Mary Jane Kelly finally named ..?

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
In my opinion, the brothers routes, are the only way forward, however easier said then done,if one believes McCarthy oral history, Kelly's clothes were parcelled up and sent to her army brother, who was reluctant to involve himself because of his sisters lifestyle..
Tracing Kelly has for some reason been made extremely difficult, almost by design ..the regiment records are incomplete, and no Kelly found is a suitabel candidate..
Regards Richard.

[Amanda]

Hi Amanda
I've tended to concentrate on looking for 'a brother in the Scots Guards' lately.
Do you think the woman you mention might be a good candidate?

There have been lots of different proposals in the past but no one woman seems to fit exactly without picking and choosing what we are going to believe of her story. It may be that none, some or all of MJK's back story is true but how do we decide which 'fit' we are willing to disregard in a candidate? This is what I always find difficult.

Hi Debra,
Yes, I might have found a good candidate as she also had some rather 'interesting' neighbours. Still a lot of research to do yet though.

You're right, it's very hard to decide which parts are fact. I think MJK may have embellished the truth according to whom she was telling her tale to at the time. It just may well be that we will never find her.
Amanda

[Debra A]

After reading the MJK chapter and a quick look on Ancestry, I wonder how the Mary Jane Malone who married Peter Dyer in Manchester in 1885 and gives her place of birth as 'India' in the 1891 census, age 32, living in Manchester at #8 Barlow St was ruled out as being 'their' Mary Jane Malone? She seems likely to me. I would have liked to have seen the research that ruled her out, if she was looked at at all.

There isn't any research included to follow up this woman Mary Jane Malone as herself, rather than as MJK from what I can gather with just a quick look.
Apologies if I have accidentally missed this research in the book.

As for the rest of the identifications-a lot of them appear to be in the wiki or on the boards posted by great researchers like Chris Scott and Neal Shelden.

After giving this a little more work I'm now convinced the Mary J Dyer I found listed in 1891 at # 8 Barlow St , Manchester is the same woman identified as a possible for MJK in Lyn Dyson's book.

[GUT]

Hi Amanda
I've tended to concentrate on looking for 'a brother in the Scots Guards' lately.
Do you think the woman you mention might be a good candidate?

There have been lots of different proposals in the past but no one woman seems to fit exactly without picking and choosing what we are going to believe of her story. It may be that none, some or all of MJK's back story is true but how do we decide which 'fit' we are willing to disregard in a candidate? This is what I always find difficult.

And that's why I doubt It will ever be proven.

Unless we find a woman who fits the whole story.

[Debra A]

Morning Debra,

Just wondering if you'd come across a Mary Kelly in Cardiff whose father was listed as a 'coal trimmer'?


Amanda

Hi Amanda
I've tended to concentrate on looking for 'a brother in the Scots Guards' lately.
Do you think the woman you mention might be a good candidate?

There have been lots of different proposals in the past but no one woman seems to fit exactly without picking and choosing what we are going to believe of her story. It may be that none, some or all of MJK's back story is true but how do we decide which 'fit' we are willing to disregard in a candidate? This is what I always find difficult.

[Amanda]

Morning Debra,

Just wondering if you'd come across a Mary Kelly in Cardiff whose father was listed as a 'coal trimmer'?


Amanda

[Debra A]

After reading the MJK chapter and a quick look on Ancestry, I wonder how the Mary Jane Malone who married Peter Dyer in Manchester in 1885 and gives her place of birth as 'India' in the 1891 census, age 32, living in Manchester at #8 Barlow St was ruled out as being 'their' Mary Jane Malone? She seems likely to me. I would have liked to have seen the research that ruled her out, if she was looked at at all.

There isn't any research included to follow up this woman Mary Jane Malone as herself, rather than as MJK from what I can gather with just a quick look.
Apologies if I have accidentally missed this research in the book.

As for the rest of the identifications-a lot of them appear to be in the wiki or on the boards posted by great researchers like Chris Scott and Neal Shelden.

[Debra A]

On the face of it the similarities between Mary Kelly found by this author and what Mary Kelly told about herself are very few and I don't see any reason for supposing that the two and one and the same. Likewise, Ms Dyson offers little support for her identification of other individuals, such as Bowyer, for whom others have looked over the years. I await comments by Debs and others who have done genealogical research with interest. Meanwhile, a new book by someone claiming to be a descendant of Mary Kelly is due in a couple of months and from what I hear it may have merit.

As far as Bowyer goes, (as I haven't looked at the rest of the book in depth yet but read this because I've looked at Bowyer) Ms Dyson has picked up the same Bowyer whose army records were researched and discussed here in 2011 by Chris Phillips and myself.

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=5636

I wasn't sure at first but this is the only Bowyer whose army records show he was in India although we should also consider that the records may not be complete. There was a death in Clapham in 1889 which I believe might be the same man as IIRC he was never traced back to Plymouth where he claimed on his discharge papers that he would be taking up residence.

[PaulB]

On the face of it the similarities between Mary Kelly found by this author and what Mary Kelly told about herself are very few and I don't see any reason for supposing that the two and one and the same. Likewise, Ms Dyson offers little support for her identification of other individuals, such as Bowyer, for whom others have looked over the years. I await comments by Debs and others who have done genealogical research with interest. Meanwhile, a new book by someone claiming to be a descendant of Mary Kelly is due in a couple of months and from what I hear it may have merit.

[Rosella]

It is very interesting but I agree proof will probably never be there. It's likely that Mary Jane did lie about being a widow with a husband killed in a terrible accident, (shades of Liz Stride and the 'Princess Alice') and other details, and she may have been a domestic servant at one stage, but the brothers' army records Lyn Dyson has traced don't really match up with what Mary Jane told others.

Also, surely Mary would have spoken to 'Indian Harry' Bowyer at one point or another about her memories of India, her stepfather serving there or mentioned it to someone at least! It's frustrating that Mary Jane was so close-lipped about her past and I do think she wasn't anxious to be tracked down.

[GUT]

My big question is how can it ever be proven.

[Amanda]

I am also reading the details with interest.

My big question however would be : Why did Mary feel the need to lie about her past?
Surely the escapades of being a Malone/Kelly living overseas was a far more exciting tale than that of being a coal miners daughter.
It's certainly fascinating research but I'm not convinced yet.

Amanda

[ceejay75]

has our mysterious girl finally been named in Lyn Dyson's new book ... RIPPED: Mary Jane Kelly?

historian and genealogist Lyn Dyson's Ripped is proving to be a very interesting read. She claim's Mary Jane Kelly was born in 1860 and was originally Mary Jane Malone. When her mother married John Kelly she took the name Kelly

All other things seem to tally too. Do hope we can find a photograph of this interesting Mary Jane Malone