confirm my theories ....

Until I read Roy's Marriage Certificate: ref 5280/1916 which states that his parents are Joseph Appleby and what appears to say Kathleen Schultz!

Everything else matches, every other part of the puzzle is a perfect fit, the dates, the places, the people, everything except this Kathleen Schultz (whom I can find no other reference to on NSW BDM or Immigration records.

Common sense tells me that the odds of there being two Roy Appleby's born in 1890 in a little place like Braidwood, both with father Joseph and mother Kate/Kathleen are very slim, but it is there in print and it is nagging at me.

To top it off I can't find any death info on NSW, QLD or VIC BDM for Edward O'Neill, Kate O'Neill, Kate O'Neill-Appleby or Joseph Appleby.

I have many mysteries in my family tree but above all this is the one that is driving me positively nuts.

Any help/suggestion would be most gratefully appreciated.

Thanks,
Belinda.

[deeiluka]

Belinda,

Are you absolutely positive that the name reads Schultz? If not, perhaps you could post a scan of the name and post it in the Common Room to see what other people think.

I've had some excellent help that way....

.....dee

[Bellejazz]

I'm reasonably positive dee.
I will scan and post ... after I figure out how to post a pic 

Thanks,
Belinda.

[PrueM]

Hi Belinda,
I've responded on your other post about the the name...

One explanation could be that when Roy got married, he either wasn't sure what his mother's name was (or he was sure, but was incorrect), or the registrar wrote the wrong name down.  If everything else fits - and you're right, Braidwood was a pretty small place! - that's the most likely scenario/s.

Prue

[trish251]

Hi Belinda

Deleted all that - I just checked the other thread - after reading Prue's message

An interesting puzzle

Trish

[Bellejazz]

Hi Belinda,
I've responded on your other post about the the name...
One explanation could be that when Roy got married, he either wasn't sure what his mother's name was (or he was sure, but was incorrect), or the registrar wrote the wrong name down.  If everything else fits - and you're right, Braidwood was a pretty small place! - that's the most likely scenario/s.
Prue

I am hoping that is the case, I know people then were not always very well informed, I know there were lots of things that just were not talked about, I know mistakes were made, I know not to believe everything I read on a certificate ... all of this tells me I must have it right, but it's enough to keep nagging at me, lol.

Hi Belinda
Deleted all that - I just checked the other thread - after reading Prue's message
An interesting puzzle
Trish

Yup, interesting is one way to describe it! 


- Belinda.

[trish251]

Hi Belinda

Just browsing re your interesting puzzle 

What was the date of birth on Roy's birth certificate? According to WWII records he was born 16 July 1891 which almost fits with his age of 25 years & 3 months  given on 21 Sep 1916 for WWI

The NSW birth record says 1890 - was it simply that he had the year incorrect on his war service?

Trish

[Bellejazz]

Well there you go!
there's something I hadn't noticed, date on birth cert is: 16th July 1890

*waaaahhhhh*

It just gets worse!

- Belinda.

[trish251]

Given that the actual day is the same - I would think Roy simply thought he was born 1891 - I initially thought WWII he might be lowering his age - but he did the same in WWI. When my grandmother was in her 70s she found out she was 3 years older than she thought she was   

Depending on the marriage date, his mother may have added a year to his birthdate - when he asked - as one does

Trish

Edit: I am beginning to think that the registrar was having a bad hair day with the schultz! - it may be worth asking the registrar to check the original records if what you have is a transcribed copy. Alternatively, looking for a baptism at the church where the parents were married may help.