William O'Neil, New York 1872-1880, birth and/or death.

[Michael ONeil]

Hi folks - I'm posting this again after nearly 4 years to see if anyone might spark a new line that I might try...

I'm looking for the birth (1872) and possible death of a William O’Neil. Now I only have one record of William's existence and that's the 1875 NY State Census.

The census lists the following at an address in Brooklyn:

James O'Neil, age 28, born Ireland, married, liquor dealer, naturalised
Hanna O'Neil, age 21, wife, born Ireland, married
William O'Neil, age 3, born Brooklyn, single
James O'Neil, age 1 year 3 months, born Brooklyn, single

My GGrandfather (the younger James) was born 21 February 1874 at 96 Bergen Street, Brooklyn to parents James O'Neil (b1847, Ireland) who married a Hannah Angela Ames (b1852-54 Manhattan) 30 April 1873 at St Teresa’s (RC) on Henry Street (lower Manhattan). He was baptised 1 March 1874 at St Paul’s in Brooklyn. James (the elder) was a liquor dealer and I have him at various addresses in Brooklyn between 1871 and 1877. Whilst there’s no addresses given in the census, by checking the names of people above and below and cross-referencing to the Brooklyn directories the address is almost certain to be 96 Bergen Street as the addresses for the names above and below are variously given as 90, 92, 94, 98, etc Bergen Street.

I already have all the marriage, naturalisation, birth and baptismal records as well as addresses from city directories which are all 100% confirmed.

So the 1875 census listing seems to match exactly - names, ages (including the exact age of the younger James - the census is dated 3 June 1875 so go back 1 year and 3 months and you arrive at February 1874), the fact that the elder James was naturalised and that he was a liquor dealer and was married to a Hannah. The only thing that is wrong is that Hannah was actually born in Manhattan not Ireland.

Except I can’t find a birth record for William!

As James and Angela didn’t marry until 30 April 1873 then William must have been born out of wedlock in 1872 which might explain no baptismal record and I believe that births were not required to be registered with the city at that time so maybe no birth record exists. I've gone down the route of checking that William was a son to either of them by an earlier partner but can't find anything there. I doubt that was the case as Hannah (and her parents) were living in the 1870 Census at the same address as James' family at 84 Madison Street in Manhattan. How likely is it that either of them had William in 1872, their first partner dies and then they married a year later with one of them taking on the other's child?

By the 1880 Census, James and Angela are living apart as James (the elder) is helping a brother with a dry goods store in Akron, Ohio which he does for 1 year before returning to NYC. Angela is living near her sick mother up on East 72nd Street and the younger James is living with 3 of his aunts on East 12th Street.

But there's no William!

If he’s died between 1875 and 1880 then I can’t find any record of this event and I was under the impression that whilst there was no legal requirement to register births it was different for deaths - they had to be registered. This seems odd?

After 1880, I can't find any record of James and Hannah living together. The last address I have for James is 84 Madison Street in 1883 when his mother's will is read. Possible city directory evidence but nothing I can say is 100%. I don't have his death details. Hannah disappears until the late 1890s when she crops up at her aunt's on East 82nd Street which is where she died in 1902. I have her burial details in a family plot at Calvary containing 19 burials but there's no William there. The younger James lives variously with his aunts on East 12th Street or his mother's cousin on East 84th Street before he eventually married and settled in Liverpool, UK.

Lastly, and this may just be coincidence, but there is no occurrence anywhere of the name William in the extended family either on James' or Hannah's side. However, the elder James' brother (Michael) who started the dry goods store in Akron, Ohio named his first son William who was born 1885 in Akron. There is no occurrence of the name William on his mother's side either. Was there any significance in Michael choosing the name William?

Anyone bounce a few suggestions my way I'd love to try them out?

Michael, Liverpool, UK.

[amondg]

There is a William P Ames who died Manhattan 22 December 1893 age 21.

 

[oldohiohome]

First, thank you for posting what you know and where you have looked.

- I've seen baptisms of illegitimate children on the Irish records, but I don't know how they did things elsewhere. Maybe he is listed under "Ames".

- As for the significance of the given name William. If the elder brother Michael in Akron named his first son William that might indicate that his father was named William. Which would go along with the "mystery" son of James and Hannah being named William as well. And it would be more evidence that James was actually his father.

Do you know the name of James and Michael's father? Or, for that matter, the name of Michael's father-in-law?

- In line with the previous post, look for a William Ames in 1880 and on the state censuses.

- I'd be really inclined to think that the William in James and Hannah's household was the son of both of them, but if you can identify William Ames as the man you are looking for, that would be a point against it. Why would he use mother's name, unless he was a stickler for being absolutely legal? Or fell out with his father? Just guessing now.

[oldohiohome]

-  Why would he use mother's name, unless he was a stickler for being absolutely legal? Or fell out with his father? Just guessing now.

Or was raised by Hannah's parents.

[oldohiohome]

There is a William P Ames who died Manhattan 22 December 1893 age 21.

Another thing to do is try to <i>eliminate</i> this man from being your family. Is he elsewhere in 1875? Or somewhere in 1880 that would be an impossible match for the William you are looking for.

[amondg]

The 1875 New York census doesn't have a relationship question, only who was in the house on that night.
He may not be their child, just someone they were looking after that night.

[Michael ONeil]

Hi folks - cheers for the replies. Sorry about being late with my homework but it's been a bank holiday weekend in the UK. I'll try to reply to all of the suggestions/questions. Here goes...

James and Michael's father was James (b1807 IRE, d1865 NYC) and Michael's father-in-law was Thomas Mahar. The closest William I can get to Michael is his brother-in-law (Mahar) but there's no more Williams going back through that line. As for O'Neil - absolutely zip all. I suppose one more possibility to think about is that James and Hannah's William has died 1875-1885 and Michael names his first son in memory? Anyhow as I said in my posting this might just be coincidence.

As I also said, the 1875 State Census is the only record I have of William's existence. I've got a list of about 10 absolute confirmed addresses that I use for O'Neil and family members or in-laws on Hannah's side (Ames, Beechinor, Dickers, Good and Carroll) and I can't tie a William (O'Neil or Ames) to any of them by 1880 or later meaning that without the link of either an address or known relatives then I couldn't be sure about any later possibilities and I can't eliminate him from being my family that way.

I know this census doesn't list relationships but given I know that James and Michael were the only children of nine to marry and have families then who could the William O'Neil be that James and Hannah might be looking after? James and Michael arrived in NYC in 1852 with their siblings and parents and they were the only branch of the family to emigrate. It also says he was born Brooklyn so I think he must be a son to one or both of them? James had occupational and residence details in Brooklyn from 1871-1876.

I've tried all the birth and death possibilities for both Ames and O'Neil for the period 1872-1885 in NYC and NY State. I didn't go much later or wider for 2 simple reasons - the first being like above I needed a link and secondly I assumed that if he wasn't around by 1880 then he's most likely dead.

I have toyed with the idea that given I know that James was in Akron for one year in 1880, Hannah was up in East 72nd, the younger James was with his aunts (O'Neil) in East 12th, and William wasn't with his younger brother, then there must be a reason for this. He's either dead or for some reason (like suggested) he's with other relatives, more specifically on his mothers side which might mean he was Hannah's son and not James'? Added to this the fact that I can't find James and Hannah together after 1880 then could they have been estranged and it was a case of my son can stay with my side of the family and your son can stay with yours? Hannah's 1902 death certificate gives her name as Angela Ames O'Neil and shortly before her death I have nursing situations wanted ads for her using the initials A.A. (Angela Ames) so she carried on using the name Ames which to me further suggests estrangement? Her full name by the way was Hannah Angela Ames. So maybe William if he was still living did use the name Ames.

Hannah's parents were Norman Ames and Mary J. Beechinor. Norman was a ship's engineer working on the packet routes between NYC and Aspinall (Panama) and California. Last census appearance was 1870 NYC with his wife Mary and daughter Angela at the same address as O'Neil. He was dead by 1887 location unknown. Mary's appears in the 1880 Census and her death in 1887 is at her sister's in East 82nd Street. No city directory listings for her at all as a widow to Norman. Obviously the lack of residence post 1880 means I can't rule out William being with them but he wouldn't be listed anyhow given he would be 8 at the most in 1880.

I do know that a cousin of Hannah - a Joseph Dickers had lost his father by 1865 and his mother (Catherine M. Beechinor) had remarried to Carroll and Joseph is living with them in 1880 so added to the fact that the younger James is with his aunts at the same time then there is at least a history of the children being taken on by other family members so surely this would be the case with William.

I do think though that William was the son of James AND Hannah and that he was born out of wedlock.

This is so annoying as I have so much confirmed history and I thought this would be the proverbial walk in the park. So much for misplaced confidence eh?

[oldohiohome]

I've never tried parish records in the US, but could you see if there is a burial record for William in the parish in Brooklyn?
Although the only ones I've looked at were Catholic in Northern Ireland, and they didn't record too many children's burials, if any.
Or cemetery records.

[Michael ONeil]

Good suggestion oldohiohome. I might fire a cheeky request to see if anyone can check St Teresa's on Henry Street, Manhattan which is where James and Hannah were married in 1873 and St Paul's in Brooklyn as that's where the younger James was baptised in 1874. There's no burial records at Ancestry for St Pauls but there are Baptisms and Marriages. Nothing at all online for St Teresa's. Will just ask to check 1875-1880.