Emma Spruce nee Hyatt

[smudwhisk]

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.

Why?  The John Hyett who arrived on the Grand Trianon in 1858 would appear likely to be the John Hyatt who died in McLeod's Creek in 1903.  His death certificate states he had been in the colony for 45 years and the informant was his brother Richard.  Similary there are several newspaper adverts/notices in 1863 from a James Burton trying to contact the John HYATT who arrived on the Grand Trianon in either 1858 or 1859.  As far as I can see, only one John Hyett or Hyatt arrived at that time, although of course its possible that any other lists are just missing.

The Passenger Lists state that the John Hyett who arrived in 1858 aged 19 years was born in Middlesex.  There are only two John Hyett or Hyatt's whose births were registered in Middlesex between 1838 and 1840.  One is a John Hyett whose birth was registered Jun qtr 1838 in Westminster St Margaret Registration District.  The other is John Hyatt whose birth was registered March qtr 1840 in Edmonton Registration District and who was baptised at Enfield St Andrew in Feb 1840.  The latter is the John Hyatt who married Emma Birch (Emma Maria Hyatt's birth certificate confirms he was from Enfield) and who died in McLeod's Creek in 1903 and whose death certificate states he had been residing in New South Wales for 45 years.

I've not looked closely at what happened to the John Hyett born 1838 in Westminster, albeit that he would have been 20 in August 1858.  Further research would be needed to eliminate him as the John Hyett who arrived in August 1858.

However, and I accept that John Hyatt born 1840 would only have been 18 years old and not 19 in August of 1858, there is other evidence to suggest that the Grand Trianon passenger was the Enfield John.  Also travelling on the same ship was a Joshua Holland, who was John Hyatt born Enfield's first cousin.  It seems likely they both emigrated together, following John's brother Richard who had arrived in the colony in May 1856 aboard the Phoebe Dunbar.  Joshua's sister Sophia and brother in law Robert Haydon (who was also Joshua, John and Richard's second cousin) followed the others to New South Wales arriving in 1875.

Going back to your comment that Emma and her father John were more likely to be registered as Hyett.  As you have obviously seen yourself on Emma Spruce nee Hyett's marriage certificate, she was illiterate and therefore its likely her surname was written as a literate person thought it was spelt.  Herbert Spruce, who could write his name, listed her father's surname as Height on Emma's death certificate.  Similarly, one of Richard Hyatt's granddaughter's surname was listed as Highatt on her marriage in 1920.  And for that matter Maria Hyatt, Richard's daughter, is listed as Hiet on her marriage in 1889, her daughter Elizabeth's birth certificate in 1889 and her son Robert's birth certificate in 1896.

The same name variations appear in the records in England for the family too.  I think the fact that Emma's marriage and the name on her children's birth certificates (of which the one I purchased and the one I found on ancestry both list it as Hyett) I really don't think is evidence that her birth would only be registered as Hyett.

Perhaps what is more of a mystery is why she is entered as Emily or Emily Maria on all of her children's birth registrations?  Her marriage is as Emma and her death is registered as that, and hers and Herbert's death certificates confirm the birth registrations are the correct family.  Even a later death certificate for one of her son's lists her as Emily.  And its not just down to Herbert Spruce getting the information wrong.  Herbert registered the birth of their son Herbert Harrington in 1904, he lists his wife as Emily Maria (there is a copy of that certificate on an ancestry public tree).  Emma herself registered the birth of their son William Herbert in 1890 and obviously told the registrar (or whoever else registered the birth) that was her name.  I have recently purchased a transcript of that certificate to see whether a different birthplace was listed for her, but, as with the 1904 certificate and her death certificate, it was listed as Tamworth.

[Neil Todd]

I can't scan and include documents at the moment but from Raymond Terrace historical society Coronial record of death of Herbert SPRUCE his wife's name was Emily Maria HYATT he married at age 23 or she was, the entry is a bit ambiguous. He was born Newcastle on Tyne England and had been in NSW for 44 years at death in 1927 so entry 1883.

My reading of that is that the magistrate was to rule on Herberts age from other sources as he most likely did not have a BC with him and possibly looked quite young. His age at 1887 of 23 makes his birth year 1864. Cannot find him on any English census

Neil

RED FLAG

  Neil

[smudwhisk]

I am not as certain of the Rev’d name, but I believe that Chas Robert MIDDLETON was the Police Magistrate at Raymond Terrace in the 1880s.   I also believe that he was the District Registrar of Births, Deaths, Marriages, and the Guardian of Minors, and his full name was likely to be Charles Robert MIDDLETON.   It is likely that he satisfied himself that Emma HYETT was 21 years of age or more when he was considering giving consent to Herbert's marriage.   (District Registrars were authorised to conduct civil marriages, he would be well aware of the regulations and the penalties for wrongly marrying a couple). 

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.  I've come across many an example in the UK or underage people marrying as if they were over the age of 21.  Either deliberately to avoid the need for parental consent or simply because they weren't asked specifically and appeared to be of that age.  Would there have been a restriction on them marrying if both had been minors without any parental consent?  Herbert does list his wife as being 38 years old in 1907 when she died which would have made her only 18 when she got married.

The more I look at this, the less I'm inclined to think the original marriage entry held by the Uniting Church would possibly solve the mystery.  Its quite likely that there could be ommissions or possibly a few untruths on it and for that reason, I'm uninclined to persue that line of research.

[smudwhisk]

I can't scan and include documents at the moment but from Raymond Terrace historical society Coronial record of death of Herbert SPRUCE his wife's name was Emily Maria HYATT he married at age 23 or she was, the entry is a bit ambiguous. He was born Newcastle on Tyne England and had been in NSW for 44 years at death in 1927 so entry 1883.

My reading of that is that the magistrate was to rule on Herberts age from other sources as he most likely did not have a BC with him and possibly looked quite young. His age at 1887 of 23 makes his birth year 1864. Cannot find him on any English census

Neil

RED FLAG

  Neil

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.

[smudwhisk]

To add to my pervious comment about the birthplace on Herbert's death certificate being a Red Herring, its therefore follows that Emma's age could also be on her death certificate but then it was her husband who was the informant and neither was that elderly at the time so you would have hoped he would have known.

[Neil Todd]

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.
[/quote]

Well probably no need to forward on any of the other documents from RT Historical Society as it is all most likely on ancestry anyway.

Neil

[majm]

May I assure you that the clergy were not permitted to conduct the marriage ceremony unless they had the required information about the parents of the bride and groom, particularly if either party were not yet 21 years of age.

Am I correct in reading this that if either party didn't actually know for certain the names of both parents, they would not be allowed to marry?

All evidence suggests that Herbert Spruce was illegitimate, if he didn't know the name of his father, would that have been a barrier to him marrying?  In England & Wales that information would simply have been left blank if the information wasn't known

     

The Police Magistrate gave consent for Herbert to marry, therefore whether Herbert knew the name of his father or not was NO barrier to him marrying.    It is important to recognise that in New South Wales that from 1823 (Chief Justice Forbes of the NSW Supreme Court), an English statute law was without effect unless it specifically stated that it was to operate in New South Wales.  So English Marriage Law was not effective in NSW. 

The bride being 21 years or more was able to give her own consent to her own marriage.  Because Herbert was not yet 21 years, he required someone else to be his 'voice'.  Whether his father was known to him nor not, it is obvious that neither his mother nor father provided that consent, and that he had relied on the Police Magistrate to provide that consent.   This particular Police Magistrate, Charles Robert MIDDLETON was also the then Clerk of Petty Sessions at Raymond Terrace, and also the Births Deaths and Marriages Registrar at the Raymond Terrace Court House.  He was also the son of a Church of England Minister.    I am quite sure that he took his responsibilities seriously, and would not have allowed Herbert to marry Emma if there was any doubt as to Emma's underage status, or any question of consanguinity, or if Emma had entered into a prior marriage.

Cheers,  JM

   

[majm]

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.

There were many ways that people entered New South Wales, and not all arrived from Britain.   In the 1850s and 1860s with Gold Fever there were arrivals from many foreign ports, not just from British ports.   California is a good example.     Each of the colonies were separate jurisdictions (and as states they still are), and so it was possible for a person to disembark at Melbourne and then make their way overland to the Colony of South Australia or New South Wales in the 1850s. Queensland was hived off NSW in 1859.  Passenger lists for Coastal trading vessels can be harder to find, and have less details anyways.   And of course, Inter-colonial trading must include movements between New Zealand ports and the eastern seaboard boards of Qld, NSW, Vic and Tas.    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

[majm]

  John Hyatt senior died at McLeod's Creek nee Drake in 1903 with his brother Richard the informant on his death certificate.  Richard listed his brother as being single with no children.  John may have been up at McLeod's Creek in 1901 when his brother Richard is listed on the Census as residing there with one other adult male.  They appear to have both been mining in the area according to both death certificates

and

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.

Why?  The John Hyett who arrived on the Grand Trianon in 1858 would appear likely to be the John Hyatt who died in McLeod's Creek in 1903.  His death certificate states he had been in the colony for 45 years and the informant was his brother Richard.  Similary there are several newspaper adverts/notices in 1863 from a James Burton trying to contact the John HYATT who arrived on the Grand Trianon in either 1858 or 1859.  As far as I can see, only one John Hyett or Hyatt arrived at that time, although of course its possible that any other lists are just missing.

The Passenger Lists state that the John Hyett who arrived in 1858 aged 19 years was born in Middlesex.  There are only two John Hyett or Hyatt's whose births were registered in Middlesex between 1838 and 1840.  One is a John Hyett whose birth was registered Jun qtr 1838 in Westminster St Margaret Registration District.  The other is John Hyatt whose birth was registered March qtr 1840 in Edmonton Registration District and who was baptised at Enfield St Andrew in Feb 1840.  The latter is the John Hyatt who married Emma Birch (Emma Maria Hyatt's birth certificate confirms he was from Enfield) and who died in McLeod's Creek in 1903 and whose death certificate states he had been residing in New South Wales for 45 years. ......

Can you please type up all the information on Emma Maria HYATT's NSW birth cert.    I should mention that there's Enfield in NSW, and it is a suburb of Sydney.  The Post Office was established there in 1853, and that would be a good indicator of officialdom recognising the area by that name.

Add
See my reply #73  re the 1901 Census, as I do not see "Richard" recorded there.     


Cheers,  JM