Emma Spruce nee Hyatt

[smudwhisk]

How has it been established that the John HYETT who arrived 1858 is Emma's Dad .... Is this based on the given name of her father as per her dc?   John is perhaps the most popular of given names in NSW 19th Century official records.

So just because there's only one apparent candidate for Emma's dad (John HYETT, arriving 1858) does not mean that the John HYETT, brother of Richard HYETT,) was a relative of Emma's.   

Cheers,  JM

I'm sorry, I thought you were suggesting that here:

I think John HYETT was aged 19, and arrived 1858 on the GrandTrianon, as per NSW State Records Index, and image from the passenger list.

http://srwww.records.nsw.gov.au/ebook/list.asp?Page=NRS5316/4_4795/Grand%20Trianon_20%20Aug%201858/4_479500153.jpg&No=12

While the spelling variations can be insignificant, it seems that Emma and her likely father have both been recorded in official NSW records as HYETT, so across two generations.   As the NSW BDM 1887 marriage registration seems to have missed out on being reconciled, the actual registration held by NSW BDM is likely to be written in the clergyman's hand, so Emma's signature would not likely be there.  Perhaps though Emma Spruce was informant for some birth registrations of her children.   If so, it may be sensible to check how her maiden name was noted on those registrations.....

Cheers,  JM

You say "I think John Hyett", not that "there was a John Hyett who arrived in 1858".

In any case, as per my previous post, John Hyatt who died in McLeod's Creek in 1903 is listed as having spent 45 years in New South Wales, putting an arrival date of 1858 or 1859.  As I mentioned, previously, also aboard the Grand Trianon in August 1858 was John and Richard Hyatt's cousin Joshua Holland.

While it is not conclusive proof that the John who arrived on that ship was the one born in Enfield in 1840, it seems more likely that it was him in light of the information on his death certificate and the fact he is listed on the Passenger List as born Enfield and his cousin was on the same ship.

Granted that the age is wrong, but, then, that could just be down to who actually took the details down for the passenger list.

[majm]

I am not disputing everything you post.   I am sure you are misunderstanding my questions. 

I have offered to help, and I have offline resources to help.   But please accept that although I have very little knowledge of how to research 19th Century English records, I have decades of experience in researching NSW 19th Century records, and I have living elderly relatives who include a retired Minister, several retired senior officers of NSW BDM, first cousins who are retired senior officers from what is now the NSW State Records Office, and the National Archives of Australia.   The questions are not posed to undermine your research but to assist in developing it. 

Cheers,  JM

[majm]

And no there are no other children mentioned, nor is there a section on the transcript for this.  But as I have absolutely no intention of purchasing an original from the NSW BMD to double check, that is what I take as being correct.

   Perhaps it was a partial transcription.    NSW BDM birth registrations includes the heading:

" Date and place of marriage - previous issue"

ADD  live link to NSW BDM sample of birth certificate.     
http://www.bdm.nsw.gov.au/Documents/b1867-11928.pdf   

I confirm that Official Transcription Agents record the information as per the registration. 

Cheers,  JM

[majm]

No. XXX.
An Act to amend and consolidate the Laws affecting the Solemnization of Marriage .
[ 30th November, 1855]

Consent in case of minority

10. If either party to any intended Marriage not being a  widower or widow shall be under the age of twenty-one years such Marriage shall not take place without production to the Minister or Registrar about to celebrate the same of the written consent of the father of such party if within the Colony or if not within the Colony then of a guardian appointed by the father or if there be no such guardian in the Colony then of  the mother of such party if within the Colony or where there is no such parent or guardian in the Colony or he or she is incapable of duly consenting by reason of distance  habitual intoxication or mental incapacity then the written consent of some Justice of the Peace appointed for that purpose as hereinafter mentioned Provided that such Justice shall make inquiry on oath as to the facts and circumstances of the case before giving such consent.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/num_act/ma1855n30112.pdf

ADD 
Penalty (on the Minister or District Registrar conducting the ceremony etc ) £500 / 5 years for marrying a minor without consent. 
The P.M. would have checked out Emma. 
No Police Magistrate would have wanted to be sent to gaol. 
Likely he would know too many offenders.
NSW had an interesting checks and balance system in the second half of the 19th Century 

and

Act No. 15, 1899.
An Act to consolidate the Acts relating to Marriage. [20th November, 1899].

In the case of Minors.
9. If either party to any intended marriage not being a widoweror widow is under the age of twenty-one years such marriage shall not take place without production to the minister or registrar about to celebrate the same—
(a) of the written consent of the father of such party if within New South Wales or if not within New South Wales then of a guardian appointed by the father or
(b) if there be no such guardian in New South Wales then the written consent of the mother of such party if within New South Wales or
(c) where there is no such parent or guardian in New South Wales or he or she is incapable of duly consenting by reason of distance habitual intoxication or mental incapacity then the written consent of some justice of the peace appointed for that purpose. Such justice shall make inquiry on oath as to the facts and circumstances of the case before giving his consent.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/num_act/ma1899n15112.pdf

There are plenty of NSW BDM marriage registrations where it seems that the groom was under 21 years of age and NO consent is recorded on the registration.  This is usually attributed to the summary nature of much of the admin process until the NSW BDM commenced the reconciliation process in 1912.  But with the registration showing that the Police Magistrate has established that Herbert was not yet 21 years of age, and that he is without either parent available to provide consent, then Chas Robert MIDDLETON has obviously made inquiry on oath as to the facts and circumstances of Herbert's intention to marry Emma, and has been satisfied and thereby given consent in accordance with the law.   Remember please that Chas Robert Middleton was the District Registrar of Births Deaths Marriages, and as such was licenced to conduct civil marriage ceremonies (Registry Office Marriages).   He could have performed the marriage ceremony, but they chose to be married in a Church.   To me that choice in itself is significant.  It shows both Herbert and Emma endeavouring to be as truthful as possible.  Raymond Terrace in the 1880s was not a huge township where no one knew anyone else.   I do not doubt that Emma believed she was at least 21 years of age, and that the clergyman and the Police Magistrate both believed her, as did Herbert. 

ADD

I accept that the certificate only suggests that Herbert was underage.  However, just because the Minister or District Registrar both didn't think Emma was underage, is not conclusive evidence that she was 21 or over.  It just means that she didn't say otherwise or they assumed from her appearance that she was and perhaps didn't query that.

My comment was that just because Herbert was the only party listed as being underage, does not, in any way, confirm that Emma was definitely over the age of 21 years.  It was just that the Magistrate and Vicar obviously assumed she was or she just told them that. 

Or are you telling me they had to carry around copies of their birth and, where appropriate, marriage certificates to prove their age and marital status in 1887 because frankly I would very much doubt that was a pre-requesite to getting married in those days.  And in any case, how would Emma knows that's what the piece of paper said anyway since she was illiterate?

As an aside, just because a woman makes her mark on an official document does not mean she was not able to read or write.  Was she asked to "make your mark here" or was she asked  to "sign here".    There's threads about this at RChat .....

Cheers,  JM

[majm]

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/num_act/piao1880n9275.pdf

Public Instruction Act 1880 

Required 70 days (ie 14 school weeks) attendance per year at school for children aged from 6 to 14 (inclusive)....     It was secular, it was compulsory and it was free. 

Perhaps Emma was more than 14 years of age in 1880, or perhaps she was not in New South Wales at that time, but if she was in NSW and if she was not yet 14, then she was to attend school for 70 days of the year.   The critical task for the teachers was to teach the three Rs .... Reading, Riting, Rithmatic and in the first few years, regardless of the pupils chronological ages, those that needed to learn to read were classed together and instruction given for learning to read .....   

Some of my family members attended school for half days for 140 days in that decade.  But I am sure that all learnt to write, as I have trunk loads of their school work.  Despite that, when marrying, many of the lasses used a mark rather than their autograph signature.   Uncle Bert who is alive and very alert, and was born in Feb 1910, and who reads my threads, knows for certain that his mum could read and write from a young age.  But she made her mark on the parish register when marrying, and she made her mark at the Court House when registering his birth, and she wrote letters to her parents long before she married, and she signed these with her autograph signature. 

Cheers,  JM 

[majm]

The birth certificate for Herbert Harrington Spruce, of which his father was the informant, lists Herbert's birthplace as Norfolk, his age as 35 years and Emma's as 33 years.  Similarly, the birth certificate of their son William Henry Spruce in 1890 lists his birthplace as Norfolk and his age as 23 years and Emma's as 22 years.

There is a Herbert Thomas B Spruce birth registered Jun qtr 1867 Henstead Registration District.  He would appear to be the Herbert Spruce born and residing as nephew in Wreningham, Norfolk, on the 1881 Census.  I've yet to find him on the 1871 Census or any later, its quite possible, in light of the information on the birth certificates that that is the correct Herbert and one or other of the family got his birthplace incorrect when giving information on his death.  I think Newcastle upon Tyne is a the Red Herring.

Familysearch have an extract baptism in 1871 of a Herbert Thomas Baldwin Spruce with mother Emma.  I've not yet gone to see if they have the original in amongst their online records but there is a marriage of a John Moore and a Sarah Ann Spruce in Henstead RD in 1856 which would appear to be the uncle and aunt that this Herbert Spruce is with.

I've so far not been able to trace what happened to Emma Spruce the mother but I'm wondering, but cannot prove it, whether she emigrated with her son under a different surname and perhaps settled in Raymond Terrace too and perhaps that's why her daughter in law was known as Emily so as not to get the two confused. My grandmother had an unmarried sister in law with the same first name as her, they were both differentiated by my grandmother being refered to by her maiden name by the rest of the family.  Similarly she had another unmarried sister in law named Ivy and a brother in law's wife was also Ivy, both again obviously having the same surname.  The brother in law's wife was refered to with her maiden name by the rest of the siblings to differentiate who was who in a conversation.

Just to Add the Register of Coroner's Inquests is viewable on ancestry, it has the same information that was contained on the death certificate and was probably the source of that information as the informant isn't one of the family.

Re Norfolk .... does it state the colony/country ....
 could it be Norfolk Is,  NSW,

Re Herbert having a mum with given name as Emma .... and they emigrated under a different name and settled in Raymond Terrace .... 
If so, then did she die before Herbert married Emma HYETT, or did she decline to give consent .... or was she incapacitated and not qualified to give consent....

https://familysearch.org/search/collection/location/1927080?region=Australia

And in NSW in the 19th Century, I find that Emily and Emma were often interchangable given names and in family circles were both shortened to "Em".   

Here's some women at Raymond Terrace, alas back in 1875. 
From Grevilles PO Directory 1875, Raymond Terrace

Mrs BAKER
Mrs CARPENTER
Mrs CHEERS, Dressmaker
Mrs DALYELL
Mrs John DOHERTY
Mrs GILBERT, Storekeeper
Mrs GLOVER, settler, Nelson Bay
Mrs GRANT, storekeeper
Mrs HOLDSTOCK, boardinghouse
Mrs LONG
Mrs MACKAY
Mrs McMAHON, charwoman
Mrs RENNIX, seamstress
Mrs ROSE, dairy
Mrs N RUSSELL
Mrs R RUSSELL
Miss E SNODGRASS
Mrs WILKINSON, charwoman.

https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QKKQ-N9W9 SPRUSE, Herbert

Cheers,  JM

[majm]

https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QKKQ-N9W9 SPRUSE, Herbert

Re 1891 document
Census date was 5 April 1891 …..  If that is ‘your’ Herbert SPRUCE, then there’s 4 males and 1 female in the household. Assuming the female is ‘your’ Emma, then who are the two remaining males….
There’s Herbert, and there's their son,  William H, born 16 June 1890  (#29549)  … perhaps there was a male boarder and/or a male visitor or two to Herbert’s household on that evening.


Re Emma BYATT  (from the 1877 newspaper cuttings) …. There’s several births for John and Emma BYATT at NSW BDM that were registered Waterloo district from 1881 to 1886 …. ….   

Sands Sydney Directories has a John BYATT, carpenter in Waterloo
Here’s the link for the free to search Sands Directories….
http://www.cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/learn/search-our-collections/sands-directory

Not sure if I posted the following info earlier in this thread, if so, I apologise for duplications...

Grevilles PO Directory 1875 BINALONG (in the LACHLAN electorate)
William BIRCH, carpenter

NSW ER 1870 THE LACHLAN
James BIRCH, residence, Wombat

NSW ER 1878 THE LACHLAN
James BIRCH, residence, Wombat

To save going back through the thread, here's a live link to the cutting. 
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/70597934 Town and Country 6 Jan 1877.

NSW ER 1870 CAMDEN
William BIRCH, residence, Town of Upper Picton in the Police District of Picton
James BIRCH, freehold, Town of Upper Picton in the Police District of Picton
John BURGH, residence, Nepean Towers, East Bargo in the Police District of Picton


Cheers,  JM

[majm]

Hi there,

From a partial official transcription of the 1906 birth for Clarence.  NSW BDM #38426

Clarence George Edward, 22 October 1906, Raymond Terrace

Father as Herbert SPRUCE, labourer, England
Mother as Emily Maria HEILE, Tamworth

Informant E M SPRUCE, Mother, Raymond Terrace.


Cheers,  JM

[majm]

NSW ER 1870 THE WILLIAMS
John HILE, leaseholder, Johnson’s Creek

NSW ER 1878 THE WILLIAMS
John HILE, leaseholder, Johnson’s Creek
Boldes HILE, leaseholder, Johnson’s Creek

State Records NSW Naturalisation Index
John HILE, Germany, cert 13 Sept 1862  Reel 130

State Records NSW
Johann and Catherina HEIL on the Parland with infant arriving Sydney 1849. 

NB
NSW BDM online index has Elizabeth HEILE married John GANDRON in 1876, marriage registered Dungog NSW #2501.  Not to be confused with the other #2501 of that year, also registered at Dungog (indexed as Liggins=OKeeffe).

Perhaps Emma/Emily Maria HEILE is not an ancestor on Smudwhisk’s elusive HYATT line.

Cheers,  JM