Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Johnto - an idea

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • lynn cates
    replied
    nice

    Hello Colin. Nice work!

    Thanks for posting.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Bridewell
    replied
    Originally posted by richardnunweek View Post
    Hi Bridewell.
    Fascinating the search may well be over, we could have the brother of Mary Kelly, coincidently it looks like his wife's middle name is Mary[ Constance Mary Kelly].
    Well researched.
    Regards Richard.
    Hi Richard,

    I'd like to think so, but I'm not so sure. In the 1881 census there's a James Henry Kelly of approximately the same age (11) born Ireland, but his sister, although called Mary, is Mary Isabella and only 13, so she'd only have been (at most) 21 in November 1888 - and the family (assuming it's the same James Henry) were living in Renfrewshire. I'll keep looking!

    Leave a comment:


  • Bridewell
    replied
    James Kelly

    Click image for larger version

Name:	1881 England Census for James Kelly.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	186.3 KB
ID:	664969

    Not the same fellow obviously but a soldier named Kelly and born in Limerick. (Apologies if this has been posted before)

    Leave a comment:


  • richardnunweek
    replied
    Hi Bridewell.
    Fascinating the search may well be over, we could have the brother of Mary Kelly, coincidently it looks like his wife's middle name is Mary[ Constance Mary Kelly].
    Well researched.
    Regards Richard.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bridewell
    replied
    Click image for larger version

Name:	1911 England Census for James Henry Kelly.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	156.1 KB
ID:	664968

    Same man in the 1911 census - confirms place of birth as Limerick in Tipperary.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bridewell
    replied
    James Henry Kelly

    [ATTACH]15297[/ATTACH]

    The town name looks more and more like Limerick to me - just can't understand why the county would be Tipperary if that was the case.
    Last edited by Bridewell; 05-25-2013, 09:30 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cogidubnus
    replied
    Does anyone think there is a possibility that 'Johnto' might not have been in the Scots Guards but in the Royal Scots?

    I only ask because I've found a James Henry Kelly who enlisted in April 1886, aged 18 years and 1 month and so was presumably born in March 1868. He was born in the County of Tipperary, Parish of St Bridgets. I can't read the town. Looks as though it begins with L & ends with K. I guess it's not Limerick. Looks like Lanerlack or something similar. When I've got a bit more time I'll see if I can post the image (if someone can tell me how to reduce the size to below the Casebook limit please).
    Wow Colin

    Unless there's been a spate of activity behind the scenes I'm amazed how little reaction there's been - it sounds like a really interesting possibility...well found mate!

    All the best

    Dave

    Leave a comment:


  • Phil H
    replied
    Could fear have played a part too?

    Without wanting to introduce the whole Fenian sidetrack, but as an example.

    Say the "Kelly's" were a catholic family and Mary had been a police informer, might they have feared for their lives if their identity had become known. revenge killings are hardly uncommon in such circles. and if a brother were in HM forces....

    Phil

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    All in the family.

    Hello Richard.

    "clearly her brother was traced, and contact to the family was initially via him."

    Clearly?

    "I have the distinct impression that deep shame was present amongst her family, and family honour overshadowed sorrow."

    Surely a family quite different from all the others, like Nichol's and Eddowes's?

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • richardnunweek
    replied
    Hi,
    I am getting the impression that sooner, rather then later, we will progress in the hunt for the real identity of Mary Kelly.
    The answer clearly lies with identifying her brother, which may not have been hidden all along, maybe..just maybe, the Royal Scot's holds the answer,
    There are drawbacks , was it not Barnett that pinpointed the 'Scot's guards' to the police, and there were traced to Cardiff?
    That would suggest that initially at least, they started their trace via them.so unless that resulted in a blank, and they switched to the Royal Scots , we still may be on the wrong track.
    The whole episode is frustrating, clearly her brother was traced, and contact to the family was initially via him.
    I have the distinct impression that deep shame was present amongst her family, and family honour overshadowed sorrow.
    Regards Richard.

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    such a cut up

    Hello Colin. Nice work.

    Send me the image and I'll try some surgery?

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Bridewell
    replied
    Does anyone think there is a possibility that 'Johnto' might not have been in the Scots Guards but in the Royal Scots?

    I only ask because I've found a James Henry Kelly who enlisted in April 1886, aged 18 years and 1 month and so was presumably born in March 1868. He was born in the County of Tipperary, Parish of St Bridgets. I can't read the town. Looks as though it begins with L & ends with K. I guess it's not Limerick. Looks like Lanerlack or something similar. When I've got a bit more time I'll see if I can post the image (if someone can tell me how to reduce the size to below the Casebook limit please).

    Leave a comment:


  • RivkahChaya
    replied
    Originally posted by Phil H View Post
    If MJK's brother was serving under an assumed name (nom de guerre)
    There was a time in the US when you had to be born in wedlock to serve in the military, and since any legal paper with your name on it had the word "illegitimate" either written or stamped next to it, it was hard go escape, but it was one reason men enlisted under false names. The other was to enlist when they were underage. They'd usually enlist as someone else, not under an entirely false name.

    Was it ever the case in Britain that you had to be born in wedlock to serve?

    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    The most obvious solution, as you are aware, is that her true name was not Mary Kelly, but how helpful is that?

    If it was not her real name, then she assumed it, and what better identity to assume than a real one?
    That makes sense, but she runs a risk, assuming the life of someone who is still around to want it back, so Mary Jane Kelly, whoever she was, was probably dead in 1888. Maybe our MJK knew her in France, or knew her back in Wales. It might explain the married name question, if the woman who died in Miller's Court, whatever her original name was, did once marry someone named Davis/Davies, but wasn't using either that name or her maiden name, because she was using Kelly's names.

    If you are right, then maybe the confusion about MJK having a child is because the original Mary Jane Kelly did have a child, who obviously wasn't with the imposter, but she still included the child in telling the background story she'd assumed. That seems sort of bone-headed, but who knows what she was thinking?
    Originally posted by richardnunweek View Post
    Hi Curious,
    I would hazard a guess and suggest that Fiona's grandfather saw some form of identification, and called it a passport when relaying that sighting at a later date.
    Regards Richard.
    +1

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    without a trace

    Hello Richard.

    "Why can't the whole Kelly saga be less complex?"

    Don't know. But it began almost immediately she died. Paper could not trace her even then.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • curious4
    replied
    Mystery woman

    Hello Richard,

    Yes, she does seem to be the original mystery woman! However, if I were to be right about her lying about her age, perhaps we should cast our nets a little wider?

    Best wishes,
    C4

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X