Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Could These Be Alice Mackenzie's Relatives ?

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

  • #76
    Yes, this calls for a cup of tea.

    Comment


    • #77
      John McCormack seems to have been the source for the idea that Alice's father was a postman from Liverpool. Makes you wonder how many details Joe Barnett might have got wrong.

      Comment


      • #78
        Yes, either McCormack got it wrong or Alice's dad didn't know his round very well.

        Comment


        • #79
          There's a story in Leicester Chronicle May 26, 1860 concerning an assault on the wife of George Halfpenny, a chair and cabinet maker. Joseph Kinsey is briefly mentioned as a witness who worked for Mr Halfpenny in Churchgate.

          Comment


          • #80
            These are Charles and Martha's children from Ancestry:

            William: 1833 - 1928
            Anne: 1835 - 1858
            John: 1838 - 1895
            Martha: 1840 - 1894
            Jane: 1842 - 1930
            Alice: 1845 - ????
            Charles: 1857 - 1936
            George Edward: 1851 - 1854
            James: 1856 - 1906

            Significantly, Alice's death is the only mystery on the tree. It's owner may welcome a solution to that mystery.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Debra Arif View Post
              There's a story in Leicester Chronicle May 26, 1860 concerning an assault on the wife of George Halfpenny, a chair and cabinet maker. Joseph Kinsey is briefly mentioned as a witness who worked for Mr Halfpenny in Churchgate.
              Thanks, Debs. Must be Alice's Joe, surely.

              I found an Alice Bryant in Wandsworth yesterday, but rejected her. One reason was that she was a 'French polisher'. It occurs to me now that the wife of a carpenter/chair-maker might well have picked up that skill.

              I'll go back and have another look.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
                Thanks, Debs. Must be Alice's Joe, surely.

                I found an Alice Bryant in Wandsworth yesterday, but rejected her. One reason was that she was a 'French polisher'. It occurs to me now that the wife of a carpenter/chair-maker might well have picked up that skill.

                I'll go back and have another look.
                Yes, that sounds like a possibility.

                Just going back to convictions, I don't know if you've seen this one or not:

                Alice MacKenzie age 27, height 5ft 4.5in. hair auburn, eyes hazel, complexion pale, scar under left eye, laundress, convicted Southwark, 31st Aug 1873, charge D&R, sentence 7 days, can read and write, weight in 9st 10lbs, out 9st 6lbs

                One thing I noticed was the difference in weight from the record you mentioned earlier, and no mention of the missing thumb, What do you think?

                Comment


                • #83
                  Also, with the record you already mentioned as Alice Taylor or Mc Kinsey in 1878 there is the same puzzle we encountered before with Catherine Eddowes in these records isn't there?
                  Mc Kinsey/Taylor supposedly had a previous conviction 4th April 1877 entry number 2499. In the 1877 register for Wandsworth there is an entry 2499 on 4th April but again, it's for a woman other than McKenzie. The entry in 77 relates to a young woman of 17 with no similarities.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Ah! Simple explanation-the two separate pages of records are not aligned correctly when stitched together in the one page image and so that refers to the woman above whose details match perfectly! I wonder if that happened with the Eddowes record too?

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Folks, has Joseph Kinsey yet been located in the censuses?

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Robert Linford View Post
                        Folks, has Joseph Kinsey yet been located in the censuses?
                        I couldn't find him in 1861, Robert. I don't know if Gary or anyone else has.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Jerry Dunlop View Post
                          I agree 100%, Howard. Pat, Gary, Debs and Robert have been nothing but remarkable on this thread (sorry if I missed someone). To go from wondering if someone was related to Alice McKenzie to actually finding never known details about her and a little extra was exciting for this forum.

                          This thread made me see that the use of aliases was a necessity for some of these women. I bet they had been in trouble so many times they used different names on a regular basis to try to avoid long sentences. Makes me wonder if the name Mary Jane Lawrence may be something more real than we realize?
                          And Lizzie Fischer which was "really" Tischer. Not to mention that Marie Jeanette was also her "real" name. I have looked at everything but I do not have all the resources many here have. On names like Lizzie Fischer I wonder if, in the crowds and mayhem when the body was discovered, people with some acquaintance with Millers Court didn't just spew names of people who had association with that address. "Oh yeah, I know her....lived with a drover..."

                          I think in contacting current day relatives, probably a number of folks would be interested in history. My parents were older, my grandparents were born in the 1890's and some of them immigrated here. Family members who were in some way disreputable would have been alluded to in whispers or never mentioned. From our perspective today we can see that people who were considered disgraceful 130 years ago may merely have succumbed to the difficulties of the times. Many now who do their own family searches cherish and sympathize with the black sheep of the family. We also know, especially through JtR studies, that many females had a very difficult time due to limited opportunities, lack of education, widowhood and many other circumstances.

                          Look at poor Alice Kinsey having both her child and husband die young within a year. Perhaps there was a terrible disease that went through, maybe even flu which still kills many. Her losses were enough to drive anyone to drink.

                          I think it is different when it comes to the actual JtR. Even if a family has personal interest, resulting publicity would not be worth it to a lot of people who want quiet lives.

                          If Jack was a Polish Jew I would be glad if he was never identified. Imagine what could have been done with that information in the last century! (Even today I am astounded at some anti-Semitic rants one finds on line. or how these things find their way into comment sections on subjects that should have nothing to do with any of that. Thus I am astounded that one ignorant soul opined that the Voynich Manuscript was a "dirty Jew book" created to take over the world and spread "filth"....etc....not worth repeating.)
                          The wickedness of the world is the dream of the plague.~~Voynich Manuscript

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by Robert Linford View Post
                            Folks, has Joseph Kinsey yet been located in the censuses?
                            I think that Joseph was the son of George Kinsey and Sarah Burton married Christmas Day 1834 at All Saints Leicestershire.
                            The family seem to have been Baptists.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              That's exactly what I was looking at, Debs. But two flaws:


                              Sarah's calculations were very wayward re Joseph's age. He was apparently born in 1841, not c49.


                              Also, the only death I could see that would fit George was Q1 61 - aged 0! Yet he must have died between 51 and 61.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                I'm not sure I follow, Robert.
                                On the marriage certificate it just says full age so there's no birth year there but he says his father is George.
                                Joseph was 25 when he died in 67 according to the newspaper announcement, that's b c 1842. There's a GRO birth for Joseph for 1841 too with Mother's maiden name Burton.

                                KINSEY, JOSEPH BURTON Order
                                GRO Reference: 1841 J Quarter in OF LEICESTER UNION Volume 15 Page 123

                                There's also the 1851 census for George, Sarah and sons John B[urton] Kinsey and Joseph, whose age is unreadable but would be about 9?

                                I haven't found them in 61 though, maybe that is where the discrepancy is?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X