Who can I believe?

Thomas Bryce, the son of David Bryce Esq, was at his father's home in Glasgow on Sunday 7 April 1861 (census night)¹. And he was definitely in Brisbane, Queensland on Tuesday 18 September 1866² (the day of his wedding with Janet Menzies). The timing and method by which he was transported between these two points in space-time are less clear.

There is no entry in the QSA Immigration Indices that might plausibly describe his journey. That is not really surprising because the period 1860-67 is almost certainly the one with the least complete coverage of immigration records.

The report of Thomas's death in The Brisbane Courier of 8 January 1912³ is quite definite concerning his entry into Queensland. "He started his career as an accountant in his native city, but left there in 1862 in the ship Golden City, and came to Queensland in search of health." Murphy's Law would have predicted as much because the Golden City is fabled among researchers for its association with missing records. (Can't find your ancestor's arrival in the 1860s, put down "via the Golden City".)

Fortunately, although not recorded at QSA, the 1862-63 voyage of the Golden City was the subject of one of the series of booklets They Came Direct compiled by Eileen Johnson⁴. But that transcription contains no reference to Thomas Bryce, 20-year-old accountant from Glasgow. On the other hand, there is an entry for a 20-year-old Scottish labourer who apparently joined the vessel at Queenstown (the port in Cork, Ireland) named Thomas Boyce. The full transcription of the passenger list also includes a Mrs Boyce and two (unnamed) infant children travelling in the cabin.

Could there be a family connection between these passengers that has nothing to do with "my" Thomas? Or having encountered the name Boyce at the top of the list, were the transcribers predisposed to interpret a later, similar but indistinct name as being the same? If the male passenger was actually Thomas Bryce, why would an accountant travel to Ireland (rather than London) to join the ship and then list his occupation as "labourer".

The Queensland Family History Society has recently completed an extensive project to transcribe passenger lists held by the National Archives for which there is no corresponding Queensland State Archives record. They are published on CD as the Queensland Customs House Shipping lists. And the arrival of the Golden City is included in the volume covering 1852-1885⁵.

That (independent) QFHS transcription includes an entry for Thomas Bryce 20-year-old Scottish labourer who boarded the vessel in London. Clearly, this reading is closer to what I was expecting but the discrepancy concerning his occupation remains. I really have no basis to decide that one or the other is correct, particularly given the conflict over where he boarded the ship.

The original paper record that underpins both transcriptions was held in the Brisbane collection of the National Archives of Australia and formed part of the set of early shipping records in delicate condition transferred to microfilm for ease of public access. But the passage of time saw that base film stock subject to "vinegary decay" and this required a further transfer of the information to a stable format. Roll 1 of Series J715 is now an enormous file of 1327 digital "frames" that can be viewed online⁶. There is no index but the images are arranged approximately in date order of departure from the UK.

The voyage of the Golden City (departing London on 3 December 1862 and then Queenstown on 13 December 1862, arriving in Moreton Bay 5 March 1863) is recorded in frames 314 to 328. On frame 318, can be seen a passenger name B?yce that has apparently been over-written at some point. I cannot determine if a letter "o" has been replaced with an "r" or vice versa. I cannot even definitively rule out some other combinations.

If a reader was expecting "Boyce", she would find it. On the other hand, someone expecting the name "Bryce" would certainly recognise that. This clearly is the entry of interest.

Upon a wider examination, it is plain that Thomas's occupation was not actually recorded as "labourer". A ditto mark was placed against his name, apparently referencing the last full word recorded above, which was "labourer". However, it is possible that when more than dozen young single men boarded in quick succession and the first few were labourers, the shipping clerk recorded them all as the same. It is not necessarily true that Thomas claimed to be a labourer, he may have simply failed to correct an error (if he was aware of it).

Which leaves the question of where he boarded the vessel. The people around Thomas in the list are all of Irish nationality but their names are on the document created in London on 3 December. Those people who did board in Queenstown (a week later) were recorded on a separate paper form with a different heading and distinct signature block.

The claim that Boyce/Bryce boarded in Ireland apparently arises from a marginal notation (Queenstown) added in another hand beside the the names of the group of Irish nationals (and Thomas). Perhaps a later user of the list assumed that the original was incorrect and that the Irishmen "must" have been listed on the wrong page. However, the statistical summary made on the last page at the time the list was created shows that there were a small number of Irish citizens boarded at the first port (London) before the much larger group a week later.

So when it comes to deciding how Thomas Bryce travelled to Queensland, who can I believe. My conclusion is that the reporter for the Courier got it absolutely right (which is not a claim that I would make lightly today). He got his information from the best available source and there is nothing in the (extant copies of the) original documents to contradict what he was told.

Transcription is not a straight-forward task. Every line interpreted involves dozens of decisions based not only on the marks on the paper but also the context in which they were originally made and then read. I can take issue with the interpretations made in the case of one man about whom I had additional information not available to the previous transcribers. There were hundreds of other passengers on that voyage for whom I have no basis to disagree with the published transcript. The overall value of the transcriptions should not be questioned.

Respect the work of transcribers but trust the evidence of your own eyes informed by all the background you have on the individual you are researching. Ask yourself, not only is that reading possible but also is it plausible given everything else I know about the person concerned.

References

1. 1861 Census of Scotland, Glasgow, enumeration district (ED) 52, page 28, Thomas Bryce; digital images, Scotlands People.
2. "Family Notices" The Brisbane Courier 20 September 1866: 4. {http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article1274492}
3. "PERSONAL." The Brisbane Courier 8 January 1912: 9. {http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article19724675}
4. Johnson, Eileen Golden City", 1863: Immigration vessels to Queensland Self published 2003 ISBN 1 875790 63 2
5. QFHS Queensland Customs House Shipping 1852-1885: Passengers and Crew Published 2014 ISBN 978-1-921171-32-1
6. Ships passengers lists - Brisbane - inwards - 4 August 1852 to 13 December 1870 NAA: J715, ROLL 1 Item barcode 32722213

Is that you, Uncle?

I began the search for our great grandfather with the last document we can connect to him, the passenger manifest of the SS Regina on its voyage to Canada. Information from that source confirmed that this was the father of Robert Joseph (b 1924) and suggested a likely birth year for further research. That line of investigation has led us to assert that his parents were Robert and Eliza Jane.

There was one further piece of information in the manifest. In addition to listing anyone who they expected to follow them to Canada, immigrants were asked to specify the person in Canada with whom they proposed to live.

In response, great grandfather Robert provided the following:

Uncle Mr J McAlister 67 [Ib?]ay Avenue Mimico Ont.

If we could identify this person and if he was a "real" uncle, then we would have a further insight into the identity of the previous generation of McAllisters.

The town of Mimico now lies within the boundaries of the city of Toronto but it has a proud history reflected in the blog Town of Mimico - Soldiers of the First World War which in February 2002 included information about

T. J. McAllister
According to his attestation papers dated September 25, 1915 at Toronto, Thomas James McAllister was born on July 7, 1879 at Corkstown, Tyrone, Ireland. ... In the 1921 Toronto City directory he is listed as a fruit dealer living on the south side of Hay Avenue, Mimico.

A copy of that 1921 City Directory is still available and it does indeed list Thomas McAllister on Hay Avenue on page 89.

It also lists some thirty other McAllisters living in different parts of Toronto, but this does appear worthy of further investigation.

Maritime negotiation

Industrial relations involving seamen in Australia have a reputation for being robust. The tale of the Persia indicates that this situation has a long history.

The story begins with an incident during the voyage when two sailors broke into the single women's quarters. Apparently the Captain decided that the offenders would be dealt with at the end of the voyage.

True to his word, Captain Smith contacted the authorities in Gladstone on the day the ship anchored to have the two men taken into custody. When the local police came on board, they were surrounded by more than a dozen crewmates of the accused, who challenged that if the locals were to arrest any of them it would mean taking them all.

The matter was settled without violence and 15 men, all from the same watch on the Persia, were taken off the ship, tried for insubordination and sentenced to three months imprisonment. They were duly transferred to Brisbane under guard on another vessel.

It was claimed that the arrest of the first two offenders had been used by their mates as a convenient excuse and the threats to the Police were simply a ruse to get themselves arrested as well. The men were reportedly unhappy with the Mate who oversaw their watch and decided that a spell in Brisbane's new Green Hills Gaol (on the site of the Petrie Terrace Barracks entertainment complex) would be preferable to continuing the voyage to China and then on to South America.

This cynical view was reinforced when after serving a little under a month of their sentence, the men were released into the custody of Captain Smith and returned to the Persia. The Courier of 28 December carried a report of the almost inevitable outcome.

It is amazing that this trouble did not boil over at sea between Plymouth and Gladstone with terrible consequences for the immigrants (and for our family history!)

A full life at sea

The voyage of the Persia from Plymouth to Brisbane in 1861 was considered a good one in that "only" 20 of the 454 emigrants who embarked died en route. The Moreton Bay Courier reported that "on the whole they had been well treated and well cared for on the passage—every one of them speaking in the highest commendation alike of captain (Smyth), doctor, and chief officer."

The doctor in question was Surgeon-Superintendent Clarence Chapman. The Surgeon-Superintendent was to responsible for the welfare of the immigrants as the agent of the ship's hirer (in this case, the Queensland Goverment). In theory at least, Dr Chapman had the authority to over-rule Captain Smyth in circumstances where the business interests of the ship's owners conflicted with the needs of the people on board.

In some cases, the Surgeon-Superintendent was supported by a Matron who took principal responsibility for "women's issues" with a particular focus on the moral well-being of the single women.

To ensure the Surgeon-Superintendent carried out his duties with due care and attention, his fee was based upon the number of "statute adults" disembarked alive at the end of the journey. For delivering 438 persons including 4 born at sea, Chapman would probably have earned £387.10.0 (since children were paid as fractions).

It would not have been easy to secure the services of a suitably qualified and experienced medical practitioner prepared to be on call for more than 400 patients 24 hours a day for up to 100 days in very challenging conditions. In an ordinary voyage, he might need to deal with difficult births, various infectious "fevers", the consequences of poor nutrition and questionable hygiene, and have to perform surgery for accidental injuries. Hiring the "wrong" man as Surgeon-Superintendent could have literally fatal consequences.

Unless a young doctor undertook the role as a means of moving to the colonies to begin a new life, he faced another 100 day journey home before he could resume his usual practice. Little wonder then that migration agents needed to devise ever more elaborate schemes to make it attractive for a proven man to undertake more than one trip.

In this respect, the immigrants of the Persia were very well served. In 1861, Dr Chapman was making his sixth voyage from England to Australia in just eight years.

• July 1854 Plantagenet 247 adults and 72 children (1 death) to Sydney
• April 1855 Speedy 302 adults and 114 children (2 deaths) to Sydney
• July 1856 Ben Nevis 269 adults and 65 children (no deaths) to NSW
• September 1857 Admiral Lyons 371 adults and 77 children (12 deaths) to NSW
• December 1858 John and Lucy 334 adults and 59 children (no deaths) to Melbourne

From The Sydney Morning Herald 16 Sept 1857

Dr Chapman had not lazed away 1859-60 at home. He sailed aboard the Euxine carrying the wives and families of soldiers to India. In a 101 day journey, only one of 224 adults was lost, but 74 of the 238 children who boarded the vessel on 14 October 1859 did not complete the journey to be reunited with their fathers.

When the Persia sailed from Brisbane for China in December 1861, Dr Chapman remained on board. He served as Surgeon-Superintendent when she transported a large group of indentured labourers to Georgetown (Guyana) to work as cane cutters.

After his eventual return to England, Clarence Chapman undertook at least three four more voyages to Australia. He arrived in Port Adelaide aboard the Mary Shepherd in April 1863, then in Sydney on the Castle Eden in November 1864, and sailed into Sydney once again on 14 October 1865 aboard the Venilia.

In July of 1870, Clarence Chapman was commended in the Melbourne press for his work in bring more than 400 new settlers to Victoria aboard the Corona

New insight into an early arrival

Until a few days ago, I believed that our 3xgreat grandmother Margaret HEATHWOOD arrived in Queensland on December 3 1861. That is the date written at the top of the passenger list of the Persia, and so it is the one included in the index created by the Queensland State Archives.

The recent availability on-line of the images of many passenger lists for voyages to Moreton Bay provides an ideal opportunity to revisit some things that we thought we knew. And it is proving a very interesting exercise.

The second last line of the list for the Persia includes a surprising reference to "Arrived Port Curtis".

It is extremely unlikely that the whole complement of more than 400 immigrants would have sailed on to Central Queensland after berthing in Brisbane. Was the Persia one of the first vessels to enter Queensland through Torres Strait so that its first landfall was not Moreton Bay as I had assumed?

A search through The Moreton Bay Courier for December (and then November) 1861 revealed that the answer was "no" and "yes". After rounding the Cape of Good Hope, the Persia had followed the conventional route south of Australia but then by-passed Port Phillip, Port Jackson and Moreton Bay and sailed directly on to Port Curtis. She dropped anchor off the township of Gladstone in the morning of Saturday 16 November 1861.

Approximately half of the immigrants disembarked there and secured employment in the surrounding districts. It was reported that agents for employers in Rockhampton were offering a £10 premium on annual wages to induce servant girls to move on from Gladstone where the going rate was only £25 per annum plus board and lodgings.

Margaret HEATHWOOD was apparently unmoved by these offers and she was among those (mainly Irish) immigrants who remained on board for the trip south to Moreton Bay arriving to begin her new life, as I had always known, on 3 December.

Lost in translation

Like many Australians of my generation, I have an uneasy relationship with what were called "foreign languages" (but are now LOTE, Languages other than English). Fifty years ago, the inclusion of the study of German in my schooling was explained by the fact that "you like chemistry, so a knowledge of German will help there". (Latin was assumed not to need justification.)

I recall two occasions during my time at university when I extracted information from a German chemistry journal — not because I needed the content, but to demonstrate that I could do so. At the time, I did not believe that this justified five years of anguish at school.

Today, with my Deutsch-Englisch dictionary (purchased for 27 shillings in 1965) beside me, I actually regret not making more effort to master the language that can help me to uncover a significant part of our heritage. As in all learning, motivation is crucial.

Fortunately, the modern mono-lingual family historian can call upon the services of Google Translate when an intractable problem arises.

In running general searches for Gramzow, I came across a passage that seemed to be about a town in Australia that was named after the home of the KÜHNs in Prussia. Der Name ist eine Übertragung von Gramzow in der Uckermark.

I thought that I had made a reasonable translation but turned to the machine for confirmation. I was shocked when the output did not mention Gramzow at all. Then came the realisation that the software tries to translate every word; including the placenames. A quick reference to the instructions showed how to mark proper nouns and the tool could be run again with much happier results.

The text confirmed that, until 1916, the locality south east of Brisbane city now known as Carbrook was named Gramzow. This is yet more evidence of the impact on the Fassifern, Logan and Lockyer Valleys of the people who left Uckermark in the middle of the nineteenth century for a new life in Queensland.

It has not escaped my notice that, once again, I was almost tripped up by the intricacies of a language (albeit a programming language in this case). However, I am learning to love translation from German.

What is the significance of 1916 in the change of name from Gramzow to Carbrook? That is a topic for another day.

Down to the sea in ships

I am looking forward to spending today in a seminar Shipping Records for Family Historians with staff from the Archives.

It is difficult to over-state the importance of shipping records to Australian family historians when so many of our ancestors came here by sea.

In the case of our family, we have confirmed connections with 15 vessels:

• 1852 Rajahgopaul
• 1855 Pacific
• 1861 Persia
• 1866 Wandrahm
• 1866 Southern Ocean
• 1870 Indus (shown at right)
• 1882 Dorunda
• 1884 Corona
• 1887 Duke of Bucchleuch
• 1887 Waroonga
• 1919 Beltana
• 1924 Hobson's Bay
• 1926 Orama
• 1928 Demosthenes
• 1929 Themistocles

and at least five more are under investigation.

A tale of two immigrants

On May 30 1866, Thomas Harlin, M.A. (a Fellow of St Peter's College Cambridge) arrived in Moreton Bay on his way to take up the position of Mathematics Master at the Ipswich Grammar School (which had been established as the first secondary school in the Colony in 1863).

Unfortunately, he had not enjoyed his voyage from England aboard the Southern Ocean. In a letter to the editor of The Brisbane Courier published on Wednesday 6 June 1866, he described fellow passengers as "the scum and refuse of the town populations of Great Britain".

This character assessment by such a distinguished English gentleman is of interest to me because among the "lower classes" conveyed by the Southern Ocean under the auspices of the Queensland Government Immigration Agency were our 3xgreat grandparents Philemon and Selva COLEY and their son Philemon Lewis COLEY (our 2xgreat grandfather).

Mr Harlin's letter was a long one as he had much to say on the character of the purported "railway artisans" who had been afforded free passage. He opined that "some ... are convicted thieves, and ... several of the rest are morally certain to swell the gaol charges of Queensland within twelve months of their landing".

It is not surprising that some in the Colony took exception to the views of Harlin and responded in (what we might now describe as) a robustly Australian way. Undeterred, the man (who, within a few years, would become the foundation Headmaster of the Brisbane Grammar School) contributed another lengthy letter on Thursday 7 June advising the Queensland government on how it ought to manage its migration program which included purported verbatim transcripts of conversations that occurred during the voyage.

On 8 June 1866, the Courier carried a letter signed an old resident of brisbane which included "I went to the depot to see and judge for myself as to the quality of the immigrants by the Southern Ocean. I have conversed with them, and believe them to be, almost without exception, a steady, hard-working class of people, and not as 'T. H.' describes them 'the scum of London.' For the future, I should advise 'T. H.' to mind his own business, and not trouble himself about people who, although they may have not had, perhaps, such a good education, and be able to put M.A., etc., at the end of their names, are quite as good as himself."

Despite his apparent lack of academic distinction, I find much to admire in the opinion of that "old resident", both with respect to our COLEY ancestors and their apparent accuser.

Both Philemon Coley and Thomas Harlin travelled from Brisbane to Ipswich to take up employment soon after arriving. Given the schoolmaster's views of his fellow passengers, it is unlikely that their paths crossed again. Nevertheless, it would be wonderful to know the opinion of the ship canal labourer concerning the Cantab Fellow; if indeed, Philemon deemed him worthy of a single thought.

Place of death

I have continued to explore my fan charts for their ability to highlight pieces of information that otherwise tend to be lost in the noise.

Some interesting features emerge when you contrast place of birth (as shown in my 17 June post, Where do you think you are from) with a corresponding place of death chart.

Obviously, it shows that a few of us are still living (which I must admit to being quietly pleased about). It also highlights the number of people born elsewhere but who died here in Queensland -- those shown a little differently in On the move.

The surprises came in identifying the two ancestors who died in a place other than their birth, but not in Australia.

Our 3xgreat grandmother Jane Davies (not to be confused with her mother, Jane Davies, or her daughter, Jane Davies) left her birth-place Wales to live in England. Only after her death, did the rest of the family set sail for Queensland.

Our great grandfather Robert Joseph McAllister (not to be confused with his son, Robert Joseph, or his grandson, Robert Joseph) was born in Northern Ireland but died in North America (probably, Canada). He apparently set sail for Quebec with the expectation that his wife and children would follow. That they did not defines our family history.

On the move

When you look at data in a new way, they raise new questions. That, in turn, can send you off in search of new (or at least, more) data.

The fan chart showing the country of birth of each direct ancestor for seven generations inevitably led to making a place of death chart. While the new chart was interesting, it was the differences that really attracted attention. An ancestor born in one place but who died in another must have been a migrant.

We could ask many questions about migration -- how?, why?, when? ... I chose to begin by examining the time period in which the travel occurred. It seems likely that the motivation and the means will be linked to when the migration took place.

The chart identifies three clusters of journey. Blue shows people who came to the colony of New South Wales and settled in its northern districts. Maroon segments indicate people who came to the newer colony of Queensland. Wattle yellow illustrates migrants to the Commonwealth of Australia.

The dates that actually divide the spans were 6 June 1859 (separation of the colonies) and 1 January 1901 (federation) but there were periods around those borders when none of our ancestors were travelling.

There were very good reasons why no one made the move to Australia between 1914 and 1918 and compelling motivation to do so when the War ended. But what of the quarter century before? Were there simply fewer migrants coming or did our Australian ancestors not associate with the "new chums" of that period?

Where do you think you are from?

Indigenous Australians place great importance on the question "Where's your country?" From the answer, they can obtain an enormous amount of information about another's background and family connections.

This apparently simple question is challenging for immigrant Australians who now form an overwhelming majority of the population. If a grandfather was born in one country and great-grandparents in at least three others, where are we from?

My exploration of name clouds prompted me to find a visual representation for the distribution of our geographic origins. The same seven-generation ancestor chart can be converted to a fan chart colour-coded for the place of birth of each person

The result:

• Legend:
• England
• Wales
• Scotland
• Ireland
• Germany
• Australia

From the chart, we can read that of our 64 4xgreat grandparents there were 32 English, 16 Irish, 8 Scots, 4 Welsh and 4 Germans.

By the time we reach 2xgreat grandparents, there were 8 English, 3 Irish, 2 Scots and 3 colonial-born.

Of course, Nanna Davies would be mortified to be labelled "English". But, that is another story entirely.

Footnote: A geographical purist may complain that two "countries" (Germany and Australia) formed from smaller units during the time period shown while another (Ireland) broke apart. I claim artistic licence in ignoring those complexities for the moment.