An Irish orphan

In Ireland, the period between 1845 – 1852 was the time of the Irish Potato Famine.

potato blight

Potatoes were the only food that the poor could afford, and their crops were destroyed by an outbreak of phytophthera infestans, or Potato Blight. The Irish called it an Gorta Mor – the Great Hunger. You can read more about it here.

During the famine, over 1 million people died from starvation and disease. Even today, over 150 years later, people still argue about the famine, it’s causes and effects. Some call it genocide. Everyone agrees on two facts:

      1. Ireland was part of the United Kingdom, under the administration of the British Government.

             2. The Government response to the crisis was so inadequate that over 1 million people died.

deserted famine village

Many of those who escaped death were forced to live in overcrowded Workhouses, places of harsh discipline and inadequate food. Thousands died in the workhouses too.

Another million survivors of the famine emigrated to the Americas and Australia.

During the Famine there were more than twice as many able-bodied females as males in Irish workhouses. These girls had very limited employment and marriage prospects and local ratepayers who supported the workhouse foresaw years of expensive payments for their support and those of the children they might produce.

In Australia, on the other hand, white males outnumbered white females by at least two to one and by eight to one in some districts. Earl Grey, the British Secretary of State for the colonies (a member of Lord John Russell's Whig government) thought he could solve Australia's problems of a shortage of labour and an imbalance of the sexes, by alleviating the overcrowding in Ireland's famine filled workhouses. As part of Earl Grey's Pauper Immigration Scheme, over 4,000 female orphans arrived in Australia from Irish workhouses between October 1848 and August 1850. You can read more about the Irish Orphan Girls here.

In theory, girls aged 14 to 18 would volunteer to emigrate to Australia on an organised and supervised scheme. In practice, they didn’t have much choice.

The girls were inspected by a Government official, who selected those he considered healthy-looking and well-behaved. The Poor Law Union had to supply each chosen girl with a large box containing a generous set of requirements for the long voyage.

The girls, with their new possessions, set off under supervision in horse transport for the nearest Irish port from where they sailed to Plymouth on the south coast of England, and thence to Australia - a voyage of several weeks by sailing ship.

Twenty ships arrived between 1848-50, most went to Sydney, six to Melbourne, and three to Adelaide. The girls were soon recruited as domestic servants and snapped up as wives.

On board the New Liverpool, which arrived in Melbourne on August 9^th, 1849, were two sisters, Biddy and Mary McDermott. Biddy was 19, Mary 18. Both claimed to be able to read and write. The girls had come from the workhouse in Clonmel, Co. Tipperary, and were described as orphans. They would have had plenty of familiar faces on the voyage out – 24 other girls from Clonmel were on the same ship.

Mary was employed by Edward Fannonsey(?) of Melbourne, and Biddy went to work for John Wright of Goulburn, her wages to be $10 for 6 months. (it seems likely that Biddy went, not to the town of Golbourn, in NSW, but to a property on the Goulburn river, near Yea in Victoria.)

On December 27^th, 1849, Biddy married Thomas Hannigan junior at St. Francis church, Melbourne. St. Francis was the first Catholic church built in Victoria, and the only place for Catholics to be married at that time. The young couple would have had to travel to Melbourne from the Goulburn, a journey of several days by wagon. Did Biddy have a chance to see her sister Mary while she was in Melbourne.?

King Parrot Creek

Thomas and Biddy spent their married life in the Yea district, at least some of it at King Parrot Creek. They had twelve children –

 1. Mary Ann b.1 October 1850 - 30 August 1932, born at Yea
2. Thomas b.1851 - 20 March 1875 aged 23 died at Alexandra
3. Catherine b. 1853 - 1 April 1860 aged 7 years died of Diptheria
4. Bridget b. 1855 - 1935
5. Margaret b. 1856 - 18 April 1860 aged 4 years died of Diptheria
6. Joseph b. 1858 - 17 April 1860 aged 2 years died of Diptheria
7. Elizabeth b. 4 May 1860
8. Josephine b. 31 January 1862 born at King Parrot Creek
9. Catherine b.4 January 1864 born at Muddy Creek, Yea
10. John b. 2 June 1866
11. Elisha (Lena/Eleanor) b.1869 - 1902 aged 33
12. Frances b.1872

Their first child, Mary Ann, was my great-grandmother, and family legend is that she was the first white child born in the district. This birth was never registered, so there was no birth certificate for her.

 Another family story, however, was not passed down – the story of Thomas’s convict parents. He may have told Biddy, but I doubt if their children knew, and certainly my mother and grandmother had no idea of their convict heritage. It was only in the 1990s that family research by a descendant, Brian Sullivan, uncovered the secret.

Did Biddy remember her lost homeland with sadness, or was she simply grateful that she and her sister had escaped the horrors of the famine, and were able to build a new life in Australia? There was tragedy even here, when the three little ones died of diptheria – perhaps the birth of Elizabeth just a few weeks later gave her some solace?

Tom Hannigan died in 1874, aged 48. The youngest child was only 2 years old then, so how did Biddy manage alone? I have not been able to find a record of Biddy’s death, so it is possible that she remarried after Tom died, and thus her death is recorded under a different name. If she lived to old age, there may not have been anyone in the family who knew her birthplace, or her maiden name.

Several of Tom and Biddy’s daughters married, and there are now many descendants from this couple. Their family names, for anyone who is researching, are – Sullivan, Gardner, Jones, Nickle, and Grimwood.

Taking a closer look Part 2

Continuing the story of Thomas Hannigan (senior) and his wife, Bridget Brown.

The early years of the new settlement at Launceston would have been very busy. Everything needed to sustain life had to be provided by the occupants, or brought in by ship. Buildings had to be erected, and land cleared for growing food.

By the time Governor Macquarie visited the settlement in 1821, he found various government buildings, erected and occupied since his first visit ten years earlier, including military barracks, commandant’s residence, lime kilns, blacksmith’s shop, stores, watch house and gaol, and a chaplain’s dwelling. The Rev. John Youl, an Anglican minister, had been appointed the first chaplain in 1819. On his arrival, he toured the district for three weeks, marrying 41 couples and baptising 64 children, some of the latter belonging to newlyweds, who had been waiting for an opportunity to be legally married.

On arrival in the colony, convicts were either set to work for the Government, constructing roads and buildings, or assigned to civilian employers. It seems likely that Thomas Hannigan was among the latter, and travelled to Van Diemen's Land as a servant to the free settler in Paterson's party. How he came to be a sailor is a mystery. There is no mention in his records of a conditional pardon, and it would have been many years before he would have been allowed the freedom of going to sea. He must have been fairly well-behaved in the colony, as he attracted no attention until the transgression of 1837.

By 1820, Thomas was married to a convict woman, Bridget Brown. There is no mention in Thomas's records of "permission to marry" and being Catholic, he would not have accepted an Anglican ceremony; so probably Bridget was a 'common law' wife.

I have very little information about her, apart from an entry in the book "Notorious Strumpets and Dangerous Girls" by Phillip Tardif. (This is a history of over 1600 female convicts who were sent to Tasmania between 1803 - 1829.) It makes fascinating reading.

Brown, Bridget (or Wilson)

Convicted at Dublin City, November 1815. Transported for stealing apparel - 7 years.

Trade, servant. Age 24 (1817)

Colonial experience

1817: 27 August arrived at the Derwent from sydney aboard the Elizabeth Henrietta

1820 & 1821 Musters: wife of Thomas Hannigan, Port Dalrymple

1820: 28 December Assaulting Mary Harman. Bound over to keep the peace.

1825: 19 October Wife of Hannigan. Breaking open  box and stealing sundry articles of wearing apparel therefrom, the propert of Mrs. Maxey. Charge dismissed.

1826: 29 March Launceston. Assaulting Isabella Whittingham. Bound over to keep the peace for 3 months.

1827: 8 March. Drunk and disorderly. To find sureties for her good behaviour for 3 months.

1829: 21 October. Being drunk and disorderly. Reprimanded.

1830: 15 November. Using threatening language to Mary Beard and gross language before the Magistrates. To sit in the stocks 4 hours and find sureties to keep the peace.

1836: 29 March. Drunk and disorderly. fined 5 shillings.

1836: 12 October. Drunk and disorderly. Fined 5 shillings.

1837: 21 April. Being drunk. Fined 5 shillings.

We can surmise something about Bridget's life from the record. The second surname, Wilson, may indicate that she was married, or at least living with someone, at the time of her conviction. Did she have children? She was 23 at the time of her trial, so it's quite possible.
If she did, she never saw them again.
Notice the dates of her court appearances - almost always in October or March. Did she celebrate the birthdays of those lost children, perhaps? (All pure speculation, of course).

Returning to the Cornwall Chronicle report of her death, we can perhaps read between the lines:
“It came out in evidence, that deceased ... resided with a man named Thomas Henshaw, upon Mr. Lawrence’s sheep run, about five miles from Launceston. On Thursday evening she was taken unwell; on Friday she became worse, ... on Saturday, about one p.m., as she was gradually sinking, Henshaw went for a Mrs. Smith to attend her, and then made the best of his way to Launceston for a doctor; Mrs. Smith, on her arrival, gave deceased some gruel, and then some tea, upon which she almost instantly expired, in which state she was found by Dr. Grant upon his arrival....”

Reading this report, I am struck by the care Bridget received in her illness. Henshaw "went for a Mrs Smith to attend her" and Mrs. Smith did her best to minister to the dying woman. Henshaw "made the best of his way to Launceston for a doctor" a distance of 5 miles - perhaps he had a horse? The doctor attended, so Henshaw or his employer must have been prepared to pay for his services.
So even in her last moments, Bridget was loved and cared for. That's good to know.

Thomas and Bridget had at least five children, but only two, or possibly three, survived. When Bridget died, their daughter Mary was in gaol, and their son Thomas was about 14 years old.
At that time, only the children of the well-to-do were educated. Poor children went to work as soon as they were old enough to be useful. Thomas may have been employed on the property where Bridget was living with Thomas Henshaw, or he may have already followed in his father's footsteps, and become a sailor.

Taking a closer look

NOTE: this post is about Thomas Hannigan senior.  Wouldn't want you to get confused :-)

A family historian is like a detective, examining the available clues, following up leads, making deductions – and sometimes, educated guesses. The more you know about the general history and events of your ancestor’s era, the more likely it is that his or her activities will make sense to you (and your audience).

Genealogical research is getting easier all the time, due to the increasing amount of material available online – Googling key places and names will often provide more information.

Sometimes you have very little basic, authentic information about an ancestor. In the case of Thomas Hannigan, I have the transcript of his trial in London in 1800, a brief record of his conviction in Tasmania in 1837, and a newspaper paragraph of the same date.

The London trial records, though entertaining, don’t tell us what happened to Thomas in Australia. For that I must rely on a photocopy of an entry in the Tasmanian convict records:

Port Arthur ruins

Name – Hanneghan, Thomas.

Height 5’2”. Age 59. 

Occupation - ??nailor Not a sailor as I originally thought, but perhaps a nail-maker?

Tried at Launceston, Oct. 5^th, 1837. 

Sentence 14 years. 

Birthplace - London. 

Religion RC. 

Read and write – neither. 

Relatives – 1 son, 1 daughter, & wife, in Launceston. 

Ships – Earl Cornwallis and Francis. 

Offence – Receiving.

A further note in the records says: “Transported for receiving part of 2 promissory notes value 3 pounds… monies the property of Wm. King….. 3 years Port Arthur, conducted to be reported.”

Directly above this entry is the record for Thomas’s daughter, Mary Ann, tried on the same day for Larceny, and sentenced to 7 years. From this we learn that Mary Ann was aged 16, and 4’11” tall. Also illiterate, she was employed as a Laundress & House Servant. She was Native-born. Mary Ann’s family consisted of a mother, sister and brother in Launceston.

Inside Port Arthur

 The newspaper article adds little: “Mary Haneghan, convicted of stealing one pair of trousers, value 5 shillings, and various monies, the property of Wm. King. Sentence, 7 years. Thos Hanagan, Hugh McGlocken, and Rebecca Barton, severally convicted of receiving part of this said property. Sentence, 14 years, and the prisoners Thos Hanagan and Hugh McGlocken, be sent to Port Arthur.”

Little enough to go on…but the records do tell us quite a lot about Thomas and his family, and of course, raise questions.

His birthplace is given as London. Was he really born there, or was it just his place of residence when he stole those sheep?

He was a little short bloke, his daughter even tinier. Seems this may have been genetic, not merely the result of a poor diet – my own mother was not much taller than Thomas.

Both father and daughter claimed to be Roman Catholic, despite a lack of Catholic clergy in Van Diemen’s Land at that date. Both were illiterate, (which argues that Thomas Junior was, also).

The family details are interesting, with a discrepancy between the two accounts. Were there 2 Hannigan daughters, or only the one, Mary Ann? The son is presumably Thomas junior.

There is a published passenger list for Earl Cornwallis which list Thomas as one of the convicts on board, along with his co-accused from London, Richard Coleman. I haven’t found any further information for Coleman.

The Francis  is the most interesting, and leads us to a new view of Thomas’s colonial history.

A schooner of 41 tons, the Francis was assembled in Sydney from frames sent out in the Pitt which arrived on 14 February 1792. Launched on 24 July 1793, she departed  Sydney on her first voyage, 8 September, to Dusky Bay, New Zealand.
A little later, in 1801, the Francis accompanied the Lady Nelson on a voyage to Newcastle, collecting 75 tons of coal which were exchanged for nails and iron in Sydney with the master of the ship Earl Cornwallis, Capt. James Tennant. (note the connection with Thomas’s convict transport.)

We next hear of the Francis in 1804, when she formed part of an expedition to Van Diemen’s Land.

Initially the British authorities were uncertain if Van Diemen’s Land was connected to the mainland, or a separate island. The matter was settled by an expedition conducted by Bass and Flinders in 1798, when they explored Bass Strait, and sailed right around the island in the Norfolk. The Tamar River was entered and mapped, and the mouth was named Port Dalrymple. They were followed in 1802 by Freycinet and Faure from the Naturaliste and 1804 by William Collins in the Lady Nelson.

Fear of French settlement led to the Governor of NSW sending an expedition under Lieut. Colonel William Paterson to establish a settlement at Port Dalrymple (in addition to the southern outpost at Risdon, the fore-runner of Hobart).

On November 4th 1804, Lieutenant Colonel William Paterson, and a fleet of ships HMS Buffalo, the HMS Lady Nelson, the Francis and the Integrity, entered the Tamar heads on the north coast of Van Diemen's Land, with a party of 181 including 74 convicts, soldiers, one free settler, and a doctor.  Thomas Hannigan was thus one of the very earliest white settlers in Tasmania!

An outer cove on the eastern side of the Tamar (George Town), was chosen temporarily and the settlers made camp there. George Town is now considered the oldest town in Australia (1804). Only the cities of Sydney and Hobart are older. In fact John Batman sailed from George Town to settle Melbourne.

View of South Esk river

Paterson continued to explore the Tamar for a better area, on findng two good streams of fresh water he named the area York Town (Beaconsfield) and would transfer all the settlers here before Christmas. The following day November 12th 1804, a large group of Aboriginals approached Paterson's camp, appearing to be quite friendly. They attacked a Marine guard and were fired on with muskets by the Marines. One native was killed and another was wounded.

Despite the hostility of the natives, Paterson continued to explore the area without further incident. Good pasture land and thick forests were found at the head of the Tamar (Launceston). Paterson also discovered and named the North Esk and the South Esk Rivers, and he was most impressed with the Cataract he discovered in a gorge of the South Esk river. Choosing to stay at the York Town settlement, Lieutenant Paterson moved the small settlement to a more fertile area he named Patersonia, (Launceston) in March 1806.

Thomas Hannigan Junior

When Bridget Hannigan died in 1840, her son Thomas was effectively alone in the world. His father, Thomas Hannigan Snr., had been sent to Port Arthur, his older sister Mary was serving 7 years for theft. 

Thomas Jr, born in 1826, would have been 14 years old.

 According to researcher Brian Sullivan, Thomas went to sea, working on ships that sailed up and down the east coast of Australia, from Sydney to the new settlement at Port Philip, and on down to Launceston and Hobart. The shipping lanes were busy, as schooners and sloops carried timber, livestock, passengers and mail. There were new settlers and their (mostly convict) employees, intent on making the most of the new land being opened up. Thomas would have watched as horses, cattle and sheep were offloaded for the pastoral runs of Port Phillip. He would have heard talk of fortunes made and lost, and business opportunities aplenty for those who weren’t afraid to work.

He would also have discovered that convicts, and their descendants, were held in much greater contempt in the mainland states.

In the early years of Van Diemen’s Land, convicts at first outnumbered free settlers, and even in 1846, 75% of the adult males were, or had been, convicts.

Most had gained a measure of freedom, those who could find a wife had married and settled down to a measure of working class respectability. Many had started a small business, and were often successful and well-accepted members of the community.

It is important to remember that few of the convicts were actual criminals, as we understand the term today.

Most were ordinary working class people, who had been caught “helping themselves” to something that didn’t belong to them – a few sheep, some game, a pair of trousers – in an effort to make ends meet. The overwhelming majority of those transported to Australia were convicted of fairly minor thefts, and most did not offend again. The really bad offenders – murderers, arsonists, and the like, were summarily executed.

So the residents of Van Diemen’s Land were very willing to live and let live; it simply wasn’t done to enquire too closely into another fellow’s past, for fear of what you might find.

Not so in the other states. NSW had received about the same number of convicts, but had far more free settlers, and there was consequently more freedom for suspicion as to the other fellow’s history. Convicts and their offspring were thought of as belonging, without possibility of redemption, to the “criminal classes” , and thus to be shunned by all right-minded people.

Port Phillip, which would become the colony of Victoria in 1851, prided itself on being free of the convict taint, and the new Government tried to stop ex-convicts from settling there, even passing a law to that effect. They were too late, of course; thousands of former convicts had already moved there, though probably few admitted to their origins.

Thomas was a sensible young man. When he abandoned the sea, sometime in the late 1840's, he too kept his origins to himself.

He began working as a carrier, taking goods from the Port of Melbourne up to the Goulburn river district, and carrying farm produce down to the city. Presumably, at least at first, he was employed by one of the squatters who had settled along the Goulburn. And here he would meet his wife.