Kellys in the Scots Guards

[curious]

Hi Curious. That's all plausible, I agree. I will try and have a closer look at that if I can. Livia has also been looking at a Kelly/Johnstone connection, she sent me the details but I still haven't managed to track through it properly yet.

It has occurred to me that is MJK's mother did remarry that might account for a number of things in her life story:

Perhaps as MJK matured, she caught stepdaddy's eye and had to leave home. One of my great-grandmothers left when her father remarried and she did not like her stepmother. My g-grand lived with two maternal uncles until she married.

So, MJK could have gone to live with an uncle, hence the story of the cousin who led her astray.

After MJK and her siblings all left home, Mama left the good-for-nothing second husband and returned to Ireland. She wrote to her daughter in London.

So, when stepdad showed up wanting to talk to MJK, she avoided him for very good reasons.

Pure speculation, I know . . . . but possibilities, I think.

[curious]

Hi Curious. That's all plausible, I agree. I will try and have a closer look at that if I can. Livia has also been looking at a Kelly/Johnstone connection, she sent me the details but I still haven't managed to track through it properly yet.

If I ever get retired, and IF you all have not figured it all out yet, perhaps I can help.

But I feel that progress is being made and more will be made as more and more records become accessible online.

Great work all around!

[Debra A]

Hi, Debra,
My brain has been fuzzy for about a month now, so I'm not sure what you are saying here.

I think this idea has merit that MJK's brother might be enlisted as a Johnston.

However, that does not necessarily mean he was lying.

Has anyone searched for the death of a John Kelly in the 1860s within a year or two of Mary Jane's birth?

Then, if something is found, the next thing to look for would be a remarriage of the widow -- to a Johnston.

Don't know if this would work or not. I don't have any way to research it and it might not make sense to anyone else.

I know, there were rumors that Mary's father came to visit her, but a stepfather might have considered himself that.

Anyway, just thinking.

Hi Curious. That's all plausible, I agree. I will try and have a closer look at that if I can. Livia has also been looking at a Kelly/Johnstone connection, she sent me the details but I still haven't managed to track through it properly yet.

[lynn cates]

reading

Hello Chris. Yes, and I just reread your book. I figure if you and Debs and Chris Phillips can't find it, it's not there.

Cheers.
LC

[Debra A]

Very much appreciated Chris (sorry about the Cris).
Now as I dig a little deeper I noticed the old thread where you provide five extremely detailed posts on the subject.

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=312

These may have been what I remembered.

Thanks again, Jon S.

Ah, now I am understanding why you think the research has not been exhaustive, Jon.
Okay, there might still be mileage in checking the pit deaths, but as far as the marriage goes; although Chris posted a huge list of men named Davis (and variants) married at the right time and in the right areas, on the link you posted, it is now possible to search for both spouses names in a marriage entry and as Chris has noted in an earlier post, there is only one marriage for a Mary Kelly and a Davies for the right time period.

It's Chris' kind of extensive research that has made me think we might have exhausted quite a lot of the avenues available.

[lynn cates]

caution

Hello Mr. Begg. Thanks. Caution is always in order. And checking for a lie? Only when ALL avenues for truth are exhausted.

Cheers.
LC

[curious]

If that includes seeing nothing wrong with wanting to extend their own personal research to include other possibilities, like the idea that Johnto is a nickname used in conjunction with the surname John(s)ton, then, yes, I guess I am!

Hi, Debra,
My brain has been fuzzy for about a month now, so I'm not sure what you are saying here.

I think this idea has merit that MJK's brother might be enlisted as a Johnston.

However, that does not necessarily mean he was lying.

Has anyone searched for the death of a John Kelly in the 1860s within a year or two of Mary Jane's birth?

Then, if something is found, the next thing to look for would be a remarriage of the widow -- to a Johnston.

Don't know if this would work or not. I don't have any way to research it and it might not make sense to anyone else.

I know, there were rumors that Mary's father came to visit her, but a stepfather might have considered himself that.

Anyway, just thinking.

[Bridewell]

the unidentified Mrs Buki

I think Mrs Buki is a type-setter's misreading of a journalist's hand-writing and should be Mrs Buke.

In the 1881 census there is a Mrs Caroline Buke living with her husband at 9, Gilston Road, Brompton & married to a Master Boot Maker.The only women living with her at that time who are not family members are domestic servants:

Marie Rapston. Unfortunately this girl is already 25 and was born, according to the census, in Hounslow.

Lizzie Kirby (transcribed by Ancestry as Risby) aged 17, born in Chalford, Gloucestershire - the Welsh Borders - there's a Lizzie M Kirby still around in 1891 though, although shown as born in Chalfont, who may, or may not, be the same girl.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Chris Scott]

Very much appreciated Chris (sorry about the Cris).
Now as I dig a little deeper I noticed the old thread where you provide five extremely detailed posts on the subject.

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=312

These may have been what I remembered.

Thanks again, Jon S.

Jon
Thanks for reposting that link - I had forgotten those listings!
Chris

[Wickerman]

Assuming untruth is an awfully easy way of getting past things we don't like or find awkward, and, of course, folk can dismiss any verification of anything Mary said as them being lied to too, which gives one a clear playing field on which to build any edifice one likes.

All too easy, and an extremely unsatisfactory but growing tendency on Casebook.
In some cases it is a very obvious ploy to paving the way for some personal theories (events in Berner St. & "Hutchinson" come to mind).

In other cases it might be born of frustration stemming from the lack of positive results, but in some of these cases the research has apparently not been exhaustive.

What I am actually suggesting is that one looks very carefully at Mary's story in its totality, all its various parts, to see whether it appears true or not.

We all have aspects of our lives we have understated and some we have overstated. Some details we might have altered and some we have completely kept quiet about.
Why should Mary be regarded as any different?

Your suggestion Paul, is perfectly sensible and absolutely reasonable, not that you need anyone to condone it.

Best Wishes, Jon S.

[Wickerman]

Very much appreciated Chris (sorry about the Cris).
Now as I dig a little deeper I noticed the old thread where you provide five extremely detailed posts on the subject.

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=312

These may have been what I remembered.

Thanks again, Jon S.

[Chris Scott]

I'm pretty sure Cris posted a list of miners named Davis/Davies who died by accident, and a list of marriage licences(?) for Davis/Davies. Were these ever followed up?
All the best, Jon S.

Hi Jon
You may be thinking of the following part of the Mary Kelly book I wrote:
So, we are looking for a Welsh mining disaster in 1881 or 1882 whose victims included a DAVIES or DAVIS. In fact 1881 was notable in the lack of fatalities for that year. In 1882 there were two incidents that resulted in fatalities:
On January 15th 1882, at Risca pit 4 died
On February 11th 1882, at Coedcae pit, 6 died.
On March 3rd 1882 at Henwaen Blaina, 5 died.
The death roll for the Coedcae incident on February 11th is:
George Warlow
Thomas Williams
Jacob Thomas
Howell James Lewis
Benjamin James
Joseph Rowlands
The Henwaen Blaina incident is described thus:
"On 3rd March 1882, five men were killed in a localised explosion. It was reported that their bodies had been blown a considerable distance."
A photograph exists of the workforce before this explosion
The death roll was:
William Bennet aged 26
? Hawkins aged 65
? Jones aged 42
John Jones aged 48
Thomas Miles aged 25
I have been unable to locate a list of the fatalities for the Risca incident of 15th January 1882.

There is one incident which occurred on December 10th 1880 and so impinges very closely on the possible time frame we are looking at. This disaster occurred at the Naval Steam Colliery, Penygraig and resulted in 96 deaths. From the death roll the following names and details are taken:
Evan Davies aged 49 from Coedymeibion, married with 4 children
Evan Davies, no details
John Davies, aged 42 from Penygraig, married with 2 children
John Davies, no details
John Davies, no details
William Davies from Ffwrdamos
William R Davies aged 23 from Penygraig
The deaths were registered in the January-March quarter of 1881 under the district of Pontypridd.
Evan Davies aged 49
Evan Davies aged 32
John Davies aged 42
John Davies, no details
William R Davies aged 23 (his middle name is Roderick)
William Davies, no details.
None of these victims of the name of Davies or Davis can be linked in legal marriage to a Mary Kelly.

With regard to a Kelly/Davi(e)s marriage, this was the end result in the book:
Mr. Davies or Davis is noticeable by his absence! In fact during this whole five year period (1877-1881) I have so far only found one record anywhere of a Mary Kelly marrying a man named Davis or Davies. This took place in Shoreditch in the first quarter of 1881 and involved a Mary Ann Kelly and a John Brook Davis. Fuller details of this marriage are given below.


The details were given as follows:-
The 1881 marriage is the wedding between Mary Ann Kelly and John Brook Davis registered in Shoreditch in the first quarter of that year. As this is the only marriage so far found between a Mary Kelly and a partner named Davis, it is important to follow this up and see if anything further can be found. There is only one census entry specifically under the named of John Brook Davis which occurs in the 1871 records. He is listed as a 19 year old unmarried boarder at 59 Township, Worcester and his occupation is listed as a chemist's assistant. Interestingly, he is listed as Welsh born, specifically as coming from Rhyl, Flintshire. He lodged with his employer, a chemist named Edwin Timms, aged 42. There is also another record of a marriage in Islington in 1883 between a John Brook Davis and either Eliza Faulkner or Charlotte King. However, it would appear that the Worcester, Welsh born John Davis is unrelated to the couple who married in Shoreditch in 1881. What I believe is their household record is listed in the 1881 census as follows:
Address: 33 Fanshaw Street, London
Head: John B Davis aged 23 born Shoreditch - Picture frame maker
Wife: Mary A Davis aged 18 born Bethnal Green - Boot machinist.

[Debra A]

A minimalistic opinion might have asked, "if any bit of MJK's story is true", so perhaps you are a closet maximalist?

If that includes seeing nothing wrong with wanting to extend their own personal research to include other possibilities, like the idea that Johnto is a nickname used in conjunction with the surname John(s)ton, then, yes, I guess I am!

[Debra A]

What is a serious impediment for many who are interested is that there is no central folder or location on Casebook where we can all turn to, to see what has been researched and what has been uncovered.
No-one wants to waste time going over a well trodden path, but many might like to help as time & finances permit.

I'm pretty sure Cris posted a list of miners named Davis/Davies who died by accident, and a list of marriage licences(?) for Davis/Davies. Were these ever followed up?
I'm sure there's plenty to look for that has never been satisfactorily resolved, co-ordination is what is missing, don't you think?

All the best, Jon S.

Co-ordinated research is a good thing. Dictated research is a bad thing.

[Wickerman]

Which is a similar question to an earlier post I made on a completely different thread that sparked this one off.
I said- If any bit of MJK's story is false what evidence are we willing to accept from researchers to prove they have found the right woman?

A minimalistic opinion might have asked, "if any bit of MJK's story is true", so perhaps you are a closet maximalist?
Ok, I'm only teasing you, but it does seem by the structure of your question that you also keep all the stories on the table just the same as I do.

Will we accept anywhere in Ireland as a birthplace, will we accept a brother in the army rather than the specific regiment, will we accept her father's name was Fred and they never lived in Wales? How we will know if it's the right girl?

We likely never will know, so in order to use the process of elimination we do need to keep all her stories, that is to say, not reject anything prematurely, because we cannot say what will turn up next.

You say we should consider Mary hasn't been identified as all sources haven't been exhausted and that's true but should we also be willing to accept there were some lies told?...Even you agree with this to some degree but you prefer to think it was Henry who told the lie.

I see no benefit to accepting the alternative, thats what I'm getting at.
You know yourself that to reject Kelly's identity is the same as throwing the baby out in the bathwater. We are left with nothing.

As much as we may doubt some of her stories they are all potential leads. So the path of least resistance is to set aside that which we cannot 'prove' (the brother/soldier story?) and proceed with some other aspect. But you know this, and I know you know this. Just because we cannot find the brother/soldier does not mean he did not exist (incomplete records, etc?).

So, your ideas aren't that much different? Slot in a lie and it becomes the reason we can't trace her/him.

Agreed, so where do these ideas come from that "I accept anything", and "believe everything"?
It simply is not true, and, as you say, our views are not so different.

What is a serious impediment for many who are interested is that there is no central folder or location on Casebook where we can all turn to, to see what has been researched and what has been uncovered.
No-one wants to waste time going over a well trodden path, but many might like to help as time & finances permit.

I'm pretty sure Cris posted a list of miners named Davis/Davies who died by accident, and a list of marriage licences(?) for Davis/Davies. Were these ever followed up?
I'm sure there's plenty to look for that has never been satisfactorily resolved, co-ordination is what is missing, don't you think?

All the best, Jon S.