|Re: [TSL] Completeness of online passenger-list databases|
|firstname.lastname@example.org on 09/03/2013|
Thanks very much for taking the time to look these things up.
* Yes, I have a copy of the full 1910 Zeeland record, and indeed Katie
and Thomas Plunket(t) went on to Lowell and stayed there until about 1927,
when they moved to Brooklyn. Kate Plunkett's Hayes siblings who also came
to Lowell were Mary-1891, Bridget-Delia-1893, Martin-1904, Ellen-1906, and
Patrick-1907. That left only two of their parents' eight children back in
* And yes, I believe the 1910 Cymric trip to Queenstown was my Katie's,
principally because her occupation was "mill hand," and I believe she
worked in the mills for at least part of her time in Lowell.
* And yes, I've seen the Rusheen Catherine, and had decided that this
Catherine was not my great-aunt Kate. Your message prompted me to go back
and retrace exactly why I did so. Here's a (long-winded, I admit)
Rusheen is over 10 miles southeast of my Kate's family's neighborhood in
Liscannor. It's not impossible that Kate lived in Rusheen before
embarking, but I have no evidence that she or anyone else in her family
Rusheen Catherine's recorded destination was Boston. Although she could
have gone specifically to Boston, my Kate's sisters Mary and Bridget had
lived in Lowell since the early 1890's, so I think it more likely that
Lowell was her final destination, especially since she was living there by
1910. I guess it's possible that Kate understood the recording official
to be asking where she was disembarking and named Boston for that reason.
My Kate's mother's name was Margaret, but Kate's known sisters were
Mary/Mollie, Bridget/Delia, and Ellen. As far as I've determined, she had
no sister named Maggie or Margaret. She did, however, have a cousin
Margaret Hayes, who was enumerated in both the 1901 and the 1911 Liscannor
censuses, so might be assumed not to have been in Boston in 1902 when Kate
arrived. I realize Kate may have called the Boston Maggie Hayes her
sister to give more legitimacy to her destination, but I haven't found
that practice to be true of the numerous other immigrations in her family.
The Boston Maggie's address was recorded as 35 Fairfield St. The city
directories for 1901-1903 list no Maggies and 4-6 Margaret-widows (i.e.,
Hayes as married name, so not a sister of my single Kate Hayes), except
for a non-widow Margaret at 39 Seneca in 1901. I can find no Maggie or
Margaret Hayes at a Fairfield St. address in the 1900 or 1910 censuses.
But, a very faint clue is a Dr. John Lamson enumerated at that address in
1910, with servants Kate Higgins age 36 and Mary Higgins age 19. Kate
Hayes's family was related in some way to a Donohue family in Liscannor.
At the time of the 1901 Liscannor census, Kate's family lived in house 37
and the Donohue family lived in house 35. James and Nora Donohue's
household 35 included grandchildren Francis Higgins age 5 and Margaret
Higgins age 3. I guess it's possible these Higgins children were related
in some way to the Boston Fairfield St. Higgins servants and were also
related in some way to the Rusheen Catherine, but I haven't tackled that
web of relationships yet!
In summary, I'm still inclined to believe that the Rusheen Catherine Hayes
is not my Kate Hayes of Liscannor.
Again, many thanks for your effort and for inspiring me to organize my
reasoning about Rusheen Catherine.
visit TheShipsList Website
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to THESHIPSLISTemail@example.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Easy citation: highlight, copy, and paste the following into your wordprocessor:
|Re: [TSL] Completeness of online passenger-list databases 09/03/2013: [Posted by firstname.lastname@example.org]|