Author Topic: WHY? Sarah BIGG to Victoria 1851-53  (Read 3835 times)

Offline PrueM

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 12,637
  • Please don't try to PM me :)
    • View Profile
WHY? Sarah BIGG to Victoria 1851-53
« on: Sunday 03 July 05 22:25 BST (UK) »
Being an Aussie, I've got to trace every family of mine back to their immigration to this country, but one of them has me stumped!

Sarah Ann BIGG (or BIGGS) was born in Kent around 1826.  She and her family moved to Essex where they had a farm at West Ham (hard to imagine today!) and in 1851 she is shown as living at home with her parents (Lydia and William) and two siblings - one of them is my 3xgreat-grandmother Caroline.

In 1861, Sarah is shown in Stepney, a widow with two children, both of whom were born in Newcastle, NSW!  I've pulled both birth records from the NSW BDM site (fantastic resource, that) and after a bit of lateral thinking, found Sarah's marriage in 1853, in Victoria.  She married William WEST, a mariner, in Williamstown, Victoria (near Port Phillip I believe).  They must have soon moved to Newcastle as their first child, Lydia, was born there in 1854.  William Jr was born in 1857 and then I guess William Sr must have either died, or the couple separated, and Sarah moved back to England.

I can find no record of Sarah in immigrant indexes for Victoria or NSW, either assisted or unassisted; nor can I find her on convict records although that woudl be a long shot.

Can anyone help? ???

Prue

Offline trish251

  • RootsChat Leaver
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *
  • Posts: 9,156
    • View Profile
Re: WHY? Sarah BIGG to Victoria 1851-53
« Reply #1 on: Monday 04 July 05 06:35 BST (UK) »
Hi Prue

Did you 3 x gg immigrate to Australia, or was it a later generation. We have a number of instances where siblings came together to Australia (without the parents). Some stayed, some returned back to the UK. Were her parents still alive in 1861? She may well have returned for some family support after being widowed. You may be able to find some information on her husband in mariner records - sorry i don't have any links.

From the AVRI, I think this is the parish where the children were christened
Hexham; Newcastle, Christ Church, Church of England (Lydia anyway, William simply says NSW).

If Sarah was in England in 1851 it is most unlikely she was a convict - Convict transportation to New South Wales effectively ceased in 1842. From 1846-50 Exiles were transported. Exiles had served part of their sentence in a penitentiary in Britain and were granted a conditional pardon or ticket of leave on arrival in the Colony.

Trish





Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline PrueM

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 12,637
  • Please don't try to PM me :)
    • View Profile
Re: WHY? Sarah BIGG to Victoria 1851-53
« Reply #2 on: Monday 04 July 05 07:54 BST (UK) »
Thanks Trish, that's really interesting.  My 3xgreat-grandmother in that particular family did not come out at that time, it was her granddaughter (my great-gran) and her daughter came out in 1921.  They are the latest immigrants in my whole line, the first was in 1817.

So it was just Sarah, on her lonesome, who came out here - I wonder whether she followed her lover and eloped?  I thought 1853 would be too late for convicts, but not having researched in Victoria before I wasn't sure.  Do you really think it's possible that she was an Exile?  They seemed to be a pretty law-abiding family, but you never can tell I suppose.  Her parents were still alive in 1861 and living in West Ham so you are probably right about going home for family support.  I'm guessing Newcastle wasn't a particularly pleasant place to bring up kids on your own in those days.

If you have any more brainwaves I'd love to hear from you!!  Thanks again

Prue

Offline trish251

  • RootsChat Leaver
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *
  • Posts: 9,156
    • View Profile
Re: WHY? Sarah BIGG to Victoria 1851-53
« Reply #3 on: Monday 04 July 05 08:43 BST (UK) »
Hi prue

No, I don't think she was an exile - she was still at home in 1851. Perhaps she met her seaman in England & came out with him on one of his ships? I was also wondering if he died at sea? I think it really unlikely that she came out alone, or not having met the husband before, if she didn't come with other family. And I agree, she probably went back to England when widowed, if she had no other family to support her in Australia (at Hexham or anywhere else it would have been difficult).

There were no convicts sent to Victoria - the ones that ended up there were ticket of leave or the like. The exiles were the British way of dumping their prisoners to somewhere that didn't want them. Told them they would be free if they went to NSW.

Many of my ancestors came from the Newcastle area - around Taree, Forster, Stroud, Buladelah, Raymond Terrace. They mainly went there for the land grants. Hexham is quite close to Raymond Terrace. The Newcastle library has all the old parish registers for the district & Raymond Terrace has quite a good library/history Society if you are anywhere near there.

Trish
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Offline corinne

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
Re: WHY? Sarah BIGG to Victoria 1851-53
« Reply #4 on: Thursday 14 July 05 22:21 BST (UK) »
When you think what life must have been like on board ships in those days for such long trips, its hard to imagine that anyone would have made the trip from England to the antipodes more than once, but I think its easy to underestimate the colonial spirit.  I have relatives who made the trip to New Zealand not once but at least three times, going back when elderly relatives died or for medical treatment.   In terms of females going out on their own, in New Zealand and I guess in Australia too, there was a great shortage of females of marriageable age, and I think there were a lot of women who went out to marry, or to become servants/housekeepers with the idea of marrying later.  Some of the marriages would have been arranged - the male going out earlier to establish his land, occupation, etc, and his intended (not necessarily formally engaged) coming out later when he had a house to live in.