Looking for William Sullivan (1839 – ?)

My husband Greg’s great grandfather Ebenezer Henry Sullivan, known as Henry Sullivan, was born on 7 August 1863 at Gheringhap, a small settlement near Geelong, Victoria.

Henry’s birth was registered by Matilda Hughes, his maternal grandmother. According to the birth certificate, his father was a labourer named William Sullivan, about 24 years old, born in London. His mother was recorded as Matilda Sullivan, maiden surname Hughes (but actually born Darby), aged 18, born in New Zealand. William and Matilda had been married in 1862, the previous year. Matilda had another child, Eleazar Hughes, born in 1861 to a different father, unnamed.

Birth certificate of Ebenezer Henry Sullivan

The 1862 marriage of William Sullivan and Matilda Frances Hughes took place on 6 October 1862 in Herne Hill, a suburb of Geelong, at the residence of the Reverend Mr James Apperley. The marriage certificate records William as 23, labourer, a bachelor, born in London, living at Gheringhap. William’s parents were named as William Sullivan, painter and glazier, and his wife Mary Barry.

1862 marriage certificate of William Sullivan and Matilda Hughes

On 12 June 1865 at Ashby, Geelong, William and Matilda had a daughter, Margaret Maria Sullivan. The informant on the birth certificate was her maternal grandmother Matilda Hughes. The father was named as William Sullivan, farmer, deceased, aged about 25, born in London.

On 20 November 1865 Margaret Maria Sullivan died, five months old. A Coronial inquest was held, where it was revealed that six months after their marriage, a few months before Henry was born, Matilda was deserted by her new husband William. Matilda Sullivan maintained that the father of the baby Margaret Maria was William Sullivan, who had visited her twice since their separation. At the time of the baby’s death Matilda Sullivan worked at Geelong Hospital. Her two younger children were cared for by their grandmother.

The inquest heard medical opinion that the baby had starved to death. The jury returned a verdict of manslaughter against the grandmother [Matilda Hughes], and the mother [Matilda Sullivan], as being an accessory to it.

In April 1866 Matilda Hughes and her daughter Matilda Sullivan were called upon to surrender to their bail, but they did not answer to their names.

On the 15th May 1866 the ‘Geelong Advertiser‘ reported on court proceedings relating to the abandonment of two year old Henry Sullivan. It was said of his mother, Matilda, that “her husband had left her, and was supposed to have gone to New Zealand, whence no tidings were heard of him, and she had recently left Geelong with some man with whom she had formed an intimacy, and had deserted her children”. The child, Henry Sullivan, was admitted to the orphanage.

I have found no subsequent trace of William and Matilda. Nor have I found any record in London of William Sullivan before he arrived in Australia. I have also not been able to trace his parents William Sullivan, painter and glazier, and his mother Mary Barry.

Moreover, other than as descendants of Henry Sullivan, neither Greg nor any of his Sullivan cousins have any Sullivan relatives among their DNA matches.

When Greg first tested his DNA he had a strong match to Helen F. from New Zealand and also to her great uncle Alan W. Since 2016 I have been in correspondence with Helen who, with me, is attempting to discover how we are related. Helen has a comprehensive family tree. We have since narrowed the relationship to her McNamara Durham line.

Helen recently wrote to tell me that she had noticed some matches descended from a William Durham, son of a Patrick Durham. Patrick Durham, it seems, was the brother of Joanna NcNamara nee Durham, Helen’s 3rd great grandmother.

I have placed the matches in DNAPainter’s ‘What are the odds?’ tool. It appears likely that Greg and his Sullivan cousins are descended from Patrick Durham. We don’t yet have quite enough data to be sure whether they descend from William Durham or one of his cousins.

What are the Odds tree (tool by DNAPainter.com) with shared DNA matches of Greg with descendants of Joanna Durham; at the moment we do not have a great enough number of sufficiently large matches to form a definite conclusion. The cousin connections are a bit too distant.

William Durham was born about 1840 in Finsbury, Middlesex, England, to Patrick Durham and Mary Durham née Barry. When William Durham married Jemima Flower on 9 April 1860, he stated that his father was William Durham, a painter and glazier. (There are several other records where Patrick Durham is recorded as William Durham but is clearly the same man.)

1860 marriage of William Durham to Jemima Flowers

Comparing the signatures of William Durham on the 1860 marriage certificate to William Sullivan on the 1862 marriage certificate. They seem to be similar.

William and Jemima had two children together, one of whom appears to have died in infancy. The other, also called William Durham, left descendants, and some of these share DNA with Greg and his Sullivan cousins and also with Helen and her Durham cousins.

On 19 October 1861 William Durham, his wife and two children, were subject to a poor law removal. The record mentions his parents.

London Metropolitan Archives; London, England; London Poor Law Registers; Reference: BEBG/267/019 retrieved through ancestry.com

Jemima died about a week later and was buried 27 October 1861 at Victoria Park Cemetery, Hackney.

I have found no trace of William Durham after the Poor Law removal. Did he emigrate to Australia and change his name?

Related posts

• Poor little chap
• From the Geelong orphanage to gardener
• Triangulating Matilda’s DNA
• John Narroway Darby

Wikitree: are these two the same man?

• William Sullivan (abt. 1839 – ?)
• William Durham (1840 – ?)

From the Geelong orphanage to gardener

My husband Greg’s great grandfather was Ebenezer Henry Sullivan, born at Gheringhap near Geelong on 7 August 1863. Ebenezer’s father was William Sullivan, aged about 24 years, a Londoner. His mother was Matilda Sullivan nee Darby, age 18, born in New Zealand. The birth of Ebenezer was registered on 3 September 1863 by his grandmother Matilda Hughes of Gheringhap; there were no other children from the marriage at that time.

William Sullivan labourer and Matilda Frances Hughes (in fact Matilda Darby, for her stepfather was David Hughes) both of Gheringhap, had been married on 6 October 1862.

In 1861, two years previously, Matilda had given birth to a child, Eleazer surnamed Hughes, by a different father. The baby Eleazar was farmed out, cared for by a woman in the country—a ‘nurse’—for 5 shillings a week.

Six months after their marriage, a few months before Ebenezer Henry was born, Matilda was deserted by her new husband. About a year later, on 12 June 1865, Matilda gave birth to a third child, given the name Margaret Maria Sullivan. The father, she said, was William Sullivan, who had ‘visited’ her twice since their separation.

Matilda Sullivan worked at Geelong Hospital. Her two younger children were cared for by their grandmother.

On 20 November 1865 Margaret Maria Sullivan died, four months old. At the inquest, medical opinion was that the baby had starved to death, and the jury returned a verdict of manslaughter against the grandmother [Matilda Hughes], and the mother [Matilda Sullivan], as being an accessory to it.

In April 1866 Matilda Hughes and her daughter Matilda Sullivan were called upon to surrender to their bail, but they did not answer to their names. I have found no further trace of Matilda Sullivan née Darby.

On 28 May 1866 the Geelong Advertiser reported on the case of Mary Sullivan, an unmarried mother of three, who was charged with stealing. Mary was sentenced to 14 days imprisonment. A “poor old woman” who lived in the house with Mary was left in charge of these children and another child who had been abandoned by another woman named Sullivan. I do not know if this Mary Sullivan is connected to William.

On the 15th May 1866 there had been another report in the Geelong Advertiser of a child and a young woman called Sullivan:

The attention of the Bench was again called, yesterday, to the case of the young child left in the care of a woman named Sullivan, who now seeks to shift the responsibility she undertook to Mr Hughes, the stepfather of the mother. Mr Hughes appeared in the Court and refused the charge of the child, who, he said, had been placed collusively by the mother with the woman, with a foregone intent to abandon it. He had undertaken the care and education of an elder child to save his stepdaughter from shame; but her subsequent career had been of a nature to preclude any further favourable consideration of her conduct. She had been twice married, and her husband had left her, and was supposed to have gone to New Zealand, whence no tidings were heard of him, and she had recently left Geelong with some man with whom she had formed an intimacy, and had deserted her children, leaving the one in question with the woman Sullivan, who had been pre paid for its keep for a fortnight, at the end of which time it was planned that the child should be left with the stepfather, a scheme that was defeated by Constable Collins, who saw the woman depositing the child at the stepfather’s premises, and warned her of the consequences of the act. The Bench refused the application of the woman Sullivan, who avows that she will not keep the child any longer. A warrant will be issued for the apprehension of the mother, who, it will be remembered, was the parent of the infant upon, whom an inquest was held at Ashby some time ago.

On 11 June 1866 Henry Sullivan, whose parents had deserted him, was committed as a state ward to Geelong Orphanage. His birthdate was given as 1862 but in fact he had been born in 1863, so he was a little less three years old. He was blind in one eye; family stories have this the result of a magpie attack.

Geelong orphanage buildings photographed October 2022

On 23 June 1873 Henry Sullivan was recommitted for a further five years.

On 28 April 1876 Henry Sullivan was licensed out to Mr Jas M Jenkins, a market gardener in Moorabbin.

On 28 May 1878 Henry Sullivan was licensed out to Mr Wm George of 72 Brunswick St Fitzroy for one month at 4/- per week.

On 23 June 1878 Henry Sullivan was discharged as a state ward. He was just under 15 years old.

Henry continued to work as a gardener. He married Anne Morley on 17 February 1887 in Victoria. They had five children and 27 grandchildren. He died on 1 June 1943 in Victoria at the age of 79, and was buried in Cheltenham Cemetery.

Henry Sullivan about 1940 at his home “Navillus”, 7 Evelyn Street, East Bentleigh with his wife, a daughter-in-law, and a granddaughter, Elaine Sullivan, from the collection of a cousin and used with permission

Related posts

• Poor little chap
• Triangulating Matilda’s DNA
• H is for Henry
• E is for Evelyn Street Bentleigh

Wikitree:

• Henry Sullivan (1863 – 1943)
• Matilda Frances (Darby) Sullivan (abt. 1845 – ?)
• William Sullivan (abt. 1839 – ?)
• Matilda Priscilla (Mogridge) Hughes (abt. 1825 – 1868)

170 years since the ‘Black Thursday’ bushfires in Victoria

Today is the 170th anniversary of the 1851 bushfires, which devastated large parts of Victoria.

Fires covered a quarter of what is now Victoria (approximately 5 million hectares). Areas affected include Portland, Plenty Ranges, Westernport, the Wimmera and Dandenong districts. Approximately 12 human lives, one million sheep and thousands of cattle were lost.

Forest Fire Management Victoria – past bushfires

Black Thursday, February 6th. 1851, as depicted by William Strutt

In 1851 among our forebears these people were living in Victoria and would have experienced the frightening conditions that day:

Greg’s third great grandparents John Narroway Darby (1823 – ?) and his wife Matilda nee Moggridge (1825 – 1868) had separated and Matilda was living with David Hughes with whom she had a daughter Margaret born 1850 at Ashby, now west Geelong. In 1851 Matilda and her daughters Matilda (1845 – ?), Greg’s great great grandmother, and Margaret were probably living in Ashby. John Darby and their daughter Henrietta may have been living in Portland where John married for a second time in 1855.

Greg’s third great grandparents Thomas Edwards (1794 – 1871) and Mary Edwards nee Gilbart (1805 – 1867), were living near Geelong at the time of the death of their daughter in 1850. They later moved to Bungaree near Ballarat but at the time of the fires they were probably in the Geelong district with their children including their youngest son and Greg’s great great grandfather, Francis Gilbart Edwards (1848 – 1913).

Samuel Proudfoot Hawkins (1819 – 1867) and his wife Jeanie nee Hutcheson (1824 – 1864), my third great grandparents, were living in the Portland district. Their second daughter Penelope was born in July 1851 at Runnymede station near Sandford which had been settled by Jeanie’s brothers. Also at Runnymede was Isabella Hutcheson nee Taylor (1794 – 1876), Jeanie’s mother and my fourth great grandmother.

The fire did not reach Ashby or Geelong but a week later a report wrote about the conditions experienced that day in the Geelong district.

The peculiarity of the phenomena of Thursday, was the extraordinary violence of the hot blast by which the conflagration was kindled. Had the hurricane continued to blow during Thursday night with the same violence as during the day, the conflagration might have approached closer to the suburbs, and we might have been exposed to the fiery projectiles which were swept through the air, and which carried devastation to stations and homesteads that were thought to be secure. The violence of the wind, the intensity, breadth, and volume of the fire, the combustible condition of grass, trees, fences, train, huts, and houses, formed a combination that baffled both calculation and means of resistance; and had the fire reached Ashby, we could not have reckoned on the safety of Geelong.

FRIDAY MORNING, FEBRUARY 14. (1851, February 14). Geelong Advertiser (Vic. : 1847 – 1851), p. 2 (DAILY and MORNING). Retrieved from http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article91917049

An account of the bushfire from the Portland perspective:

BUSH FIRES.
(From the Portland Guardian.)
Yesterday forenoon was a period of extraordinary heat, and we are sorry to say, of calamity also. The heat from 11 o’clock, am, until afternoon was most oppressive ; a hot wind blowing from the N.N.W. in a most furious manner. At this time the thermometer stood for an hour by one glass at 112° while by two others it reached 116° in the sun. The dust in the streets was most suffocating, penetrating the smallest crevices, and filling the houses. In consequence of the excessive heat and bush fires, the last day of the races was postponed, until this day, when they duly came off. About 12 o’clock a bush fire in the vicinity of the town began to rage with the utmost fury. It sprang up near the racecourse, and through the violence of the hot wind, threatened to consume the booths, and to envelope the persons who had assembled there in the flames, before time could be afforded them to escape. By a slight change of wind, however, the racers escaped ; but the resistless element swept away in its course the newly erected cottage of Mr Howard the collector of Customs, leaving time only to hurry away Mrs Howard and the family out of the house, before their residence became a perfect cinder So sudden and rapid was the progress of the flames that the fowls and goats about the premises were all consumed. The fire swept along before the wind, carrying away the fences, and all that stood in its way, for about a mile and a half, when Mr Blair, with the whole body of the constabulary, and others from the racecourse arrived in time to save his own hay-stack and residence. The utmost concern was felt in town at the same time, at the approach of the fire from another quarter. Burnt particles were whirling down the streets and flying over the tops of the houses in profusion. But a constable was not to be seen in town. Those of the inhabitants in their houses were making the best preparations which they could for themselves respectively , water carts and concentrated effort was at a sad discount. Several gentlemen did their utmost to prepare against a highly probable casualty, but the utmost which they could do was to warn others of the danger. Fortunately the wind moderated about two o’clock, and the apprehension passed away.

While this fire was raging in the immediate vicinity of the town, Mount Clay and the farms in that locality were enveloped in one vast blaze. Mr Millard has again been a heavy sufferer in this latter fire, and has now lost the whole of his crops. Messrs Monogue, M’Lachlan and Dick, have partaken with him in his misfortunes. The work of years has been swept away from those industrious families and severe sufferers. Their fences, their crops, and their homes, have been annihilated at a stroke.

Just at the same hour the Bush Tavern, which has stood scathless for many years in the midst of a dense forest, and proved so often a place of shelter to the forlorn traveller from the pitiless storm of winter and the scorching heat of summer, is now a heap of ashes. The fire reached the buildings without warning ; and the few articles which were saved from the wreck ignited afterwards with the excessive heat which the burning houses created. The bridge across the Fitzroy has shared a similar fate with the house;  a dray, and it is supposed a horse, have met a similar calamity.

At sea, the weather was even more fearful than on shore. Captain Reynolds reports that yesterday, when 20 miles from the Laurences, the heat was so intense, that every soul on board was struck almost powerless. A sort of whirlwind, on the afternoon, struck the vessel, and carried the topsail, lowered down on the cap, clean out of the bolt rope, and had he not been prepared for the shock, the vessel, he has no doubt, would have been capsized. Flakes of fire were, at the time, flying thick all around the vessel from the shore in the direction of Portland.

BUSH FIRES. (1851, February 12). The Argus (Melbourne, Vic. : 1848 – 1957), p. 4. Retrieved from http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article4776130

Black Thursday, February, 1851. Engraved F.A. Sleap. In the collection of the State Library of Victoria.

Trove Tuesday: Cornish memorial and Ballarat pioneer

Last month, when we visited the St Erth Methodist Church in Cornwall, I noticed that one of the plaques on the wall was a memorial to Francis Tuckfield erected by James Oddie and Benjamin Bonney, passengers on the Larpent in 1849.

A similar plaque was unveiled in the Yarra Street Methodist Church, Geelong in 1906.

A MURAL TABLET. (1906, March 20). Geelong Advertiser (Vic. : 1859 – 1929), p. 2. Retrieved from http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article149169675

 

The plaque was to honour Reverend Francis Tuckfield (1808 – 1865) and his wife, Sarah Tuckfield nee Gilbart (1808 – 1854), who threw their house open to passengers from the Larpent who had been afflicted by fever.

Francis Tuckfield, portrait in the collection of the National Portrait Gallery of Australia

Sarah Tuckfield, portrait in the collection of the National Portrait Gallery of Australia

 

The Larpent had arrived in Geelong on 28 June 1849. Among the passengers was James Oddie (1824 – 1911) with his wife and child. The Larpent’s emigrants had been selected by the Presbyterian minister John Dunmore Lang, a promoter of emigration. During the voyage many passengers became ill with what was thought to be typhoid. Sadly both Oddie’s wife and child died.

James Oddie was among the earliest gold miners arriving at the newly opened Ballarat diggings in August 1851. He became very rich and was later a great philanthropist. He founded the Art Gallery of Ballarat. His portrait hangs there.

James Oddie’s obituary in the Geelong Advertiser of 4 March 1911 stated that Oddie had instituted an annual reunion of passengers of the Larpent and their descendants to meet at Mack’s Hotel, Geelong.

Trove Tuesday: death of Captain W. A. P. Dana

William Augustus Pulteney Dana (1826-1866) was my 4th great uncle, the eighth of the ten children of my 4th great grandparents William Pulteney Dana (1776-1861) and Charlotte Elizabeth Dana née Bailey (1795-1846). He was one of the brothers of my great great great grandmother Charlotte Frances Champion de Crespigny née Dana (1820-1904).

Superintendent William Dana

William, then superintendent of police at Geelong, died suddenly on 5 October 1866.

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 6, 1866. (1866, October 6). The Argus (Melbourne, Vic. : 1848 – 1957), , p. 5. Retrieved from http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article5775248

CURRENT TOPICS. (1866, October 6). Geelong Advertiser (Vic. : 1859 – 1926), , p. 2. Retrieved from http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article148784229

Items of News. (1866, October 10). Hamilton Spectator and Grange District Advertiser (South Melbourne, Vic. : 1860 – 1870), , p. 2. Retrieved from http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article194471140

LOCAL INTELLIGENCE. (1866, October 11). Kilmore Free Press and Counties of Bourke and Dalhousie Advertiser (Kilmore, Vic. : 1865 – 1868), , p. 2 (MORNINGS.). Retrieved from http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article70060810

His funeral was reported in the Geelong Advertiser of 8 October 1866. Thousands of people, it was reported, viewed the long cortege. Philip de Crespigny, William Dana’s brother-in-law and my great great great grandfather was one of the principal mourners. Also among these principal mourners were his nephews, George and Augustus Dana.

CAPTAIN DANA’S FUNERAL. (1866, October 8). Geelong Advertiser (Vic. : 1859 – 1926), , p. 3. Retrieved from http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article148784238

Images of Captain Dana’s grave in the Geelong cemetery at Find-A-Grave: http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=163742121 These were kindly taken by Find A Grave contributor Ron M following my request to the site.

Poor little chap

So far in my family history research I have not used DNA testing. Document-based methods give me more than enough to go on with.

However, today I decided to order Ancestry.com DNA kits to learn about DNA methods.  There are three brick walls in my husband’s family tree that perhaps DNA might get me past:

• Henry Sullivan (1862-1943), a great grandfather of my husband, was admitted as a state ward in Geelong in 1866 about the age of four. His parents had deserted him.
• George Young (1826-1890), from Liverpool, a great great grandfather of my husband,  provided no information about his parents.
• Caroline Clarke (1835-1879), wife of George Young and a great great grandmother of my husband,  was not specific about her birth and I have been unable to trace her parents, perhaps John Clark(e) and Hannah Sline. She said she was born about 1835  in Tumut. But she also said she was born in Sydney.  I’ve got nowhere with this.

Having ordered the kits I thought I might look again at these brick walls. More newspapers and other records have been digitised since I last looked. I thought there might be more material.

I didn’t get any further with the Young and Clark puzzles. However, I think I have made some progress with Henry Sullivan. The story I have found seems plausible, and more information may turn up, but a DNA link would be very useful to confirm my guesses.

Henry Sullivan at his house, “Navillus”, in Bentleigh, Victoria with his wife Anne Sullivan née Morley (1861-1946) and daughter-in-law Florence Sullivan née Hickson (1898-1983) and grandaughter Elaine Sullivan later Priest (1933-1987). Photo from Elaine’s daughter.

Henry Sullivan (1862 – 1943) was committed as a State Ward in Geelong on 11 June 1866 for seven years. He was said to be a native of Victoria. He was a neglected child. At the time of his committal, both his parents were said to be living but he had been deserted. His parents’ names were not given on the Ward Register. He had lost the sight of his right eye. Family stories say he was struck by a magpie. We have not been able to find a birth certificate.

Sullivan Henry VPRS 4527 OS 1 no 1768. VPRS 4527 Ward Registers [1864 – c.1890] are records of children in State care. Records held by the Public Records Office Victoria.(click on image to enlarge it)

In 1873, when the first seven year committal period expired, Henry, aged 11, was recommitted. At the time of his recommittal it was again stated that both parents were living and that they had deserted him in June 1866.

Sullivan Henry VPRS 4527 OS 8 no 7003

I had earlier looked, without success, for records of court cases in Geelong in June 1866 to find reports of Henry Sullivan being committed as a State Ward.

Today I reviewed newspaper reports from May 1866.

I found a report on 28 May 1866 of a Mary Sullivan appearing before the Central Police Court in Geelong on Friday 25 May accused of stealing. (CENTRAL POLICE COURT. (1866, May 28). Geelong Advertiser (Vic. : 1859 – 1926), p. 3. Retrieved from http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article147269389 )

Mary Sullivan was unmarried. She had three children of her own and one left in her care to support. The magistrate took into consideration ‘the position of the unfortunate children’, and Mary was given a mitigated sentence of 14 days imprisonment.  An old woman told the court that she lived in the same house as Mary Sullivan and was left in charge of the children and the ‘little one’ who had been abandoned by another woman named Sullivan.  The newspaper stated that ‘The decrepit and indiscreet creature walked off with the child clinging to her.’

I think that small child was Henry Sullivan.  Fourteen days after Mary’s appearance in court on 25 May was about the 8th of June. I suspect that when Mary Sullivan was released from gaol she decided she could not cope with an extra child not her own.

On the 15th May 1866 there had been another report of a child and a young woman called Sullivan.

The attention of the Bench was again called, yesterday, to the case of the young child left in the care of a woman named Sullivan, who now seeks to shift the responsibility she undertook to Mr Hughes, the stepfather of the mother. Mr Hughes appeared in the Court and refused the charge of the child, who, he said, had been placed collusively by the mother with the woman, with a foregone intent to abandon it. He had undertaken the care and education of an elder child to save his step daughter from shame; but her subsequent career had been of a nature to preclude any further favourable consideration of her conduct. She had been twice married, and her husband had left her, and was supposed to have gone to New Zealand, whence no tidings were heard of him, and she had recently left Geelong with some man with whom she had formed an intimacy, and had deserted her children, leaving the one in question with the woman Sullivan, who had been pre paid for its keep for a fortnight, at the end of which time it was planned that the child should be left with the stepfather, a scheme that was defeated by Constable Collins, who saw the woman depositing the child at the stepfather’s premises, and warned her of the consequences of the act. The Bench refused the application of the woman Sullivan, who avows that she will not keep the child any longer.  A warrant will be issued for the apprehension of the mother, who, it will be remembered, was the parent of the infant upon, whom an inquest was held at Ashby some time ago. (CURRENT TOPICS. (1866, May 15). Geelong Advertiser (Vic. : 1859 – 1926), , p. 2. Retrieved from http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article147269067 )

I think in the court case this child is the ‘little one’ and the woman Sullivan is the Mary Sullivan who, less than two weeks later, was found guilty of stealing. There were two clues to follow up. The step-father of the mother was surnamed Hughes and the mother of the child was the parent of the infant upon whom an inquest was held at Ashby some time previously.

I had some trouble finding the inquest. I dashed down to the library to look at the index of inquests. The surname Sullivan produced nothing likely and inquests held at Ashby also didn’t seem to produce anything. I returned to searching the newspapers.  Deaths of infants and consequent inquests were unfortunately quite common.

I found an inquest in November 1865 where the grandmother was Mrs Hughes.  I believe this is the inquest to which the Geelong Advertiser of 15 May 1866 referrs.

Margaret Maria Sullivan aged six months starved to death. She was in the care of her grandmother Matilda Priscilla Hughes, the wife of David Hughes. The parents were William Sullivan and Matilda Frances Sullivan.  The Geelong Advertiser of 23 November 1865 reported the surnames as Sutherland but the Mount Alexander Mail of 24 November 1865 gave the surname as Sullivan. The birth and death indexes confirm that the surname was indeed Sullivan.

In her evidence Matilda Frances Sullivan stated

The mother of the child, Matilda Frances Sullivan, who was in service twelve miles from town at the time, was examined, and admitted having had an illegitimate child before marriage, three years ago. Her husband left her six months after marriage, and she had had another child beside the deceased since then. She swore that her husband visited her twice during that period at her mother’s house, and that deceased was his child. She paid to have her first child taken care of in the country ; the other two she left with her mother. (CHILD KILLING. (1865, November 24). Mount Alexander Mail (Vic. : 1854 – 1917),p. 3. Retrieved from http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article197091398 )

The Geelong Advertiser reported the mother’s evidence:

Matilda Frances Sutherland, wife of William Sutherland, sworn – I do not know what my husband is. The deceased child is mine. I was married on the 6th October, I think, as near as I can remember, 1862, by the Rev Mr Appleby, at Herne Hill. I cannot tell when my husband left me. I have seen him twice since he went away first. The first time he left was about six month after the marriage. Do not know when I saw him again, or how long we lived together. I do not know how long he was with me on either occasion. On my oath, the child is my husband’s. The child is not a love child. I do not know the reason why my husband left me six months ago. I had a child before I was married. He knew before marriage that I had the child. I have two children beside the child. The one born before marriage is four years old. When my husband came back is more than I can tell you. I saw him only on two occasions. My first child was born in July 1862. I have not seen my husband during this year 1865. Saw him last year on the two occasions I allude to. The deceased child was born on June 12th, and is six months old. Made no effort to find my husband I suppose he knows that the child is born. I can’t as I do not know where he is, nor anybody that does. He has given me no support whilst he has been away, and I get my living by going out to service. My mother supports one child and I the other, for which I pay L1 a month. Gave nothing toward the support of the deceased child. (CURRENT TOPICS. (1866, May 15). Geelong Advertiser (Vic. : 1859 – 1926), p. 2. Retrieved  from http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article147269067 )

The grandmother’s evidence was also detailed in the Geelong Advertiser:

Matilda Priscilla Hughes, wife of David Hughes – I took the deceased child when she was born, in Autumn street, on the 12th June. ‘My daughter has three children, one at nurse in the country, for which she pays 5s a week, and the other I keep as well as the deceased child. The elder boy is five years old. The second one is going in two years and the third is six months old. It was delicate from birth, and was fed from the bottle with farinaceous food. I waited on you (the coroner) on Thursday, and said I came to show you the baby. You told me I ought to get a wet-nurse. I did not say to you “I want you to see the child in case any thing should happen afterwards.” On Monday I sent the undertaker for a certificate from you of the death of the child. I don’t know the father of the child. My daughter’s husband has not been seen by either of us for some months before the birth of the boy who is three years old. … (Geelong Advertiser 15 May 1866 p. 3)

The jury returned a verdict of manslaughter against the grandmother, and also against the mother as an accessory to the child’s death.

The Victorian birth, marriage and death indexes confirm the evidence given at the inquest.

• birth Eleazar Hughes, no father, mother Matilda Hughes. Registration 1861 / 8434 born CHERHAP (this is Gheringhap, a village at the junction of the Geelong-Ballarat (1858-62) and Geelong-Maroona (1913) (to Ararat) railways. There were large numbers of navvies and associated construction workers in the area during both those periods.).
• marriage 1862 William Sullivan and Matilda Frances Hughes. Registration 1862 / 4376.
• birth Ebenezer Henry Sullivan, father William, mother Matilda (Hughes) Registration 1863 / 14440 born GHER (again Gheringhap )
• birth Margaret Maria Sullivan, father William, mother Matilda (Hughes). Registration 1865 / 8809 born ASHB, probably Ashby, a locality in Geelong West.
• death Margaret Maria Sullivan, father William, mother Matilda Frances (Hughes). Registration 1865 / 8836. Place of death ASHB.

There seems to be no other record of Ebenezer Henry Sullivan in the Victorian Birth, Death and Marriage indexes..

Eleazar / Eleazer Hughes married in 1881, had children and died in 1949. There are a number of family trees on Ancestry.com which include him.

I believe, based on the coincidence of the court reports and the committal of the small child as a State Ward in 1866, that my husband’s great grandfather Henry Sullivan, was Ebenezer Henry Sullivan, the son of William Sullivan and Matilda Frances Hughes.

Should any descendants of Eleazer, Henry’s half-brother, be willing to help, DNA testing might be able to confirm this.