John WARD - Wellington NSW

[Illawarrian]

James Ward b. 1852 was the last of the children of John Ward and Judith Reece. In 1856, Judith remarried William McKenna. The marriage certificate says Judith was a WIDOW. The marriage celebrant would have to be absolutely sure that she was, and in a small town like Wellington, everyone would have known if she wasn't telling the truth.
So, between 1852 and 1856, a period of 4 years, JOHN WARD DIED. He didn't disappear.
A person who is missing in N.S.W. cannot be presumed dead and a death certificate issued after only 3 or 4 years. It takes many more years than that. So, it makes sense that Judith was in possession of a death certificate.
The newspaper article regarding the death of John Ward states that he was John Ward ALIAS MAXWELL. (Men who left their wives usually used another name because desertion was a criminal offence).
So, firstly, he has the SAME NAME as John Ward. John Ward your ancestor - John Ward who died in Sydney in 1853.
His friend George Young stated that this man was 36 years old. So, a second fact that ties in, he was the RIGHT AGE. Same name, same age!
Another friend, Thomas Clewley, stated at the inquest that he had LEFT HIS WIFE. This fact fits. She had no more children to him after 1852.
John Ward died of intemperance and this FITS THE SITUATION whereby his wife did not complain to police of his desertion - there is nothing in police gazettes saying his wife, or police, were looking for him. She did not want him to come back, or she would have reported it to police.
The death certificate of this JOHN WARD we are speaking of above, appears on N.S.W. BD&M as JOHN MAXWELL, because that was one of the names John Ward was using, to avoid being found.
However in the legal notice published, seeking a wife or relatives, he is named as JOHN WARD, as it must have been decided that was his real name.
So, the reason none of John Ward's descendants have been able to find his death certificate, is that the name has been mistakenly recorded as John Maxwell.

[rosball]

Good thinking Illawarian 

Theres is a probate packet for John WARD who died 30 september 1853 at NSW State Archives
https://www.records.nsw.gov.au/

I can photograph this the next time I am there ... it could contain a death certificate and other useful info.

Ros

[Illawarrian]

I hope it's the younger John Ward then. There was an older one, aged 59 I think, who also died in that year in Sydney. The John Ward I'm talking about died on 4th October aged 36, and his death certificate is mistakenly listed under the surname Maxwell on BD&M. I'll include the article for those who don't know how to search Trove.

[majm]

Good thinking Illawarian 

Theres is a probate packet for John WARD who died 30 september 1853 at NSW State Archives
https://www.records.nsw.gov.au/

I can photograph this the next time I am there ... it could contain a death certificate and other useful info.

Ros

It will NOT contain a death certificate.   It may have a record of burial, but as it is for a death in 1853 in NSW ... no d.c.

Civil Registration of bdm events commenced in NSW 1 March 1856.  If the NSW BDM index has the letter 'V' in the reference no. It is NOT a  certificate.  The 'V'  series are the  Early Church Records  and are scant in respect of family history. 

The Probate Packet should have good clues to help further.

JM

[majm]

James Ward b. 1852 was the last of the children of John Ward and Judith Reece. In 1856, Judith remarried William McKenna. The marriage certificate says Judith was a WIDOW. The marriage celebrant would have to be absolutely sure that she was, and in a small town like Wellington, everyone would have known if she wasn't telling the truth.
So, between 1852 and 1856, a period of 4 years, JOHN WARD DIED. He didn't disappear.
A person who is missing in N.S.W. cannot be presumed dead and a death certificate issued after only 3 or 4 years. It takes many more years than that. So, it makes sense that Judith was in possession of a death certificate.
The newspaper article regarding the death of John Ward states that he was John Ward ALIAS MAXWELL. (Men who left their wives usually used another name because desertion was a criminal offence).
So, firstly, he has the SAME NAME as John Ward. John Ward your ancestor - John Ward who died in Sydney in 1853.
His friend George Young stated that this man was 36 years old. So, a second fact that ties in, he was the RIGHT AGE. Same name, same age!
Another friend, Thomas Clewley, stated at the inquest that he had LEFT HIS WIFE. This fact fits. She had no more children to him after 1852.
John Ward died of intemperance and this FITS THE SITUATION whereby his wife did not complain to police of his desertion - there is nothing in police gazettes saying his wife, or police, were looking for him. She did not want him to come back, or she would have reported it to police.
The death certificate of this JOHN WARD we are speaking of above, appears on N.S.W. BD&M as JOHN MAXWELL, because that was one of the names John Ward was using, to avoid being found.
However in the legal notice published, seeking a wife or relatives, he is named as JOHN WARD, as it must have been decided that was his real name.
So, the reason none of John Ward's descendants have been able to find his death certificate, is that the name has been mistakenly recorded as John Maxwell.

We need to remember that 'widow' in that era in NSW had a broader meaning,  so basically a woman without a partner, but with children to support ...  it is also possible that the clergy did not require documentary proof that she was a 'widow'.  NSW Marriage laws did not require documentary proof in that era. The clergy wrote the status (widow or spinster) on their own parish register.

Divorce did not come to NSW until 1873.  You may find that in NSW  that the usual community meaning of 'widow' contracted to become strictly a woman who could prove her husband had died, only after Queen Victoria became a widow.  (ADD her Prince Albert died December 1861).

JM

[majm]

NSW BDM Burial Record INDEX
1853, John MAXWELL, age 36 Volume 119,  Line 910, 

Volume 119, Roman Catholic registers. 
https://www.records.nsw.gov.au/archives/collections-and-research/guides-and-indexes/births-deaths-and-marriages-registers-1787-1856


JM

[majm]

Judith kindly provided the following live link to Trove's digitised newspapers back earlier in this thread...
http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/62052358  for the Bathurst newspaper article dated 26 January 1856.

The Marriage is indexed at NSW BDM as William McKENNA and Judith WARD, in 1855, Volume 43B, line 463 and for marriage in the registers with code MM.  Volume 43B is for C of E marriages.   MM is C of E, Montefiores, Wellington and that marriage is part of the Early Church Records.

https://www.bdm.nsw.gov.au/Documents/early-church-codes.pdf

JM

[majm]

Cables clergy index info on Rev William WATSON has him at Wellington from 1831-45 with the CMS involved in the Aboriginal Missions in the Wellington Valley, and then from 1845-1857 as the Reverend in the Wellington Valley, he became one of the Reverends in William Bailey’s ‘Free Church of England in NSW’ in 1857.  http://anglicanhistory.org/aus/cci/index.pdf

 I suspect that that clerical connection to William Bailey would be pointing to Rev Watson at Wellington having a ‘broad’ interpretation to the word ‘widow’.    Bailey’s marriage shops have been discussed a number of times on the Australia board here at RChat.

http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/bailey-william-1731.

JM

[Illawarrian]

It doesn't matter how broad his interpretation of the word 'widow' was, if John Ward wasn't dead, Judith wasn't free to remarry, and all three involved could go to prison. The first prosecution for bigamy occurred in N.S.W. in 1818 and you'll find many cases on Trove. These three weren't dishonest people, and there's no way they would have broken the law that way.