(continued)
On the certificate - so hard to read that a frustrated transcriber decided to 'key smash' the name and turned it into
Housties - John's father was registered as
James Haycock, carpenter. Dad even was present at the wedding and signed as a witness. That was not even
close to 'Thomas Haycock, inn keeper'. Intriguing.. because if New Zealand John was
not the inn keeper's son, who was he?!
I then searched for a possible marriage and certificate for the John who
was the inn keeper's son, John born 1816 Hydan-Dol, baptized 02 June 1816 at Castle Caereinion. And found he married
Elizabeth Humphries in
1843 in Montgomeryshire. Listed as father on the certificate? Thomas Haycock,
inn keeper. That meant there were
three John's who were continuously confused with each other:
John #1 born 1810 Oswestry, died 1876 Wolverhampton - son of John Haycock & Margaret Jones.
John #2 born 1816 Castle Caereinion, died 1863 Monmouthshire - son of
inn keeper Thomas Haycock & Mary Stansfield.
John #3 born 1818/1819, died 1872 Marlborough New Zealand - son of
James Haycock, carpenter.
All that was left now was to find out where the New Zealand John & James tied in with the Shropshire/Wales Haycocks, as I did have the previously mentioned DNA matches.
Trying to find carpenter James Haycock in the 1841 census didn't get me any results, so I decided to use the immigration info from several family trees and managed to find a transcription of the 1842 passenger list. That's when things started clicking into place. Because right above the entry for John (23yo) and wife Elizabeth Haycock was that of James (35yo) and wife Ann Haycock. And James' profession was listed as 'carpenter/joiner'. Which meant inn keeper's son James (1803) wasn't John's brother but his
father! The close family relationship between John and James was further confirmed by the baptism of James' youngest child in England, Elizabeth Ann on 9 January 1842, months before they headed off to New Zealand. She was baptized in Ingrave, Essex. The
exact same place where John married Elizabeth Burls a few months later.
In the end, the picture is very clear.
Aside from John possibly being an illegitimate child by inn keeper Thomas himself, it's most likely that James actually fathered John when he was very young, around 15 or so. Stranger things have happened in locales where alcohol is plied and common sense flies out the window. So far I haven't found John's mother, but it's highly likely James kept very close contact with his (presumed) eldest son, and at one point decided they all deserved a new start. This also allowed them to 'fiddle' with their ages a bit, James suddenly being several years younger on the ship's manifest, and maybe John was made to be a little older. Whatever the case, they stepped on New Zealand soil as brothers.
I do realize the presented facts completely upset all the stories surrounding 'John Haycock, son of inn keeper Thomas Haycock from Wales'. And for that I do apologize. Personally, however, I find
this story to be much more exiting & inspiring, as it speaks of the loyalty of a father to his son, and of the extremes he was willing to go through to erase his son's status of a 'base born bastard' and help him write a new future.
For me, this has hit very close to home.
TD