If genealogy is good at one thing, it's personalizing history. It gives people today a sense of ownership of yesterday.
This morning, I was browsing TIME magazine, and (being entirely uninterested in the political races which took up most of the issue) read a short article titled "Brief History: Cholera Outbreaks." I got to the line that read "An 1866 New York City epidemic led to the creation of the city's board of health, the first in the U.S.," and my reaction was "That's our cholera epidemic! The one that killed Julia and James Thomas!"
Ownership is probably not the right word, and maybe I shouldn't be using a possessive pronoun. But I felt an immediate sense of recognition, and connection to the epidemic of 1866, as well as a very real awareness that, while an article about historic and current cholera epidemics might seem academic, we're actually talking about real diseases that killed - and continue to kill - real people. Julia was 15 and James Thomas only 2 1/2 when they died.
Showing posts with label Julia Toner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Julia Toner. Show all posts
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Monday, May 25, 2009
We interrupt this broadcast. . .
I've been concentrating on the O'Haras for a few days, because I have lots of records stored up that I haven't ever uploaded. However, I noticed today that the 1865 New York State Census was up on FamilySearch's Pilot Site. I've been traveling and moving and unpacking all day, but I've tried to page through (since the records are unindexed) in every free moment. Finally, at 9 at night, success! I've found the Toners! They're on the right-hand page of that image, the only family listed on the top part.
A few interesting things, bulleted because I'm short on time this evening:
- They live in a brick house worth $2,000. (If I knew more general history of the time, I'd perhaps be able to shed some light on what that said about their general material well-being.)
- Both Julia and Mary Ann, at ages 15 and 13, are employed, "sewing."
- Mary has given birth to 8 children. Only 7 are listed, and James Thomas is one of them. That means someone else died young, someone we haven't yet discovered.
- James Thomas is listed as James T., which I assume means he was actually called James Thomas. That's kind of cute.
- James Thomas was 1 and a half years old when the census was taken, which means he was about 2 1/2 when he died in August of 1866.
- Infuriatingly, this census lists an older woman, named Julia Toner, age listed as 60 (um, she was 63 five years ago!), who is listed as the mother of the head of household. I THOUGHT RICHARD'S MOTHER WAS JUDITH! Why, when Richard died, was she listed in her death notice as the mother of Richard Toner? I am increasingly convinced that, for some reason, the Toners used the names Judith and Julia interchangeably. Argh argh argh argh argh. Who was Richard's mother?
- Anyway, this Julia, supposedly Richard's mother, is listed as widowed, the mother of 4 children. So it seems possible that Richard had 3 siblings.
- Richard has been naturalized. Early naturalization records rarely had much information (later ones can be treasure troves), but there's another record I'd like to see one day.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Irish Names: Julia
So it's not strictly an Irish name. But Julia has been the most genealogically relevant name in my Irish family history search, and the stories about it run through the ages.
I could have asked anyone what Nana's mother's name was and gotten an answer, but I was at the very beginning of genealogy - before I'd even begun asking questions - when I came across a copy of Nana's death certificate, which listed her parents as Julia Toner and Patrick Mulvaney, both born in New York.
"Oh, cool," I thought.
I had an easy time finding Julia and Patrick on Ancestry.com in 1900, and 1910, and Julia and kids in 1920 and 1930, after Patrick had died. My searches yielded an 1880 result for a Julia Toner, of the proper age, in Manhattan, parents John and Mary.
"That's probably her," I thought.
Some time later, I ordered Julia's death certificate, which told me that her parents' names were Richard Toner and Mary Cullen, and so I started a new search, and quickly found the Toners in 1860 - Richard, Mary, Julia (9), Mary Ann (8), Samuel (6), Elizabeth (5), Louisa (3), William (9 m), and another Julia (63).
"Awww. . . Julia was named after her paternal grandmother!" I thought.
"But. . . this Julia is a full 19 years older than our Julia."
Now, occasionally a woman in Julia's family would lie about her age. This I know well. But 19 years. . . 19 years is a lot! She would have had to be bearing children well into her 60s. There were no fertility treatments in 1910, after all.
And then in the 1870 census, both of these Julias had disappeared. The Julia who had been 9 was gone entirely, and the Julia who had been 63 appeared to have been replaced by an 85-year-old named Judith. There was a new toddler, also named Judith, two years old.
Where was Julia? Had she grown up, married, and moved out by 19? Had she died?
And what of the elder Julia? Was she the same person as this even-older Judith?
And if so, does that mean Julias and Judiths are interchangeable or easily confused in the Toner family?
Could Judith the toddler be Julia my great-great-grandmother?
Death records proved that Richard's mother was Judith Toner. I have no idea whether the older Julia was the same person as Judith, mis-recorded, or whether Julia was someone else entirely.
I searched the Brooklyn Daily Eagle Online for "Julia + Toner," hoping to find evidence of my great-great-grandmother doing anything. Being born, getting married, attending a picnic. I was dying to know whether she was the same Julia who had been 9 in 1860, but shouldn't even have been born until 1870. These searches led me to the Julia who had been 9 in 1860, and who certainly was not my great-great-grandmother. She had died at age 16, in a cholera epidemic, along with her younger brother James Thomas, who had lived and died between census years.
My great-great-grandmother Julia Toner was certainly born. Her 9 kids didn't arrive out of thin air. I've seen her marriage certificate. She was real. Further research shows she almost certainly belonged to this Toner family. Her son was living with Elizabeth's family in 1910. She signed Louisa's death certificate in 1925, releasing the body to the undertaker. I've still never found census or birth records that show her definitively being recorded as part of this family, though she clearly lived her life amongst her sisters, especially. There remains the possibility that the Judith who was 2 in 1870 was really Julia.
Though the practice of naming children after their deceased siblings is unsettling to modern sensibilities, I think I like it. I went into this genealogy thing looking for my ancestors. Their siblings were footnotes, at best. I only discovered the story of big sister Julia's life because she had the same name as little sister Julia my great-great-grandmother. Little sister Julia's life would have been remembered; at least her DNA lives on in my family members and I. Big sister Julia's life and memory would have died with her. By proxy, I found James Thomas, whose life would have gone not only unremembered but also virtually unrecorded, as he missed the census years.
When Richard and Mary decided to name their youngest (to my knowledge) after their eldest (to my knowledge), they ensured that her name would live on in infamy.
And infamy it would be.
In the 1960s, my grandparents, pregnant with one of my aunts, put names in a hat, and had my dad pick one out. Julia - my grandmother's grandmother's name - was one of the choices. (My dad picked Gail.)
Fast forward 30-odd years. We're in Eileen's kitchen, at a family party of some sort, and the above story, - the picking names out of a hat story - is told. My mother proceeds to mightily offend Gail by exclaiming, upon hearing the choices that had gone into the hat, "You couldn't have at least picked Julia?!"
(And here's where we pray my parents continue their practice of ignoring the fact that I have a blog. Don't want to give them heart attacks, after all. . .)
Fast forward to the present day. I begin doing genealogy, and am one day talking about the relatives I've discovered. My boyfriend - whose taste in names and mine don't necessarily agree - hears me mention my great-great-grandmother Julia and remarks that he likes that name. Hmm. . . I like it, too. Might Julia be a name that continues to live on in the family?
Fast forward to the future. . . ?
I could have asked anyone what Nana's mother's name was and gotten an answer, but I was at the very beginning of genealogy - before I'd even begun asking questions - when I came across a copy of Nana's death certificate, which listed her parents as Julia Toner and Patrick Mulvaney, both born in New York.
"Oh, cool," I thought.
I had an easy time finding Julia and Patrick on Ancestry.com in 1900, and 1910, and Julia and kids in 1920 and 1930, after Patrick had died. My searches yielded an 1880 result for a Julia Toner, of the proper age, in Manhattan, parents John and Mary.
"That's probably her," I thought.
Some time later, I ordered Julia's death certificate, which told me that her parents' names were Richard Toner and Mary Cullen, and so I started a new search, and quickly found the Toners in 1860 - Richard, Mary, Julia (9), Mary Ann (8), Samuel (6), Elizabeth (5), Louisa (3), William (9 m), and another Julia (63).
"Awww. . . Julia was named after her paternal grandmother!" I thought.
"But. . . this Julia is a full 19 years older than our Julia."
Now, occasionally a woman in Julia's family would lie about her age. This I know well. But 19 years. . . 19 years is a lot! She would have had to be bearing children well into her 60s. There were no fertility treatments in 1910, after all.
And then in the 1870 census, both of these Julias had disappeared. The Julia who had been 9 was gone entirely, and the Julia who had been 63 appeared to have been replaced by an 85-year-old named Judith. There was a new toddler, also named Judith, two years old.
Where was Julia? Had she grown up, married, and moved out by 19? Had she died?
And what of the elder Julia? Was she the same person as this even-older Judith?
And if so, does that mean Julias and Judiths are interchangeable or easily confused in the Toner family?
Could Judith the toddler be Julia my great-great-grandmother?
Death records proved that Richard's mother was Judith Toner. I have no idea whether the older Julia was the same person as Judith, mis-recorded, or whether Julia was someone else entirely.
I searched the Brooklyn Daily Eagle Online for "Julia + Toner," hoping to find evidence of my great-great-grandmother doing anything. Being born, getting married, attending a picnic. I was dying to know whether she was the same Julia who had been 9 in 1860, but shouldn't even have been born until 1870. These searches led me to the Julia who had been 9 in 1860, and who certainly was not my great-great-grandmother. She had died at age 16, in a cholera epidemic, along with her younger brother James Thomas, who had lived and died between census years.
My great-great-grandmother Julia Toner was certainly born. Her 9 kids didn't arrive out of thin air. I've seen her marriage certificate. She was real. Further research shows she almost certainly belonged to this Toner family. Her son was living with Elizabeth's family in 1910. She signed Louisa's death certificate in 1925, releasing the body to the undertaker. I've still never found census or birth records that show her definitively being recorded as part of this family, though she clearly lived her life amongst her sisters, especially. There remains the possibility that the Judith who was 2 in 1870 was really Julia.
Though the practice of naming children after their deceased siblings is unsettling to modern sensibilities, I think I like it. I went into this genealogy thing looking for my ancestors. Their siblings were footnotes, at best. I only discovered the story of big sister Julia's life because she had the same name as little sister Julia my great-great-grandmother. Little sister Julia's life would have been remembered; at least her DNA lives on in my family members and I. Big sister Julia's life and memory would have died with her. By proxy, I found James Thomas, whose life would have gone not only unremembered but also virtually unrecorded, as he missed the census years.
When Richard and Mary decided to name their youngest (to my knowledge) after their eldest (to my knowledge), they ensured that her name would live on in infamy.
And infamy it would be.
In the 1960s, my grandparents, pregnant with one of my aunts, put names in a hat, and had my dad pick one out. Julia - my grandmother's grandmother's name - was one of the choices. (My dad picked Gail.)
Fast forward 30-odd years. We're in Eileen's kitchen, at a family party of some sort, and the above story, - the picking names out of a hat story - is told. My mother proceeds to mightily offend Gail by exclaiming, upon hearing the choices that had gone into the hat, "You couldn't have at least picked Julia?!"
(And here's where we pray my parents continue their practice of ignoring the fact that I have a blog. Don't want to give them heart attacks, after all. . .)
Fast forward to the present day. I begin doing genealogy, and am one day talking about the relatives I've discovered. My boyfriend - whose taste in names and mine don't necessarily agree - hears me mention my great-great-grandmother Julia and remarks that he likes that name. Hmm. . . I like it, too. Might Julia be a name that continues to live on in the family?
Fast forward to the future. . . ?
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Death Notice, Julia and Joseph T. Toner
I searched the New York Times for the Toners, and came upon this, another notice of the death of the first Julia Toner and her brother. It's a PDF, so I can't post it, but you should be able to view the original by clicking here. From August 21, 1866, in a section counting local deaths from the cholera epidemic:
This doesn't shed much light on them, but it brings to the fore a lot about their lives. These two didn't just die of cholera; they died during a cholera epidemic. That's much different, and probably a much scarier situation to live in, both for them and for their family. Interestingly, Julia's brother is listed here as Joseph T. Toner. This poor boy's been called every name in the book! He's James Thomas in the Eagle, but that was mistranscribed as John Thomas in the first record I saw of it. Here, in the Times, he's Joseph T. I'm assuming that his name was actually James; the notice in the Eagle was more of an obituary than a statistic (it mentioned the funeral times, etc.), so I want to give that one more credence, as it was probably submitted directly by the family. I'd imagine that the information that went to the Times took a more circuitous route, probably going from the doctor treating them to, say, the County Health Commissioner (if he existed back then), to the Times.
The Cholera in Brooklyn
The official returns of yesterday show an apparent decrease of cholera
cases, while at the same time the proportion of deaths is greater than
heretofore. Nine cases are reported, of which seven died. The following is the
list:
. . .
Joseph T. Toner, corner of Van Brunt and Tremont streets. Died 19th.
Julia Toner, same residence. Died 20th.
. . .
The report of the Registrar shows that 27 burial certificates were granted
on Sunday as follows,
Cholera - 7
Cholera Infantum, Cholera Morbus, Dysentery, &c. - 11
Other zymotic diseases - 1
All other diseases - 8
Total - 27
Which shows a reduction of 12, as compared with the day
previous.
This doesn't shed much light on them, but it brings to the fore a lot about their lives. These two didn't just die of cholera; they died during a cholera epidemic. That's much different, and probably a much scarier situation to live in, both for them and for their family. Interestingly, Julia's brother is listed here as Joseph T. Toner. This poor boy's been called every name in the book! He's James Thomas in the Eagle, but that was mistranscribed as John Thomas in the first record I saw of it. Here, in the Times, he's Joseph T. I'm assuming that his name was actually James; the notice in the Eagle was more of an obituary than a statistic (it mentioned the funeral times, etc.), so I want to give that one more credence, as it was probably submitted directly by the family. I'd imagine that the information that went to the Times took a more circuitous route, probably going from the doctor treating them to, say, the County Health Commissioner (if he existed back then), to the Times.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Brooklyn Churches! Excitement!
Some time ago, I posted about having come across baptismal records of the three eldest Toner children, Julia, Mary Ann, and Samuel, at St. Paul's Church in Brooklyn. I didn't know why only those three were baptized there, but it appears I've just figured it out!
Combining this Brooklyn Catholic blog I just found, which gives locations and founding dates for churches in Brooklyn with my knowledge of the addresses the Toners lived at and the very cool "My Maps" feature at Google Maps, I've created this map that shows family addresses in blue (will give addresses, family, and time period if you click) and church locations in green (will give parish name, address, and founding date if you click), I've realized that the Toners, it would seem, attended St. Paul's, and baptized their first three children there, until two much closer churches - St. Mary Star of the Sea in 1853 and Visitation in 1854 (1853 is the date given for Samuel's baptism, the latest Toner baptism at St. Paul's). I'll have to look a little closer to double check whether there are any other Catholic churches in or near Red Hook, but for now it looks like my first order of business is contact St. Mary's and Visitation and finding out how far back their parish records go (please let them go all the way back to 1853/4!), and either request a search or make a plan to go do some research myself (that part might not happen until this summer, of course). Finding baptismal records for the middle Toner kids there, and then, especially, for the younger Julia, our Julia, would be crucial. It's torturous to know that the family I've traced back the farthest is the one that hasn't quite necessarily 100% been linked to us, although I'm 98% sure.
My assumption will be that the Toner's attended Visitation (we know the Mulvaneys did), but since we know that the Madigans attended St. Mary's, both are worth the effort.
Anyway, check out the map, as I'll be updating it soon with additional churches and addresses. For my own reference, it will include the O'Haras and Quinns as well as the Mulcahys, Mulvaneys, Madigans, and Toners. I've just recently e-mailed St. Augustine's near Baltic St. to see if they can find any of the sacramental records of the O'Hara family, but if they're not there, I'll have to map and check all of the other local churches.
Combining this Brooklyn Catholic blog I just found, which gives locations and founding dates for churches in Brooklyn with my knowledge of the addresses the Toners lived at and the very cool "My Maps" feature at Google Maps, I've created this map that shows family addresses in blue (will give addresses, family, and time period if you click) and church locations in green (will give parish name, address, and founding date if you click), I've realized that the Toners, it would seem, attended St. Paul's, and baptized their first three children there, until two much closer churches - St. Mary Star of the Sea in 1853 and Visitation in 1854 (1853 is the date given for Samuel's baptism, the latest Toner baptism at St. Paul's). I'll have to look a little closer to double check whether there are any other Catholic churches in or near Red Hook, but for now it looks like my first order of business is contact St. Mary's and Visitation and finding out how far back their parish records go (please let them go all the way back to 1853/4!), and either request a search or make a plan to go do some research myself (that part might not happen until this summer, of course). Finding baptismal records for the middle Toner kids there, and then, especially, for the younger Julia, our Julia, would be crucial. It's torturous to know that the family I've traced back the farthest is the one that hasn't quite necessarily 100% been linked to us, although I'm 98% sure.
My assumption will be that the Toner's attended Visitation (we know the Mulvaneys did), but since we know that the Madigans attended St. Mary's, both are worth the effort.
Anyway, check out the map, as I'll be updating it soon with additional churches and addresses. For my own reference, it will include the O'Haras and Quinns as well as the Mulcahys, Mulvaneys, Madigans, and Toners. I've just recently e-mailed St. Augustine's near Baltic St. to see if they can find any of the sacramental records of the O'Hara family, but if they're not there, I'll have to map and check all of the other local churches.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Julia Toner death notice
In further searching the NY Newspaper Death Notices, I came across one from 1866 that reads:
Aug 19 John Thomas Toner and his sister Julia on 20th children of Richard of So Bklyn
Then I went to the Brooklyn Eagle itself, and searched through the paper for that date, and found this:
It reads: Toner - On the 19th of August, of cholera, James Thomas Toner, and his sister Julia, on the 20th inst. The funeral will take place from the residence of their father, Richard Toner, corner of Van Brunt and Tremont streets, South Brooklyn, this afternoon at 4 o'clock.
It appears there was a transcription error in the one I first posted, and that Julia's brother was named James, not John.
So it seems that - again, assuming that this Richard Toner family we've been tracking lately is the Richard Toner family of our Julia Toner - that the Julia in that family who was 20 years too old to be our Julia was not, actually, our Julia. It was not too uncommon to name a child after an older sibling who had died, and we can only assume that our Julia, born several years after her oldest sister died, was named after the earlier Julia. This James Thomas Toner, though, wasn't on the 1860 census. If he died in 1866, and hadn't yet been born in 1860, he had to have been 6 or younger. Julia was 9 in 1860, and so she would have died at about age 15. Imagine losing two of your children - the oldest and the youngest, it seems, a 15 year old girl and a 5 year old boy - within a day of each other.
If I could only find the Toners on the 1880 census, we could possibly confirm some of these assumptions. If the Toner family - clearly the same Toner family - were to show up on in 1880 with a daughter Julia, 8-12 years old, we'd know for sure that our Julia was named after her older sister.
Aug 19 John Thomas Toner and his sister Julia on 20th children of Richard of So Bklyn
Then I went to the Brooklyn Eagle itself, and searched through the paper for that date, and found this:
It reads: Toner - On the 19th of August, of cholera, James Thomas Toner, and his sister Julia, on the 20th inst. The funeral will take place from the residence of their father, Richard Toner, corner of Van Brunt and Tremont streets, South Brooklyn, this afternoon at 4 o'clock.It appears there was a transcription error in the one I first posted, and that Julia's brother was named James, not John.
So it seems that - again, assuming that this Richard Toner family we've been tracking lately is the Richard Toner family of our Julia Toner - that the Julia in that family who was 20 years too old to be our Julia was not, actually, our Julia. It was not too uncommon to name a child after an older sibling who had died, and we can only assume that our Julia, born several years after her oldest sister died, was named after the earlier Julia. This James Thomas Toner, though, wasn't on the 1860 census. If he died in 1866, and hadn't yet been born in 1860, he had to have been 6 or younger. Julia was 9 in 1860, and so she would have died at about age 15. Imagine losing two of your children - the oldest and the youngest, it seems, a 15 year old girl and a 5 year old boy - within a day of each other.
If I could only find the Toners on the 1880 census, we could possibly confirm some of these assumptions. If the Toner family - clearly the same Toner family - were to show up on in 1880 with a daughter Julia, 8-12 years old, we'd know for sure that our Julia was named after her older sister.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
New York, Death Newspaper Extracts
In searching this collection on Ancestry.com, I have so far come across two death notices that appear to be of interest to us. Both are from the Brooklyn Eagle, though I haven't come across either in searching that site itself.
The first, from September 22, 1870, reads:
Sept. 21 Samuel J. Toner 18y s Richard & Mary Fremont-Van Brunt St.
which I believe translates to Samuel J. Toner, age 18, son of Richard and Mary Toner, died September 21, 1870. I'm not sure of the reference to Fremont-Van Brunt St. Does Van Brunt St. now, or did it ever, intersect with a street called Fremont? or Tremont? (It's a fuzzy image.)
It seems that Julia's brother Samuel died at age 18.
Possibly even more exciting is the next one, published August of 1874:
Aug 14 Mrs Judith Toner native Maynorth co Kildare Son Richard of Van Brunt St Bklyn
It seems that no, Julia was not named after her paternal grandmother, and that the older woman named Judith who lived with the Toner family in 1870 was, in fact, named Judith, and that she died in 1874, several years after that census was taken. Most important, however, is the fact that she was a native of Maynorth in Co. Kildare, Ireland! However - a quick google search reveals no such place. There is, though, a Maynooth in County Kildare. I'll have to do some more research to find out whether there ever was a Maynorth, and whether our Judith and Richard Toner came from Maynooth.
Now this looks like progress!
UPDATE: The actual death notices, from the Eagle itself,
Judith's reads:
TONER - August 14, 1874, Mrs. Judith Toner, a native of the town of Maynooth, County Kildare, Ireland. Her funeral will take place from the residence of her son, Richard Toner, Verona St, near Van Brunt, and 2 1/2 o'clock PM, on Sunday, August 16, 1874.
(Yes, the town in Ireland is Maynooth, not Maynorth, which is good, because Maynorth doesn't appear to exist.)
Samuel's reads:
TONER - Suddenly, Sept. 21st, Samuel J. Toner, in the 18th year of his age, son of Richard and Mary Toner. His friends and acquaintances are respectfully invited to attend his funeral, on Friday, at 2 1/2 o'clocj, without further notice, from his father's residence, cor. of Tremont and Van Brunt sts.
This doesn't say what Samuel died of, only that it was sudden, and so not the result of a long illness. We also learn that the Toners appear to have moved around the corner between 1870 and 1874, and are now living on Verona St., near its intersection with Van Brunt, whereas before they were living at the corner of Van Brunt and Tremont - unless Verona was previously known as Tremont? I only posit that because I couldn't find Tremont on a current google maps.
UPDATE: The actual death notices, from the Eagle itself,
Judith's reads:TONER - August 14, 1874, Mrs. Judith Toner, a native of the town of Maynooth, County Kildare, Ireland. Her funeral will take place from the residence of her son, Richard Toner, Verona St, near Van Brunt, and 2 1/2 o'clock PM, on Sunday, August 16, 1874.
(Yes, the town in Ireland is Maynooth, not Maynorth, which is good, because Maynorth doesn't appear to exist.)
Samuel's reads:
TONER - Suddenly, Sept. 21st, Samuel J. Toner, in the 18th year of his age, son of Richard and Mary Toner. His friends and acquaintances are respectfully invited to attend his funeral, on Friday, at 2 1/2 o'clocj, without further notice, from his father's residence, cor. of Tremont and Van Brunt sts.
This doesn't say what Samuel died of, only that it was sudden, and so not the result of a long illness. We also learn that the Toners appear to have moved around the corner between 1870 and 1874, and are now living on Verona St., near its intersection with Van Brunt, whereas before they were living at the corner of Van Brunt and Tremont - unless Verona was previously known as Tremont? I only posit that because I couldn't find Tremont on a current google maps.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
St. Paul's Parish, Brooklyn - Baptismal Records
After happening upon this record group while I was looking up the Mulvaneys, I started searching for other names in it. The Mulvaney dates, like I said, seemed a little bit off, but the Toner records are more or less spot on, as long as you allow for misspellings/mistranscriptions. Here's what I've found:
Julia Toner
b. July 19 1850
baptized July 28 1850
parents Richard Toner and Mary Curran
godparents John Burns and Mary Fannon
Mary Ann Toner
b. March 3 1852
baptized March 14 1852
parents Richard Toner and Mary Cullen
godparents Joseph McGrath and Marcella Glascow
Samuel Tonar
b. August 11 1853
baptized August 21 1853
parents Richard Tonar and Mary Cullum
godparents John Reily and Mary McCormick
I have not come across records for Elizabeth, Louisa, William, or Judith. It's possible that they moved between when the eldest three and the rest of the children were born, and so everyone else was baptized elsewhere.
(From Ancestry.com:
"St. Paul’s church was founded in 1836 in Brooklyn, New York. It was known as the “Irish Parish” because it served as the focal point for Irish immigrants in Brooklyn during the Great Irish Famine of 1845-1851.
This database contains baptismal records from St. Paul’s parish from 1837-1900. The city of Brooklyn did not require the reporting of births until 1866. Baptisms were generally performed within days of children’s births. Because of this, baptismal records can often be used in place of birth records when birth records are either unavailable or non-existent.
Information listed in this database includes:
Name of individual baptized
Baptismal date
Parents’ names
Birth date
Names of godparents
Notes:
At least one godparent was required for proper baptism
‘NL’ or ‘Not Listed’ indicates that the name or date is not written in the original record
‘XXX’ indicates that the name or date is completely illegible
‘CXX’ indicates that only the initial letter of a name is legible in the original record
Middle names were not transcribed except for ‘Mary Ann/Anne’ to distinguish from ‘Mary’
Surnames and given names were transcribed as they appear and were verified in the original registers.")
Julia Toner
b. July 19 1850
baptized July 28 1850
parents Richard Toner and Mary Curran
godparents John Burns and Mary Fannon
Mary Ann Toner
b. March 3 1852
baptized March 14 1852
parents Richard Toner and Mary Cullen
godparents Joseph McGrath and Marcella Glascow
Samuel Tonar
b. August 11 1853
baptized August 21 1853
parents Richard Tonar and Mary Cullum
godparents John Reily and Mary McCormick
I have not come across records for Elizabeth, Louisa, William, or Judith. It's possible that they moved between when the eldest three and the rest of the children were born, and so everyone else was baptized elsewhere.
(From Ancestry.com:
"St. Paul’s church was founded in 1836 in Brooklyn, New York. It was known as the “Irish Parish” because it served as the focal point for Irish immigrants in Brooklyn during the Great Irish Famine of 1845-1851.
This database contains baptismal records from St. Paul’s parish from 1837-1900. The city of Brooklyn did not require the reporting of births until 1866. Baptisms were generally performed within days of children’s births. Because of this, baptismal records can often be used in place of birth records when birth records are either unavailable or non-existent.
Information listed in this database includes:
Name of individual baptized
Baptismal date
Parents’ names
Birth date
Names of godparents
Notes:
At least one godparent was required for proper baptism
‘NL’ or ‘Not Listed’ indicates that the name or date is not written in the original record
‘XXX’ indicates that the name or date is completely illegible
‘CXX’ indicates that only the initial letter of a name is legible in the original record
Middle names were not transcribed except for ‘Mary Ann/Anne’ to distinguish from ‘Mary’
Surnames and given names were transcribed as they appear and were verified in the original registers.")
Saturday, November 1, 2008
Answering some questions, and raising some more
Given that William Mulvaney is missing from the 1910 census at Van Brunt St., I went looking for him. I found a William Mulvaney, about our William's age, living with Thomas Renehan, his wife Elizabeth, and his step-children (Elizabeth's children?) John and Catherine Loughlin. This William Mulvaney is 10 years old, he was born in NY, and so were his parents, his language is listed as "none," his job as "none," he cannot read or write, has not attended school within the last year, and in the last column, "whether deaf or dumb" there's something written - I think it says "dumb," but I'm not sure. There's no proof that this is our William Mulvaney, but I went to maps.google.com and discovered that William is living with the Renehan family just around the corner, on Conover St., from the Mulvaneys at 270 Van Brunt St. Given that William's inability to read and write at 18 in the 1920 census indicates that something isn't quite right, you have to ask - how many (mentally or physically) disabled William Mulvaneys could possibly live in a given 4 block area?
I asked Betty and John about the possibility, and they said "No one ever spoke about William, or Willie, as they called him, so he may very well have been 'slow.'" Further, it seems that the Loughlin family may have been Julia's sister's family.
Apparently Julia had at least two sisters, and possibly more:
What then, of Julia? If she is the same Julia Toner listed in 1860, she was a full 19 years older than the ages she fairly consistently gave on later censuses, and that Thomas Mulvaney had recorded on her death certificate. She would have been in her late 50s when Nana was born, and in her 80s in the pictures posted below. And while it's possible for women to give birth late in life, the thought that a woman who didn't start having kids until she was over 40 could give birth to at least 9 kids (John, James, Auntie Mae, Grace, Thomas, Willie, Harold, Raymond, Nana) in about 15 years stretches the imagination. There were no fertility drugs at the turn of the century! Also unlikely, though, are most of the machinations that could explain how that Toner family ended up with a second daughter named Julia, 20 years younger than the first.
In other words, right now I'm hoping Julia's mother kept a detailed diary throughout her entire life, and that someone stumbles upon it in an attic, and soon!
However, we do see that by 1910, Julia appears to have sent one of her kids to live with one of her sisters, while having two of her other sister's kids living with her. I think it's important to do genealogy horizontally as well as vertically. While it'll be amazing to someday know Julia Mulvaney's great-great-grandmother's name, imagine the significance of her sisters - and brothers, of course, but I don't know anything about brothers - to her daily life, as they lived around the corner from each other, helped raise each others children, went to church together, sent their kids to school together, probably did their shopping and chores and had dinners together.
I asked Betty and John about the possibility, and they said "No one ever spoke about William, or Willie, as they called him, so he may very well have been 'slow.'" Further, it seems that the Loughlin family may have been Julia's sister's family.Apparently Julia had at least two sisters, and possibly more:
- Louise Toner Deegan, whose husband made buttons and who had no living children
- Another sister who possibly married a Loughlin (According to this census, if we're talking about the same family, her name was Elizabeth.)
- Another sister, who married a man named Murphy. They had 4 children:
- John Murphy
- Thomas Murphy
- Annie Murphy Dowd, who was married to Jack Dowd, a NYPD detective chief
- Another sister, who married a man named Keene and had a daughter Margaret who became an Urusline nun.
What then, of Julia? If she is the same Julia Toner listed in 1860, she was a full 19 years older than the ages she fairly consistently gave on later censuses, and that Thomas Mulvaney had recorded on her death certificate. She would have been in her late 50s when Nana was born, and in her 80s in the pictures posted below. And while it's possible for women to give birth late in life, the thought that a woman who didn't start having kids until she was over 40 could give birth to at least 9 kids (John, James, Auntie Mae, Grace, Thomas, Willie, Harold, Raymond, Nana) in about 15 years stretches the imagination. There were no fertility drugs at the turn of the century! Also unlikely, though, are most of the machinations that could explain how that Toner family ended up with a second daughter named Julia, 20 years younger than the first.
In other words, right now I'm hoping Julia's mother kept a detailed diary throughout her entire life, and that someone stumbles upon it in an attic, and soon!
However, we do see that by 1910, Julia appears to have sent one of her kids to live with one of her sisters, while having two of her other sister's kids living with her. I think it's important to do genealogy horizontally as well as vertically. While it'll be amazing to someday know Julia Mulvaney's great-great-grandmother's name, imagine the significance of her sisters - and brothers, of course, but I don't know anything about brothers - to her daily life, as they lived around the corner from each other, helped raise each others children, went to church together, sent their kids to school together, probably did their shopping and chores and had dinners together.
Monday, October 27, 2008
October 10, 1938
So, I had these great, organized, well-planned out ideas to post things in reverse chronological order, from most recent to most ancient, so that things would eventually be laid out in an order that makes perfect chronological sense when viewed from the most recent to the oldest post.
Nevermind all that.
A few weeks ago, I sent away to the NY Municipal Archives for the death certificates of Julia and Patrick Mulvaney, Nana's parents. Julia's arrived this afternoon. I don't have a scanner, but I'm transcribing it for my own records, so I'll post it here, as well. It contains lots of information I didn't know, though it may not be new to all of you.
[Bureau of Records - Department of Health - Borough of Brooklyn]
1. Place of Death: Borough of Brooklyn 324 82 St., Private residence
2. Full name: Julia Mulvaney
3. Residence (usual place of abode): 324 82 St., Brooklyn
Personal and Statistical Particulars
4. Sex: Female
5. Color or Race: White
6. (Marital Status): Widowed
7. Date of birth: [blank]
8. Age of decedent: 68 yrs.
9. Occupation
a. trade: Housewife
b. industry: Own home
c. date decedent last worked at this occupation: June, 1936
d. total time spent in occupation: 45 years
10. Birthplace: USA
11. How long in US (if of foreign birth): [blank]
12. How long resident in City of New York: [blank]
Parents of Deceased
13. Name of father of decedent: Richard Toner
14. Birthplace of father: Ireland
15. Maiden name of mother of decedent: Mary Cullen
16. Birthplace of mother: Ireland
17. Informant: Thos. Mulvaney, son
Medical Certificate of Death
18. Date of death: October 10, 1938
19. I hereby certify that I attended the deceased from Aug. 1936 to October 10, 1938. I last saw her alive on Oct. 10, 1938: death is stated to have occurred on the date stated above, at 3:45 PM.
The principal cause of death and related causes of importance were as follows:
chronic hypertensive cardio-vascular disease (duration 2 1/2 years)
chronic thyrotoxicosis (duration 2 1/2 years)
Other contributory causes of importance:
cerebral embolism (duration 10 days)
Name of operation: [blank]
Date: [blank]
What test confirmed diagnosis? [blank]
Was there an autopsy? No
Signature: Charles Stern, MD
Address: 454 43 St., Bklyn
21. Place of Burial: Holy Cross Cemetary
Date of Burial: October 13th, 1938
22. Undertaker: Joseph Redmond, John Redmond
Address: 476 73 St.
Nevermind all that.
A few weeks ago, I sent away to the NY Municipal Archives for the death certificates of Julia and Patrick Mulvaney, Nana's parents. Julia's arrived this afternoon. I don't have a scanner, but I'm transcribing it for my own records, so I'll post it here, as well. It contains lots of information I didn't know, though it may not be new to all of you.
[Bureau of Records - Department of Health - Borough of Brooklyn]
Certificate of Death
[1938 October 12 PM 12:27]
Certificate No. 19700[1938 October 12 PM 12:27]
1. Place of Death: Borough of Brooklyn 324 82 St., Private residence
2. Full name: Julia Mulvaney
3. Residence (usual place of abode): 324 82 St., Brooklyn
Personal and Statistical Particulars
4. Sex: Female
5. Color or Race: White
6. (Marital Status): Widowed
7. Date of birth: [blank]
8. Age of decedent: 68 yrs.
9. Occupation
a. trade: Housewife
b. industry: Own home
c. date decedent last worked at this occupation: June, 1936
d. total time spent in occupation: 45 years
10. Birthplace: USA
11. How long in US (if of foreign birth): [blank]
12. How long resident in City of New York: [blank]
Parents of Deceased
13. Name of father of decedent: Richard Toner
14. Birthplace of father: Ireland
15. Maiden name of mother of decedent: Mary Cullen
16. Birthplace of mother: Ireland
17. Informant: Thos. Mulvaney, son
Medical Certificate of Death
18. Date of death: October 10, 1938
19. I hereby certify that I attended the deceased from Aug. 1936 to October 10, 1938. I last saw her alive on Oct. 10, 1938: death is stated to have occurred on the date stated above, at 3:45 PM.
The principal cause of death and related causes of importance were as follows:
chronic hypertensive cardio-vascular disease (duration 2 1/2 years)
chronic thyrotoxicosis (duration 2 1/2 years)
Other contributory causes of importance:
cerebral embolism (duration 10 days)
Name of operation: [blank]
Date: [blank]
What test confirmed diagnosis? [blank]
Was there an autopsy? No
Signature: Charles Stern, MD
Address: 454 43 St., Bklyn
21. Place of Burial: Holy Cross Cemetary
Date of Burial: October 13th, 1938
22. Undertaker: Joseph Redmond, John Redmond
Address: 476 73 St.
Funeral Director's Certificate
I hereby certify that I have been employed, without any solicitation on my part or that of any other person, as undertaker to dispose of the remains of Julia Mulvaney by Thomas Mulvaney of 324 82 St., Bklyn, who is the son and the nearest surviving relative or next of kin of the deceased. This statement is made to obtain a permit for the burial or cremation of the remains of the deceased.
Signature: Joseph Redmond
Business address: 476 73rd St.
Permit No.: 219
If another undertaker in your employ is to take personal charge of the work in the care, preparation, or other disposal of such dead human body, give his name: John J. Redmond
State License No.: 192
Signature: Joseph Redmond
Business address: 476 73rd St.
Permit No.: 219
If another undertaker in your employ is to take personal charge of the work in the care, preparation, or other disposal of such dead human body, give his name: John J. Redmond
State License No.: 192
Physician's Supplementary Certification
(Required in Connection with Telephone Application for Removal Permit)
(Required in Connection with Telephone Application for Removal Permit)
If death has not been contributed to or caused by homicide, suicide, accident, acute or chronic poisoning, abortion, puerperal sepsis, or any suspicion of of those conditions, and the funeral director desires to obtain removal permission by telephone, the physician will execute the following certification:--
I hereby certify that the death of Julia Mulvaney who died on Oct. 10, 1938, at 324 82 St., Bklyn has not been contributed to or caused by any of the conditions mentioned in the above list.
Personal signature of physician: Charles Stern
Address: 454 43 St., Bklyn
I didn't try to use block quotes again, as last time I did that was the formatting nightmare two posts below, but hopefully it's easy enough to tell where the certificate begins and ends. It gets awfully clinical and distasteful towards the end, doesn't it?
Keeping in mind that death certificates tend to be the least reliable of vital records, because they are filled out by someone other than the person they are about (in other words, it's much less likely than a child or grandchild will accurately name the parents of the deceased on a death certificate, than, say, that the parents of a newborn will accurately name themselves on a birth certificate), what I learned from this (I'm deciding to trust Thomas Mulvaney) were most specifically Julia's parents' names, Richard Toner and Mary Cullen.
If Julia was 68 when she died in 1938, her birth was around 1870, which is in keeping with the age she gives on all the census records I've found her on (I never have come across the 1930 census for the family). However, when I search census records for Richard Toner in NY, with wife Mary and daughter Julia, the only records I come up with that seem even possible are these, from 1860 and 1870:
These two families are clearly the same, but their Julia is a full 19 years older than ours should be. She may even have already left home by the 1870 census, right around when our Julia should be just being born. I've heard a story or two about a Mulvaney woman lying about her age, but I would think that 19 years would be stretching it.
First, I want to ask whether anyone already knows the names of Julia's parents and siblings, and can let me know whether all this conjecture is misplaced.
Second, I'm going to let my imagination run wild for a minute. There's an older woman living in the home during both census years (she ages more than 10 years in the interim, though, so there's no guarantee that she's the same person). Her name is listed as Julia Toner in 1860, and I would assume that she's Richard Toner's mother. In this census, young Julia is listed, 9 years old. The older woman is listed as Judith Toner in 1870, and a toddler is listed, baby Judith. Assuming for a moment that she is the same woman, it seems possible that her name IS Julia, and that the census taker misheard Julia for Judith that day - in which case it's possible, I suppose, that little 2-year-old Judith could actually be Julia, too - and she'd be about the right age to be our Julia.
That of course, leaves the problem of having 2 daughters named Julia in the same family (and we'd have to hope that Occam's Razor doesn't apply to genealogy) - it could be explained any number of ways (Julia 1 died and they named the baby after her; Julia 1 got into some trouble, named the baby after herself, and left it with her parents; etc.) all of which are possible, and none of which are particularly likely.
It could also be, of course, that there were multiple Richard and Mary Toners in NY at the time, and that more than one of them had a daughter named Julia, and that our Toner family was skipped by the census that year. Or that I just haven't found them. Or that one of you will post a comment to the effect of "Thomas Mulvaney must have been mistaken. Julia's parents were named Bob and Sue," and I'll feel a little silly. Does anyone have any facts, documents, stories, opinions, or wild conjecture similar to mine to add to the story?
I hereby certify that the death of Julia Mulvaney who died on Oct. 10, 1938, at 324 82 St., Bklyn has not been contributed to or caused by any of the conditions mentioned in the above list.
Personal signature of physician: Charles Stern
Address: 454 43 St., Bklyn
I didn't try to use block quotes again, as last time I did that was the formatting nightmare two posts below, but hopefully it's easy enough to tell where the certificate begins and ends. It gets awfully clinical and distasteful towards the end, doesn't it?
Keeping in mind that death certificates tend to be the least reliable of vital records, because they are filled out by someone other than the person they are about (in other words, it's much less likely than a child or grandchild will accurately name the parents of the deceased on a death certificate, than, say, that the parents of a newborn will accurately name themselves on a birth certificate), what I learned from this (I'm deciding to trust Thomas Mulvaney) were most specifically Julia's parents' names, Richard Toner and Mary Cullen.
If Julia was 68 when she died in 1938, her birth was around 1870, which is in keeping with the age she gives on all the census records I've found her on (I never have come across the 1930 census for the family). However, when I search census records for Richard Toner in NY, with wife Mary and daughter Julia, the only records I come up with that seem even possible are these, from 1860 and 1870:
These two families are clearly the same, but their Julia is a full 19 years older than ours should be. She may even have already left home by the 1870 census, right around when our Julia should be just being born. I've heard a story or two about a Mulvaney woman lying about her age, but I would think that 19 years would be stretching it.
First, I want to ask whether anyone already knows the names of Julia's parents and siblings, and can let me know whether all this conjecture is misplaced.
Second, I'm going to let my imagination run wild for a minute. There's an older woman living in the home during both census years (she ages more than 10 years in the interim, though, so there's no guarantee that she's the same person). Her name is listed as Julia Toner in 1860, and I would assume that she's Richard Toner's mother. In this census, young Julia is listed, 9 years old. The older woman is listed as Judith Toner in 1870, and a toddler is listed, baby Judith. Assuming for a moment that she is the same woman, it seems possible that her name IS Julia, and that the census taker misheard Julia for Judith that day - in which case it's possible, I suppose, that little 2-year-old Judith could actually be Julia, too - and she'd be about the right age to be our Julia.
That of course, leaves the problem of having 2 daughters named Julia in the same family (and we'd have to hope that Occam's Razor doesn't apply to genealogy) - it could be explained any number of ways (Julia 1 died and they named the baby after her; Julia 1 got into some trouble, named the baby after herself, and left it with her parents; etc.) all of which are possible, and none of which are particularly likely.
It could also be, of course, that there were multiple Richard and Mary Toners in NY at the time, and that more than one of them had a daughter named Julia, and that our Toner family was skipped by the census that year. Or that I just haven't found them. Or that one of you will post a comment to the effect of "Thomas Mulvaney must have been mistaken. Julia's parents were named Bob and Sue," and I'll feel a little silly. Does anyone have any facts, documents, stories, opinions, or wild conjecture similar to mine to add to the story?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)