Harriet Whybrew - an update

 

Poor Harriet! I've found more information about her recently, but everything I've discovered has been bad news. 

To recap on what I've already written about her, Harriet was David and Susan Whybrew's first child. She was born in Adelaide in 1868, before they were married. When David's regiment returned to England, Susan went too, taking their second daughter, Eliza, with them, but leaving Harriet behind. I've discussed who might have taken care of Harriet and how she came to be reunited with her family in her late teens.

Harriet's name began appearing in the Adelaide press in January 1882, when she was only thirteen, though she was reported to be fifteen. She was charged with stealing a watch and other property. The police magistrate sent her to the Industrial School, a reformatory, for twelve months. Even there she got into trouble.

Between then and August 1885 she was constantly in and out of the police courts, often charged with 'loitering' or with the use of bad language. Sometimes she paid a fine, sometimes she went to prison for several weeks. 

I've recently come across some additional newspaper reports and records that I hadn't seen before. All together, I've found twelve mentions of Harriet in the police court between 1882 and 1885. On one occasion, in July 1883, she and her cousin, Rose Atkin, appeared together, both charged with 'using indecent language, loitering etc'. They were each fined two pounds. Rose paid the fine but Harriet went to gaol for three months, presumably because she couldn't pay. On the prison records (which are now available on familysearch.org) both girls were described as prostitutes. 

Time in hospital?

I still don't know what happened to Harriet between her last appearance in the Adelaide courts in August 1885 and her appearance in court in  Colchester in England in October 1888. But I did discover a 'Susan Whybrow' listed in the Adelaide hospital admissions in 1885. She was said to be eighteen years old, single, Roman Catholic, born in South Australia. She was admitted on 26 November.

Since I can't find any Susan Whybrow (or similar name) born in SA around the right time, and the details fit Harriet pretty well, I'm wondering if someone inadvertently listed her mother's name instead of hers. After all, the Destitute Asylum twice listed David Whybrew as her uncle rather than her father. The hospital admission records (which are also now on familysearch.org) show that she was in hospital for two weeks. 

The name 'J. Bonnin' is listed under the 'circumstances' column. Was this a doctor? An employer? A friend? Usually doctors were given their title in this column. The only Dr J Bonnin I can find in Adelaide, James A Bonnin, didn't graduate until 1895. A John Bonnin (or Bonnie or Bonney) appeared in the Police Courts around this time, charged with use of indecent language. Perhaps he brought Harriet to the hospital.

Harriet, if this is her, was treated for anaemia. Given her lifestyle, it's quite likely that Harriet would have had a poor diet, which could have led to chronic anaemia. But if she was admitted to hospital for treatment, it's more likely that the anaemia was acute. I can only speculate on what might have caused this, but it does seem that something happened at the end of 1885 that led to the end of Harriet's appearances in the Police Court.

If Harriet was in hospital in late November 1885, then she couldn't have been the 'Miss S Wybrow" who left Adelaide for England on 15 November. The identity of this Miss Wybrow is a mystery. I can't find any other mention of her existence. 

How Harriet came to rejoin her family is also still a mystery. My hunch continues to be that the Salvation Army might have had something to do with it, given their outreach to 'fallen women' in Adelaide, and Harriet's sister Eliza's association with the 'Salvos' in Colchester. An article about the Salvation Army 'home for fallen women' in Norwood reported in August 1886 that

Since the opening, thirty-four girls and women have been received, thirteen of whom have been placed in situations, and from reports that are received by the matron, they are giving entire satisfaction, and are most thankful to the officers of the institution for the great benefits derived by them from its establishment. Four of the number have been restored to their parents, and four have been transferred to the lying-in department of the destitute, whilst one married' woman has returned to her husband.

Perhaps Harriet was one of those restored to her parents. 

(My thanks to the South Australia Genealogy group on Facebook, who helped me to find some of this information.)

You can find out more about Susan and David Whybrew and their family, in my book Susan: convict's daughter, soldier's wife, nobody's fool.
It's available on Amazon and other online books stores

Walter Lindrum on video

Walter Lindrum, the champion billiards player, was born in Kalgoorlie in Western Australia in 1898. He was the son of Frederick Lindrum, another billiards great, and Harriet Mary Atkin, both from Adelaide. His grandmother, Mary Ann Atkin (nee Mason) was the sister of my great great grandmother, Susan Mason. 

I recently came across this video about him. It looks as if it was made in the 1970s and the sound is rather wobbly in places. It focuses mainly on Walter's career as a billiards player, but it has some interesting snippets about his personal life.

(Ignore the screen at the beginning that says 'Sorry there's a problem with this part of the video'. It continues after that.)

Henry Hartland - another child of Jane Mason?

Two years ago I wrote a post about Jane and Bridget Mason, the two youngest sisters of my great great grandmother, Susan Mason. I mentioned that I'd come across a child named Naomi, reportedly born in 1881 to a Jane Mason in the Adelaide Railway station. I wasn't sure if this was the same Jane Mason or not.

A couple of weeks ago I was excited to receive an email from someone who is a descendant of Jane Mason. Not through Naomi though, but by another daughter. (More on that in a later post.) That was enough to send me back to do some more research on Jane.

I found a family tree online that included Naomi Mason, one I hadn't seen before. But Naomi's mother was said to be a girl named Sarah Jane Mason, the daughter of Thomas F Mason. The information on the tree was well documented, including a photo of the entry for Naomi's birth in the Destitute Asylum records. There was no doubt that Naomi didn't belong on my tree. So I went back and added an update to the post I'd written in 2018.

Since then I've discovered another possible child of "our" Jane Mason, a boy named Henry Hartland. He was born in Adelaide on 22 August 1873 and was originally registered as Henry Hartland Mason, suggesting he was born "out of wedlock". His father was listed as Henry Hartland.

I can't find any record of Jane Mason marrying Henry Hartland. In fact, I can't find any record of Henry Hartland senior in South Australia, apart from his name being on the younger Henry's birth registration.

What I did find was a newspaper article in the South Australian Register, on 19 October 1872, which described Jane Mason as an employee of Joseph John Hartland, who owned a hotel (the Prince Albert in Currie Street according to other news items);

Sophia Vicary, daughter of Thomas Vicary, was charged with stealing one tablcloth, value 8s., from Joseph John Hartland, licensed victualler, who recognised the article produced as being his. Jane Mason, in the employ of prosecutor, said she placed the cloth upon a line . about 5 . p.m. on Tuesday, and missed it between two and three hours later. Prisoner came to see her that night. Lewis Irving, pawnbroker, said the cloth was pawned by prisoner on Tuesday night. Sentenced to two months' hard labour.

So it seems likely that Henry senior was related in some way to Jane's employer. I'm still trying to unearth the link between Henry and Joseph John Hartland (usually described as John Joseph).

But how could I be certain that this was the Jane Mason from my family tree? (Once bitten, twice shy!) One clue came from searching through newspapers on Trove for the younger Henry. On 25 April 1884, Adelaide newspapers reported that a boy named Henry Hartland appeared in the police court and was sent to the Industrial School for being an "uncontrollable child". One report helpfully mentioned the name of his aunt, Mary Atkins.

The Express and Telegraph  Fri 25 Apr 1884, p 2

This seemed promising. Jane Mason on my tree had an older sister, Mary Ann, who was married to Henry Atkin (without an 's'). They lived in Currie Street in Adelaide. In fact, Mary Ann and Henry were listed as the next of kin when Susan Mason's daughter Harriet Whybrew was sent to the industrial school in 1882. They had a large family of their own, so if they were responsible for Jane's wayward child too, they would have had their hands full.

Still, there were other Mary Atkins living in Adelaide at this time. Without more evidence, I'm not quite ready to claim Henry Hartland as Jane's son. But I've recorded what I've found because it's an interesting story, and perhaps someone can shed some further light on it.

Poor Henry was only 11 years old when he was sent to the reformatory in Magill. Perhaps it's significant that Jane Mason was in hospital in June 1884, and died from cirrhosis of the liver less than two years later. She may have been too unwell to look after him.

Henry had several further brushes with the courts. He was re-admitted to the industrial school in 1887 for two years. Then in August 1890 he was charged, along with two other boys, with taking part in an assault on a Chinese man. He was sentenced to two months' prison, but was released on the Governors' orders on the grounds that he hadn't been involved.

South Australian Register Mon 22 Sep 1890 p 4

An Assault on a Chinaman. — On August 20 three youths named Bruan, Hartland, and Wynes were sentenced at the Adelaide Police Court to two months' imprisonment for assaulting Way Ching, a Chinaman, in Hindley Street. Efforts were subsequently made to secure the release of Henry Hartland on the ground that he had not taken part in the affray. Enquiries were made, and Mr. W.V. Smith, who acted for Hartland, has just received the following letter from the Under Secretary, dated September 19 : — ' Re assault on Chinese and Hartland. Sir— Referring to previous correspondence and to your letter of yesterday's date I have the honour by the Chief Secretary's direction to inform you that His Excellency the Governor has been pleased to order his release this afternoon.'

For most of his life, Henry worked as a labourer. He married a woman named Emma, and they had at least two children: Henry (1898) and Jean Clare (1920). Strangely, given his past history, in 1910 Henry was also listed in South Australian school admission records as the guardian of a child named Leno Ah Yee, born in 1905.*

In December 1916, at the age of 44, Henry (also known as Harry) enlisted in the Australian Imperial Force. He was sent to France, where he was wounded in the leg in August 1918. After recuperating in England, he returned to France until the end of the war. When Henry died in 1935 he was buried in a soldier's grave in West Terrace Cemetery. 

If you know any more about Henry Hartland, or Jane Mason, I'd love to hear from you. I've removed the contact form from this blog for the time being because messages were not reaching me. Please use the contact form on my web site or leave a comment on this post.

Sources:

* South Australian school admission records, Family Search. In 1916 Charles Ah Chow was listed as Leno Ah Yee's guardian.

A sad tale of two Roses

The name Rose and its variants - Rosina, Rosanna, Roseanna - pops up quite often among the Beales and Mason families in the Ward family history. Recently I've discovered two more Roses that I didn't know about before. Unfortunately their lives were both rather brief.

The first was Rosanna Mason, born in Sydney on December 1, 1841. She was the first child of John Mason and Catherine Murphy, and she was baptised at St Mary’s Church on December 8. Her sponsors (the Catholic equivalent of god parents) were Andrew and Mary Goodwin, the same couple who had been the witnesses at John and Catherine’s wedding in February that year.

Their second child, Mary Ann, was born on October 19 the following year. Catherine may already have been pregnant again with her next child, Catherine, when little Rosanna died. Perhaps she succumbed to one of the epidemics of childhood diseases such as whooping cough and scarlet fever that swept through Sydney in the 1840’s, as families began arriving in the colony as migrants. Nearly 30% of deaths in the 1840’s were among infants*. Prior to this, when the population had been made up chiefly of adult convicts and soldiers, such illnesses had been almost unknown. Rosanna was buried in Sydney.

As was common in those days, John and Catherine used the name Rosanna again, for their fifth daughter, who was born in Adelaide in 1847. Several of the Mason’s daughters named one of their children Rose, Rosanna or Rosina. I knew already about Rose Atkin (daughter of Mary Ann), and Roseanna Murphy (daughter of Eliza Mason).

Recently I discovered another child named Rose who I think is a daughter of Susan Mason and David Whybrew. (I don't yet have certificates to prove it, but it seems likely.) If so, she would be one of the 'missing' children who doesn't appear on any census.

She was registered in Colchester in the April-June quarter of 1874 under the name “Rosina Whybruew”. The spelling suggests that it was Susan who registered her, and unlike the other children born while David was in the army, she wasn’t recorded on the British Nationals Armed Forces births register.

That may be because the family were in a state of upheaval. A two year old child named David, who was almost certainly their son, died in Colchester  in July. David’s regiment was moved to Ireland in August, arriving in Dublin on August 8. Susan and the children went with him, though they may not have sailed at the same time.

Sometime in 1874 a child less than a year old named “Rose Whybren”  died in Dublin and her death was registered there. It seems very likely that this was Susan and David’s young daughter. It must have been a terrible blow to lose a baby like that in a strange country, especially so soon after the death of another child.

Like her parents, Susan and David used the name Rose again for a later child, a daughter born in Kent in 1877. Their daughter Eliza kept the tradition going by marrying into a family with many ‘Roses’, the Beales, and naming one of her daughters Rosina.

Postscript: I now have confirmation that the child Rosina Whybrew, who died in Dublin in October 1874 was the daughter of David Whybrew, soldier in the 50th regiment. She was 4 and a half months old and cause of death was 'diarrhea'.

*Lewis, Milton James. The People’s Health: Public Health in Australia, 1788-1950. Greenwood Publishing Group, 2003. Print. Page 30-31

====================================

to read more about the Mason and Whybrew families, see my book Susan: convict's daughter, soldier's wife, nobody's fool. It's available on Amazon and other online books stores. To read a preview of the first chapters, click on the cover image.

Discoveries in Adelaide (part 2)

St Luke's Anglican church,
Whitmore Square, where
Susan Mason and David Whybrew
were married in 1869.

Our trip to Adelaide seems a long time ago now, but here at last is "part 2" of this series.

My second port-of-call after the State Library was the SAGHS library in Unley. This private library is the custodian of microfiche copies of the Catholic baptism records from the early days of South Australia. Since Catholics didn't bother to register their children with the government in those days, this was the only way to check the dates of births for John and Catherine Mason's daughters who were born in Adelaide.

I haven't used microfiche since I was at university back in - well, the last century. They haven't become any easier to use, and these sets were rather worn at the edges. But I was eventually able to find the date of birth, date of baptism and the baptism sponsors for all the girls. The records included the mother's maiden name, which was very helpful.

What I was most interested in, of course, was Susan Mason's details. She was born on May 6, 1848 and was baptised "Susanna" on June 4, 1848. Her baptism sponsors were Bartholomew McCarthy and Ellen Lennon (?) I'm not certain of that last name as it wasn't clear. All the other girls also had sponsors with Irish sounding names.

I've been trying to find out something about Susan's sponsors, but I can't find Ellen, and the only Bartholomew McCarthy I can find seems to have been born in 1838. Technically that makes him too young to be a sponsor (similar to a god-parent in other denominations.) He was quite a character, if the newspaper reports about him are any guide, so he'd be an apt sponsor for Susan if it was him.

While I was at the SAGHS library I had a look at their index cards for the Destitute Board. I didn't find Catherine, but I found Harriet Whybrew's entry to the Industrial school in 1882. As I mentioned in my last post, the person who recorded it seemed to have confused her father, David Whybrew, with her uncle, Harry Atkin.

Later I went back to the State Library and looked up the original entry in the record book*. Poor Harriet - at the age of 15, after being sent to the Industrial School in Magill on January 17, 1882 (ie to a reformatory) , she got transferred to prison for a couple of months on May 3 for "riotous behaviour and destroying government property". She then returned to finish her time at the school on July 1. I wonder what she was rioting about?

The entry for Harriet Whybrew,
reading across the page of a very large book
 (not great photos, but click to enlarge each image.)

Although not strictly a discovery made in Adelaide, I have recently found that the Adelaide Rates books are now online and can be searched. As I've mentioned before, with a few exceptions Australian census records have always been destroyed once they've been processed, so these Assessment records are a wonderful alternative source of information about where people lived. Tennants' names are given as well as the owners of properties. The images of the records are not transcribed, and only indexed in a very basic way, so it takes a bit of searching. But I've been able to find John Mason's name several times.

It seems the family lived in a 2 room pise house on Grenfell Street for the first few years that they were in Adelaide. At that stage Adelaide was divided up into numbered 'Acres' and they were in one of several houses on Acre 95. By 1852 they had moved to the other side of the town to a house on Acre 131 on Currie Street. In 1854 they had moved a little further up Currie Street to a 4 room brick house on Acre 130. Even though this was a larger house, it must still have been quite crowded with 7 or 8 children living there.

In 1855 they had new neighbours next door - Henry Atkin and his family. I assume this is Henry Atkin senior, whose two sons, Henry and Thomas, married Mary Ann and Margaret Mason a few years later.

The rates books also enabled me to find the Ship Inn, across the road from the Mason's house, on Acre 120. Where it once stood is now a car park.

Part of the Adelaide map from 1880 showing Acre 130 (circled in red)
and the site of the Ship Inn (circled in blue). Click on the image to enlarge it.

*GRG28/5/2, entry number 45 and 238 on the State Records index.

====================================

to read more about the Mason family and their life in Adelaide, see my book Susan: convict's daughter, soldier's wife, nobody's fool. It's available on Amazon and other online books stores. To read a preview of the first chapters, click on the cover image.

Discoveries in Adelaide (part 1)

Who would have thought that the word "English", written in faded ink on yellowing paper could make my heart sink. But it did.

South Australia's magnificent State Library.
The Spence Wing is in a modern building behind this one.

Last week I spent a few days in Adelaide, looking for information about the Mason family, while my husband attended a conference. Although I'd been to Adelaide before, this was the first time I'd been there since I discovered that my father's forebears had once lived there. I had a wonderful time exploring the city on foot, and using the Spence wing of the State Library to check out some original documents and records that aren't available on-line.

One of the first things I wanted to see was the minutes book of the Destitute Board. As I've mentioned previously, the local newspapers reported that Catherine Mason applied to the Board for relief several times, both before and after her husband John died in 1857. The Board minutes seemed the most likely place to find more information about the family and their circumstances.

Unfortunately there is a gap in the records between 1857 and 1869. But I found the entry for Friday November 21, 1856, a couple of months before John died, in the big tattered ledger. The record was in John's name rather than Catherine's.

Cottages in North St, off Currie St.
Most of Currie St is now taken up by
businesses and warehouses.

It stated, in a neat copperplate hand, that "Jno. Mason" lived in Currie St (no number given), had 4 children under the age of 7 and 4 over 7, that he arrived in Adelaide on the Dorset 12 years prior, and that he was a labourer. His application was recommended by Dr Shole.

Under "Circumstances" it said "Has been ill, unable to work since last Christmas." Type of relief provided was "outdoors", that is, provision of rations rather than "indoors", admission to the Destitute Asylum. All this confirmed what the newspaper report had said. In fact, one of the things I discovered on this trip was that the newspaper reports at the time were remarkably detailed and accurate.

The only new information, apart from Dr Shole's name, was the comment in the last column . Whoever wrote the minutes felt that it was important to record the nationality of the applicants, even though it wasn't required. In most cases they also recorded the religious denomination, though it was omitted in John Mason's case. But there was that word:  "English". Drat!

The Edinburgh Castle Hotel, Currie St,
one of the oldest pubs in Adelaide.
The Ship Inn, frequented by the Masons,
no longer exists.

For some reason, the entry for John in the Destitute Board minutes was duplicated a few lines down, on the same date, but with a minor correction to the ages of the children. Perhaps this entry was made after the information had been checked by the Relieving Officer, as the newspaper reporter indicated was going to happen. But that word English was 'dittoed'. No correction there.

After all the research I'd done trying to discover where John Mason came from, before he married Catherine Murphy in Sydney in 1841, that word "English" was depressing. By a long process of eliminating every other John Mason I could find, I'd come to the conclusion that he was probably the young convict of that name who arrived in New South Wales on the Parmelia in 1834. And that John Mason was an Irishman from Limerick.

The most obvious explanation is that I've got the wrong John Mason. After all, I have no proof that the convict on the Parmelia was the one who married Catherine Murphy. But so much that I know about John and Catherine suggests they were Irish. Almost everyone associated with them - the witnesses at their wedding, the sponsors at their children's baptisms, the person who registered John's death - was Irish. So I've been trying to think of some other possible explanations.

We know from the newspaper report that it was Catherine, not John, who fronted up to the Board to ask for relief, so the recorder didn't actually meet John on that occasion. Did he know the family? Where did the information come from?

If John had arrived in Australia as a teenager in 1834 and he had lived in Australia for 22 years, perhaps he had lost his accent. Or perhaps he lived and worked in Ireland but originally came from England, though convicts' records usually recorded where they were born. Maybe Catherine sounded, looked, or claimed to be English.

Or perhaps, just maybe, the recorder made a clerical error. My faith in official records was rattled when I found a couple of entries in 1882 for Harriet Whybrew, when she was admitted to the Industrial School at the age of 15 for stealing a watch. One entry mentioned that her parents were in England, but both entries said that her uncle, David Whybrew, a turner, lived in Adelaide.

Part of one of the records for Harriet Whybrew.
(Taken with a phone camera from a microfilm,
so not great quality. Click to enlarge.)

In fact, David Whybrew was her father, a soldier who was living in England with his wife Susan Mason and their other children at the time. Harriet's uncle Henry Atkin, husband of Mary Ann Mason, was a wood turner living in Adelaide. (More on this later.)

Since I've been home I've been going back over my previous research, looking for an English John Mason that I might have overlooked before. So far I haven't found one that wasn't dead or married by 1841 or still in Sydney after 1845. I'll keep looking.

As a footnote, I still don't know why John was bed-bound for twelve months before he died. While I was at the library I checked the Adelaide Hospital admissions records for 1855-1857, but didn't find any of the Mason family mentioned. Never mind - it was great fun and fascinating looking at original records from 160 years ago. The library and State Records people were all very helpful. I just wish Adelaide wasn't quite so far away.

====================================

To read more about the Mason family in Adelaide, see my book Susan: convict's daughter, soldier's wife, nobody's fool. It's available on Amazon and other online books stores. To read a preview of the first chapters, click on the cover image.

The fourteen children of David and Susan Whybrew - part 1

According to the 1911 UK census, Susan Whybrew gave birth to 14 children in total, of whom only 7 were still alive at the time of the census. I hadn't given this much thought until an observant fellow-genealogist asked me if I knew what had happened to them all. Both he and I had the names of 9 children from the various census records, but what of the other five? And which of the nine were no longer living in 1911? After some digging, here's what I've been able to discover so far of the 14 children born to Susan.

Five 'missing' children

First of all, those missing names. These are most likely to be children who were born between the census years and then died in infancy. The England and Wales index of births doesn't provide the parents' names or the mother's maiden name, so it's impossible to be sure from the Index that a child named Whybrew was a  child of David and Susan. But likely names include:

Photo credit: magro_kr / Foter / CC BY-NC-ND

• Frank William Whybrew - born in Colchester in the December quarter of 1870 (ie between October and December), died in Colchester in early 1875 aged 4.
• David Whybrew, born in Colchester about 1872, died in the September quarter of 1874 aged 2.
• Alfred Whybrew, born in Colchester December quarter 1888, died in 1889 aged 1.
• JamesWhybrew, born and died in Colchester December quarter 1892.
• Lily Whybrew, born in Colchester December quarter 1896, died March quarter 1897.

(Update, 28 Feb 2017: Frank is excluded, the others are all now confirmed.)

In theory, Frank William should have appeared on the 1871 census with Susan if he really was one of her children. (David was in the barracks on census night). In practice, I haven't been able to find him anywhere on the census. Only Eliza (who is listed as 'Emily') is recorded with Susan. Possibly Frank was staying with someone who didn't know his correct details, or perhaps he was simply overlooked by whoever mis-recorded Susan and Eliza's name on the census.

On the other hand, it seems strange that David and Susan would call their first son Frank rather than David (after his father) or James or John (after one of his grandfathers), so perhaps he doesn't belong in the list.

Susan would have been 48 years old when Lily was born (if she was her mother), so it's unlikely that there were any other children after this.

Whatever the true details, it's clear that, as was common in those days, Susan and David lost several children in infancy. Their births would account for the long gap between Eliza and Alice, as well as between William, Ellen and Ada (all five years apart).

What of the remaining 9 children? Here, in order of birth, is what I know about them.

Harriet

Harriet was born in Adelaide on 17 September 1868, eight months before David and Susan married. Eliza's birth followed in December 1869. When David and Susan returned to England in about 1870 with his regiment, they took Eliza with them, but Harriet remained behind. 

Although I don't have any documentary evidence, I have it on good authority from her descendants that Harriet was taken care of at some stage by the Lindrum family in Adelaide. It's quite possible that this was from birth. In 1868 the Catholic church in Adelaide set up the first refuge for unmarried mothers and their small children at Fullerton. But prior to this it was customary for children of unmarried mothers to be handed over at birth, either to a family member or a privately-arranged carer, or into the care of the State if this was not an option. 

It's not clear what the connection was between the Lindrum family and the Masons at this time. Frederick Wilhelm Lindrum, an immigrant from Germany, married Clara Wolff in Adelaide in 1862. They had 3 children, Frederick William (1865), Clara Wilhemina (1868) and Lavinia Elise (1871, died in 1872.) The younger Frederick later married Harriet Whybrew's cousin, Harriet Atkin (daughter of Susan's sister Mary Ann Mason and Henry Atkin) but that was not until 1886, when Harriet Whybrew was in her late teens. (Frederick and Harriet Atkin went on to be the parents of Frederick and Walter Lindrum, two of the all-time great billiards players.)

Perhaps the Lindrums were simply a generous family who knew of Mason family's hardships. Or perhaps Frederick senior played billiards with David Whybrow or his officers from the 50th regiment, like these men of another regiment:

Billiard Players from the 14th Regiment of the Foot British Army.
Photo B18519 courtesy of the State Library of South Australia.

Frederick Lindrum senior was the landlord of the Clarence Hotel in King William Street, as well as the owner of other properties in South Australia. He ran a billiards room which was very popular. When he died in February 1880 he was described as a well respected man with a large circle of friends.

However, within a few months of his death his widow Clara was advertising the Crown Hotel in Port Victor for sale, and in May 1881 she advertised the sale of household goods and furniture due to a move to the hotel in Ardossan (150km from Adelaide). By the end of 1881 Clara had begun making appearances in the insolvency court and she was declared insolvent in December 1881.

The apparent dispappearance from public life of Mrs Clara Lindrum after her insolvency case is something of a mystery. Mrs Lindrum's daughter Clara married in Adelaide in 1885, and Frederick married Harriet Atkins in Melbourne in 1886, but there is no mention in the newspapers of their mother, and no record anywhere of her death or possible remarriage. 

So what happened to Harriet? Not long after Mrs Lindrum's insolvency case, the name 'Harriet Whybrow' (sic) starts to be mentioned in newspaper reports from the police courts in Adelaide. This is almost certainly Harriet Whybrew. The Australian Birth Index lists her as Harriet Whybrow, daughter of David Whybrow, and I haven't found any other Harriet Whybrows/Whybrews born, married or arriving in Australia in this period.

In January 1882, in a case somewhat reminiscent of her mother, the 13 year old Harriet was charged with stealing a watch:

Harriet Whybrow, a young girl, was charged with stealing one watch, value 45s., and various other articles, value 24s., the property of Francis Harris, on January 10. The prosecutor missed several of the articles from her bedroom and on a search being instituted it was found that the prisoner, who was living in the same house, had pawned them with Mr Berliner.When arrested prisoner owned to pawning all the articles with the exception of the watch. The prisoner, who pleaded guilty, was sent to the Industrial School for one year.

TUESDAY, JANUARY 17. (1882, January 21). South Australian Weekly Chronicle (Adelaide, SA : 1881 - 1889), p. 12

Why Harriet was staying with Francis Harris isn't clear. Perhaps she was employed as a maid. The South Australian Register reported that Miss Harris lived in Rosina Street, while the South Australian Police Gazette said Harriet was accused of having stolen goods from 'Sophia Harris'. Putting all this together, it's possible that the owner of the watch was Frances Sophia Harris (born 1866), youngest daughter of John Harris, who owned a general goods cum second-hand shop in Rosina Street. Later the same year, while Harriet was confined in the Industrial School, Frances Sophia married William Barrett, the son of a London solicitor, in Melbourne.

The Industrial School was a reformatory where 'wayward children' and orphans awaiting placement were sent to be taught useful skills as well as continuing their general education. Despite the skills they acquired, a record of having spent time there made it very difficult for girls to find work afterwards, as it was taken to be a sign of bad character. Harriet apparently stayed out of trouble for a while, but in June 1884 she and several other girls were charged £2 each for 'loitering'. In November 1884 she received another £2 fine for loitering, and again in April 1885. After that we hear no more about Harriet Whybrow in Adelaide. 

Harriet Malone, nee Whybrew

It seems that sometime between 1885 and 1888 she decided to return to the family she had never met in England. Perhaps she hoped to make a fresh start. However, things didn't go well for Harriet in Colchester. The next mention I can find of her is in a newspaper report from the Colchester police courts in August 1888, when she and her sister Eliza are named as witnesses in a domestic dispute between her parents, Susan and David Whybrew.

Then in October 1888, Susan Whybrew was charged with assaulting Harriet during a row in which Susan is said to have told Harriet to 'clear out of the house'. Perhaps she did clear out. When Harriet made a final appearance in the Colchester courts in 1890, this time after a dispute with another young woman, both girls were said to live in Magdalen St.*

Henry and Harriet Malone

Life seems to have improved for Harriet when she met Henry Malone, the son of a soldier, Peter Malone. Henry was born in India, but seems to have lived most of his early life with his grandparents in Colchester (in Magdalen Street, in fact). He and Harriet were married in Colchester at the end of 1890. Their first child, Cissy, died within a few months of birth in 1892, but their son, Henry Everett Malone, survived to adulthood. The family continued to live in Colchester for several years, and were there in 1911. After that I haven't been able to trace them.

Eliza

As Eliza plays a direct role in our family history, I intend to write a separate post about her. A basic outline of her life appears here. Suffice to say that Eliza married William James Beales in 1891 and they and their family were living in Colchester at the time of the 1911 UK census.

Alice

Alice was born in 1875 while David and Susan were stationed in Ireland. She married Herbert Arthur Miller, a carpenter, in Colchester in 1896, when she was 21. Their daughter Alice Frances was born 1900 and they were still living in Colchester in 1901.

In about 1904 the family migrated to Cook County, Illinois (ie Chicago), possibly travelling via Quebec in Canada. I haven't been able to find them for certain in any passenger lists, but on the 1910 US federal census Herbert states that they arrived in 1904.

[Update: I have since found Alice with her two children, Alice Frances and Betsy Mary (born 1903) on the passenger list of the Tunisian, which arrived in Quebec in August 1905. Herbert had arrived earlier on board the Virginian. Betsy seems to have died soon after their arrival in Canada, since she disappears from the records after this.]

At first glance it appears from the 1910 US census that Herbert and Alice were living in Cook county with their daughter Alice Frances. But a closer look at the image of the census document shows that the "Alice M Miller" married to Herbert in 1910 was 5 years younger than Alice Whybrew, had been married for less than a year, and had no children living or otherwise. The new Alice Miller also had two Irish parents. (Alice Whybrew's parents were English and Australian). 

The puzzle is resolved by records showing that Alice Miller (ie Alice Whybrew) died on 7 December 1909 and was buried at Forest Home cemetery in Cook County. Herbert Miller married an Irish immigrant, Alice M McKeon, on 12 March 1910. Thus Alice is one of the two Whybrew children who survived childhood but died prior to 1911. The cause of her death is unknown. Herbert and his second wife Alice lived on in Chicago and Alice Frances married there.

Rose

Rose married George Henry Anthony in Colchester in 1897, but in the 1901 census Rose was staying with Harriet and Henry, and I haven't managed to discover where George was at that time. Like Alice and Herbert, Rose and her husband George migrated to Cook County Illinois. The records indicate that they travelled there via Canada, sailing on the "SS Canada". They arrived in Quebec with their baby son George in June 1907, and were living in Chicago at the time of the 1910 US federal census. 

Tragedy struck in April 1913 when six year old George died. He was buried, like Alice Miller, at Forest Home cemetery in Cook County. The records helpfully show his mother's name, Rose Whybrew. The family's address is given as 626 S. 48th Ave.

In 1917, George Anthony received call-up papers for the US army, although he wasn't a citizen at the time. Whether or not he joined the army isn't known. The papers show that he was unemployed. His wife was named as Rose Anthony, but her address was different to his. He was still living at 626 S 48th, while she was at 4823 Congress St. After this date, I haven't been able to trace either Rose or George. It's possible that they separated and Rose remarried. 

I'll continue with the other children of David and Susan in my next post.

* These reports are all from The Essex Standard, West Suffolk Gazette, and Eastern Counties' Advertiser

You may also be interested in:

Susan Mason, a wild colonial girl
David Whybrew's military career part 2
David Whybrew's military career part 1
Discoveries in Adelaide part 1
Discoveries in Adelaide part 2

__________________

You can find out more about Susan and David Whybrew and their family in my book Susan: convict's daughter, soldier's wife, nobody's fool.
It's available on Amazon and other online books stores

The Masons and their neighbours in Currie Street, Adelaide.

Currie Street ca 1861
State Library South Australia B4545

We know from the newspaper report on Susan Mason's first court appearance in August 1865 that she lived in Currie Street in Adelaide, and was familiar with the Ship Inn. The death notices for Margaret Atkin and Rose Morris (both sisters of Susan) also mention Currie Street.

I thought it would be interesting to see if there were any other reports mentioning members of the Mason family in Currie Street, so I've done a bit of hunting on Trove. (Trove.nla.gov.au) Here's what I found. Note that I'm not claiming that any of these people called Mason are definitely related to Susan - they might be, but they might not.

The first report comes from the South Australian Register, 20th June 1849. (I've edited it slightly to make it easier to read)

LOCAL INTELLIGENCE: 

An inquest was held yesterday, by William Wyatt, Esq., Coroner, at the 'Ship Inn,' Currie-street, on the body of Joseph Penfold, baker, in that street, who met his death on the preceding night. A post mortem examination had been made by Dr Nash, at the house of deceased, and after the jury had been to view the body, the examination of witnesses commenced.  

Dr. Knott sworn— Said he was sent for on Monday night to attend deceased. A little fluctuation about the heart was the only remaining sign of life. Had at tended him before in apoplexy. Was not surprised to find him so near death upon the recent occasion, for he had noticed in the course of the day that he was not only paralytic and imbecile, but evidently in a dying state. Witness had expressed that opinion to a Mr Mason [my emphasis]. 

He was found the previous night in a hole into which he had fallen. It was three or four feet deep, and made near a house which was building on his (Dr. Knott's) account. Deceased had for years been a remarkably sober man, but had become paralytic, and at length given way under the pressure of old age and disease. Dr. Nash, Colonial Surgeon, had made a. post mortem examination on the body of Joseph Penfold. [A detailed description of the post-mortem follows which I'll spare you from reading] 

 Fanny Moyle, spinster, heard quarelling at about 6 o'clock the night before, between deceased and his daughter. Saw his face bleeding, and that he wanted to go away. She would not let him, but said she would fetch a shoemaker to put a stitch in his wound. A short time elapsed, when all at once witness heard a scream from Dr. Knott's building. Presently she met Matilda Penfold, who said her father would insist upon following her, and in doing so he had fallen into a pit and killed himself. When witness approached, several persons were removing deceased from the cellar into which he had fallen. It was a cellar near Dr. Knott's house. Matilda had had too much to drink. The father and daughter were always quarrelling. In her hearing, Mrs Edwards, a neighbour, said she (the daughter) had killed her father with a jug. The mother seemed to take no notice of what was said. She was in the same state as her daughter [More descriptions of the wounds etc snipped for the sake of brevity].

From a member of the Total Abstinence Society who was on the jury, we learned that deceased, who was in his 67th year, had been a water drinker during 47 years of his life, and although he had latterly indulged to a certain extent in strong drinks, he had done so under the sanction of medical prescription, and certainly not to any injurious extent. The unfortunate deceased appears to have had a most unhappy home ; and if the fatal termination were attributed to mental excitement alone, there seems to have been reason enough for the assumption; but when we state that the unguarded excavation into which he fell, in the dark, was not less than five feet deep, and deceased a heavy man, there can be no doubt his death was at least accelerated by the fall. This want of caution, and the serious accidents thereby occasioned, of which we have so many instances, cannot be too much deprecated, and ought no longer to be without legislative interference.

Whether or not the Mr Mason mentioned here was John Mason (Susan's father), the article still reveals some interesting things about the type of people and activities that were to be found in Currie Street. I was fascinated to see that a shoemaker was to be sent for to put a stitch in Mr Penfold's wound.

Currie Street ca 1871
State Library South Australia B1871

The next article, from the South Australian Register, on 28 November 1853, also mentions the Ship Inn* as the place where inquests took place. I found several other references to it being used for this purpose. This article doesn't have any reference to the Mason family, but does give more insights into life in Currie Street. Again I've edited it to make it shorter and easier to read 

CORONER'S INQUEST. 

Mr. Stevenson held an inquest on Friday, and, by adjournment, on Saturday, at the Ship Inn, Currie- street, on the body of John Grayson, an infant six weeks old, who died on Thursday last, as mentioned in the Register of the following day.    

The Jury having been sworn, The Coroner told them there were some circumstances of suspicion attending the death of the child, inasmuch as it had happened rather suddenly, and no medical aid had been called in. It would be their duty to enquire into the particulars, and it was quite possible they might find it had arisen from natural or accidental causes. The Coroner and Jury then proceeded to a house of disgraceful repute, next door to Mr. Wadey's, butcher, Currie-street. The body of the child was lying on a table in the front room. It had the appearance of having been tolerably healthy; but there were very visible marks of pressure: its nostrils were distended, its mouth open, and the tongue slightly protruding.  

On the return of the Jury, Eliza Quinlan, the mother of the child, was called into the room. She was crying bitterly, and seemed much distressed. The Coroner, kindly, had one of her female companions brought in to sit beside her. She was then sworn, and duly cautioned to answer no questions which she thought might criminate herself. She is a young woman of about twenty five, and, for one of her class, tolerably decent in appearance, though her gaudy tawdry dress harmonized as little with the occasion as with her own uncontrollable emotion. [There follows a long description of the trial, detailing who was in the house at the time and so on, which you can read at the link provided.]

 The Jury, after some consultation, returned a verdict of "Accidental death," believing, apparently, that the child had been suffocated by overlaying, and not, as alleged by the mother, that it died from the effect of illness in her arms. Dr. Baruh then asked the Coroner if there were no means of closing the house kept by Corbis and Ward, as it was an intolerable annoyance to the neighbourhood. The Coroner said that any respectable neighbours might lay an information at the Police-office, and there was no doubt the Magistrate would take the necessary steps for abating the nuisance.

This, and many other articles from the time, suggests that "houses of ill repute" were common in and around Currie Street. Note the condescending tone of the newspaper towards the poor mother in her "gaudy tawdry dress".

The next article describes another tragedy, and includes mention of a Mr and Mrs Mason. It appeared in the South Australian Register, 2 August 1852.

MELANCHOLY ACCIDENT.

 — A poor woman named Wyburn, who has for some time resided with her daughter (aged 16), in Currie-street, was, during the early part of this week, nearly driven to distraction by the disappearance and continued absence of the girl from her home. After many enquiries, the anxious mother obtained a clue to the girl's retreat, and on Wednesday last, discovered her in a house of 'ill-fame', which the misguided creature refused to leave. The poor woman returned to her now cheerless home in a state of dejection, that no doubt hastened an epileptic attack, to which she was occasionally subject. A kind neighbour, named Mason, [my emphasis] observing that the poor woman was, on her return home, quite incapable of ministering to her own wants, supplied her with some tea and other matters, and left her in some degree composed and apparently preparing to retire to rest.  

In the course of the night, Mrs. Mason heard screams in the residence of Mrs. Wyburn, and induced her husband to get up and enquire into the cause of the outcry. On entering Mrs. Wyburn's house, Mr. Mason found the poor creature lying on the floor near the fireplace enveloped in a sheet of flame. The loose portion of her attire was entirely consumed. before the fire was extinguished, and even her stays were in part consumed. Dr. Baruh, who was called in immediately, applied the usual remedies; but, as the case was one of great danger, he took prompt measures to have the sufferer removed to the Hospital, where she now lies in a most precarious state. It is supposed that the poor creature sat by the fire absorbed in grief, until she fell down in a fit, and that she lay helpless while the fire raged around her, until she was rescued from instant death by the active humanity of Mr. Mason.

I'd like to think that the kind-hearted Mr and Mrs Mason were Susan's parents.

*The History Girl blog has an interesting article about the Ship Inn, which apparently changed it's name to the Bedford later on. 

___________________

You can find out more about the Mason family in my book Susan: convict's daughter, soldier's wife, nobody's fool.
It's available on Amazon and other online books stores

Catherine Murphy - a summary of what's known

Catherine was born about 1822 (based on her stated age when she died.) It seems likely she was born outside Australia. A daughter named Catherine was born to James and Sarah Murphy in Sydney in 1821, but she seems to have married Henry Stedman, and remained in NSW. I can't find any other registered births for Catherine/Catharine Murphy in the right time period.

Of the convicts named Catherine Murphy who arrived in Sydney between 1820 and 1841, only three were born within ten years of 1822. Two of these are known to have married other men, and the other didn't obtain a certificate of freedom until 1848, so Catherine was probably a free immigrant, or her birth in NSW is unregistered.

It seems she was unable to write, since she signed her name with an 'X' when she married John Mason on February 2 1841. Both were said to be Roman Catholic, and married in St Mary's Catholic church in Sydney. Father Joseph Platt performed the marriage, and Andrew and Mary Goodwin were the witnesses. 

The birth of a daughter, Mary Ann, was registered in 1842 in Sydney, and another child, Catherine, was born in 1844. There may have been one or more children born to John and Catherine in Sydney who died in infancy, but this is uncertain.

In December 1844, John and Catherine and their two children sailed to Adelaide on the Dorset, arriving in January 1845. Catherine must have been pregnant at the time, as a third daughter, Margaret, was born in July that year.

Rose followed in 1847, Susan in 1849, Eliza 1850, Jane in 1852 and Bridget in 1854. When Bridget was 3 years old John died, leaving Catherine, then 35, with eight girls to bring up alone. Michael Murnane filled out the death registration details on Catherine's behalf.

The three older girls, aged 14, 13 and 11, were already working, and the 14 shillings a week that they earned between them was the family's total income. (The average labourer earned about 4 shillings per day at that time.) Catherine applied to the Destitute board for relief in June 1857, and again a few months later.

Catherine's eldest daughter, Catherine, married George Davis in June 1865 in Adelaide. Mary Ann married Henry Atkin in July 1865, and Margaret married Henry's brother, Thomas, in February 1866. Catherine's first grandchild, John Thomas, was born in 1865 to Mary Ann. More marriages and grandchildren followed, with Rose marrying William Morris in 1868 and Eliza marrying Jeremiah Murphy, a British soldier, in March 1869.

It's not clear what became of Jane and Bridget, but Susan must have caused Catherine a lot of heart ache. From the age of 14 her name appeared in the Police Court reports of the Adelaide papers several times. In April 1868 she appeared as a witness to a theft, in a case involving her future husband, David Whybrew. Susan's first child, Harriet, was born 'out of wedlock' in September 1868. Susan eventually married David in May 1869, with her second child Elizabeth (Eliza) born in December of the same year.

Both Susan and her sister Eliza left Australia about 1870 with their husbands and returned with their army regiment to England. Catherine Mason remained in Adelaide until her death in 1874, at the age of 52. She was probably buried at West Terrace Cemetery, but no newspaper announcement of her funeral, and no record of her grave has been found.

___________________

You can find out more about John and Catherine Mason, Susan and David Whybrew and their families in my book Susan: convict's daughter, soldier's wife, nobody's fool.
It's available on Amazon and other online books stores