The ALLEGED photograph of the Kelly family

[Archaic]

Hi Brenda. That's a good point!

Best regards,
Archaic

[The Grave Maurice]

...I've never heard of another Victorian woman that went back to her maiden name after the death of a husband.

Me either. I've often wondered why she wasn't known as Davis or Davies. Excellent point, Brenda.

[Livia]

Me either. I've often wondered why she wasn't known as Davis or Davies. Excellent point, Brenda.

Except Florence Maybrick.

There's never been any record found that
MJK married. It could be another "Princess
Alice" tale, designed to generate sympathy.

[Livia]

Hello Chris,

Could you please inquire of the photo owner
if she knows if any of the Kelly brothers served
in the US Armed Forces?

I've found several interesting military records on the
1900 census of several Kelly men, all born in
Ireland, all emigrated in the early 1890s and
strangely some with no home address.

Some of them were stationed in the Philippines,
some in Cuba and some in the States.

There's one, a Michael J Kelly age 22, born in
Ireland, parents born in Ireland, emigrated in
1889, home address 1712 E Washington Street,
Springfield, Ill.

And another, Henry J. Kelly, enlisted July 2, 1897,
a Sargeant, age 41, born Ireland, stationed in
the Philippines, Company F, 18th Regiment,
Infantry. No home address, no emigration or
citizenship information listed (for anyone on this
page).

Thanks,

Liv

[The Grave Maurice]

Except Florence Maybrick.

Well, yeah, but Florence's case is unique. Even so, she didn't change her name until after she was released from prison. And who wouldn't?

[Phil Carter]

I've never felt that "Kelly" was the name we should be looking for. She had been married, and I've never heard of another Victorian woman that went back to her maiden name after the death of a husband.

Hello Brenda,

Although her husband was still alive, it seems that Catherine Eddowes used her maiden name, as well as her married name Conway, and that of Kelly, her man friend.

Best wishes

Phìl

[Debra A]

Hi all,
It seems well enough documented that women of this class used several aliases, pretended to be married when they weren't and also used their maiden names when they were married. It probably depended on what circumstances they were in at the time and which name was necessary or beneficial.

Looking at Catheirne Mylett and her use of surnames to gain access to different infirmaries and workhouses and get around settlement issues etc. shows her claiming to be married to a man named Davis, using this name on the birth certificates of her children but no marriage certificate exists. Using her maiden name of Mylett or Millet whilst in the workhouse/infirmary in poplar along with a the false name of Rose, but using Kate Davis whenever using the Whitechapel Infirmary (where her children were born). She was also well known as Alice Downey to some.
...yet she's still traceable in the records despite all the different names (although finding her in 1881 was an extremely difficult job)

Aliases were common and acceptable in this class.You were known by the name you told people and no one question you on it. Married and widowed women could ignore their married name whenever they wanted or felt it necessary, and did:

[Debra A]

I think the biggest obstacle to identifying Mary Jane Kelly in the records is that Barnett was very specific about the details of her background, as told to him. If only a couple of things were fabrications on Mary Janes's part then identification becomes very difficult. It's these specific details of her background that we use when looking for 'possibles' for Mary Jane or present a new candidate to each other, yet we don't even know how much of the story is true. The name could be spot on but the rest made up.

[Debra A]

Hello Chris,

Could you please inquire of the photo owner
if she knows if any of the Kelly brothers served
in the US Armed Forces?

I've found several interesting military records on the
1900 census of several Kelly men, all born in
Ireland, all emigrated in the early 1890s and
strangely some with no home address.

Some of them were stationed in the Philippines,
some in Cuba and some in the States.

There's one, a Michael J Kelly age 22, born in
Ireland, parents born in Ireland, emigrated in
1889, home address 1712 E Washington Street,
Springfield, Ill.

And another, Henry J. Kelly, enlisted July 2, 1897,
a Sargeant, age 41, born Ireland, stationed in
the Philippines, Company F, 18th Regiment,
Infantry. No home address, no emigration or
citizenship information listed (for anyone on this
page).

Thanks,

Liv

I admire your stamina, Liv! Good work, as always.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Debra,
Unless Ms Kendall lane fabricated a story[ which I doubt] then we should be clear that the police/authorities would have known the identification of the Millers court victim.
According to the good lady, her grandfather knew, that his mother [ McCarthy's wife] parcelled up some belongings, and sent them to the victims brother who was in the army[ ie. Jonto]It is therefore clear, that one of three things happened.
A] Barnett informed the police where her brother was stationed.
B] A letter bearing the regiments crest was found amongst her belongings .
C] Jonto informed the police that he was related.
If neither of the above took place then how did Mrs McCarthy know where to send them.
We should not forget also a little matter of the passport claim...
Again according to the good lady her grandfather saw Mary's passport..would that not have her correct name ?
Many members have shunned that ,stating that passports were not present in 1888, but one was seen it is claimed...
I would suggest that as it was in the media, and registered on her death certificate, the name was indeed Marie Jeanette Kelly.aka Davis, the former being a affectionate tone of Mary Jane, and the latter her married name.
I would suggest[ fingers crossed] that it is really that simple, ie, either the next of kin that was known, was relayed by Barnett, that being one Henry/Kelly , 2ND battalion scot's guards[ Barnett knew where the regiment was stationed]..or a letter was found with the relevant details.
I would suggest that Henry initially, was reluctant to involve himself , otherwise where did the ''worried about future army prospects'' derive? , but he did what was expected of him , and was the bearer of the tragic news to the family.
One can only speculate that the shame , was hard to bear, and the immediate family emigrated not long after, and Henry also.
Regards Richard.

[Debra A]

Hi Richard,
Fiona's story may well be true, but until evidence is presented none of us can know for sure?
Police didn't mention tracing MJKs family or sending on her belongings in the police file. Of course, those papers may be lost to us now, but the newspapers also seemed to verify that MJK's family didn't come forward.
There were passports in those days, I've been through the passport applications.

And once again, we have to ask, why is there no Henry Kelly in the muster rolls for the Scots Guards in 1888 ? Barnett knew the regiment was in Dublin and said he was serving. Perhaps he had already left before 1888 and Mary just didn't know, but then that doesn't fit with Fiona saying he didn't want to ruin his army career and was still serving in the regiment. If her real name was Marie Jeanette Kelly as you say and you believe her brother was in the Scots Guards, then he would also have the surname Kelly, and there is no one in that regiment in 1888 who fits with the story as far as we know.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Debra,
It is all so confusing, it should all be so straightforward , it should be easy to find a Kelly in the 2ND battalion who served in 1888, unless records were destroyed, after a recruit had left the regiment for a period of time, or bought themselves out.
Its almost if a cover up of sorts was in evidence, its taken 124 years just to get a alleged photograph of the family, it strikes me that it was attitude of ''Something's are better left ''....
Regards Richard.

[Debra A]

Hi Debra,
It is all so confusing, it should all be so straightforward , it should be easy to find a Kelly in the 2ND battalion who served in 1888, unless records were destroyed, after a recruit had left the regiment for a period of time, or bought themselves out.
Its almost if a cover up of sorts was in evidence, its taken 124 years just to get a alleged photograph of the family, it strikes me that it was attitude of ''Something's are better left ''....
Regards Richard.

Hi Richard, but we know that records for the Scots Guards still exist in the form of the Muster rolls for 1888, that give names but not details of soldiers in that Regiment in 1888, But, there are also the Chelsea pension records, which give biographical details and service history of individual soldiers and can be cross referenced with the muster roll names. These also show who bought themselves out, went AWOl or deserted etc.
I believe it's not the lack of records for the Scots Guards, it's the lack of a Kelly who fits the bill?

[Debra A]

I just found an old post in the archives by Neal Shelden that gives the names and numers of all men with the surname Kelly or McCarthy in 2nd Battalion Scots Guards from Muster Rolls 1885-mid 1888.
I just realised that I can use the numbers Neal recorded from these records to check their pension records with fuller details.
I will start a new thead later today. It might draw a blank but worth it for ruling out too I think?....if it works!

Thanks Neal!

[curious]

If her real name was Marie Jeanette Kelly as you say and you believe her brother was in the Scots Guards, then he would also have the surname Kelly, and there is no one in that regiment in 1888 who fits with the story as far as we know.

Not if Marie Jeanette Kelly's father died when she was young and her mother remarried. Then the younger children would have a different last name.