Don't Use Genealogy to Shame Your Opposition

A few seasons ago Ben Affleck was a guest on Finding Your Roots. It was discovered that he had an ancestor that was a slave owner. This tidbit was edited out of the episode that aired.  Understandably, few, if any, people today would be thrilled to discover that they were the descendant of a slave owner. 

We must remember that we are judged as individuals based on our own choices and actions; both good and bad. Our decisions are our own. It would be wrong to hold Ben Affleck as a bad person just because his ancestor owned other people. It would be just as out of line to praise Ben Affleck if his ancestor was a hero or a moral champion. Those past deeds are the domain of his late relatives. Their sins and blessings were their own. 

Recently, I came across items where Tucker Carlson and Anne Coulter had their family trees made public by critics to try and shame them for their immigration views. Both Carlson and Coulter are critics of the current calls for open borders.

There are two issues at hand here. First, current immigration policies are fair game to be examined and debated by those in favor of more open immigration and those opposed to it. Polite society should always seek a fair and truthful discussion on public policy. 

Second, the choices and circumstances of one’s ancestors have no bearings on today’s public voices. Not surprisingly both Carlson and Coulter are descended from ancestors that emigrated from Europe. However, this has no bearing on the opinions they are allowed to hold in 2018. One can be a descendant of immigrants and oppose open borders today. 

Prince Harry is allowed to declare the monarchy is out of date and needs to fade away. He can also join the Catholic Church. Both of these actions would go against his ancestors’ choices but neither would make Prince Harry a hypocrite. 

Genealogy should be a pursuit of truth and not used to score political points. The truth is out there. 

Relying on Others is a Pain

One of the challenges with pursuing one’s family tree is having to rely on others. The most annoying aspect is when miscommunication and lack of clarity cause others to reject your requests for help. 

Recently, I was dismayed to receive negative replies from NJ Vital Statistics regarding two marriages from 1937 and 1970. Both were found in the NJ marriage indexes now available through the efforts of Reclaim the Records. I was hoping to get the non-certified “certifications” that the office offers for weddings of my grandmother’s first cousins. 

The 1937 was rejected because I did not provide the county and location of the marriage. Their own index does not provide that information for 1937 but those making a request must provide it or your Xerox of your ID, your request and your check will be returned. They did provide an envelope and I am deciding whether I want to ask a second time. The bride lived in Jersey City in Hudson County in the 1920 and 1930 censuses. 

I expected that the 1970 would be rejected because the marriage occurred less than 50 years ago. That was not why the marriage record was not searched and provided as requested. They mentioned that I was not a close enough relative which boggles my mind. Marriages are public events and therefore one has zero expectation that the information on a marriage license is private. The license by its very nature exists to prevent fraud and bigamous unions. Therefore, I would argue that current marriage licenses should be open for a full review by anyone. 

Follow the Leads and Trails

Take time to carefully review and follow new leads as they arise. I found a marriage license for Charles McNulty from 1931 that identified his parents as James McNulty and Catherine Carolan. Knowing that he was Irish born I went to rootsireland.ie and did a search for his baptism. He was baptized on 19 Sep 1876 at Knockbride, County Cavan. I was able to find an older brother Peter Nulty in 1875 and a younger sister Bridget Nulty in 1879. The siblings had civil birth registrations but Charles did not. 

Follow up research in the 1901 and 1911 Irish census found that Catherine Carolan (Mc)Nulty was widowed before 1901 and living with daughters Lizzie and Annie and her son Charles in 1901. This made sense since Charles’ US passport application indicated that he emigrated in 1902. In 1911, Catherine was still living with Annie and a granddaughter, Kate Murray. 

Moving from knowns to unknowns, I looked for a death registration for James (Mc)Nulty before the 1901 census. I found him dying in Dec 1896 and registered in Jan 1897. Realizing that the Irish records were exclusively using the shortened spelling of the name of N(a)ulty I did a restricted search for Cootehill and found several more entries. 

The presence of a granddaughter named Murray hinted that one of the Nulty daughters had married a Mr. Murray before 1911. I was able to find a 20 Feb 1903 birth at the Nulty homestead of Annafarney for Kate to James Murray and Lizzie Nulty. I was then able to find a 1901 wedding for them and several other children born 1904, 1906, 1908, 1909 and 1911. I do not know why their eldest daughter was not living with her parents at Kocknalossett in 1911 but the younger 5 children were all born there. I had tried to find deaths for Kate Murray’s parents but that is not the only reason for a child to dwell with a grandparent. 

I continued searching in the civil register and found older siblings of Charles McNulty; Bridget in 1864, James in 1866 and Mary in 1868. I was also able to find birth records for Lizzie in 1871 and Annie in 1873. I was unable to find baptismal records for any of these children. 

I was able to find a marriage from 3 Feb 1855 between James Nulty and Catherine Carolan. This was a church marriage register as Catholic marriages went unregistered with civil authorities until 1864. 

I was curious if they really did have a 9 year infertile period to start their marriage. I also noted that their first known child was Bridget born 21 Sep 1864. Earlier, I discovered that their last known child was also named Bridget born 27 Jan 1879. There was no mistaking these Bridgets. Both were born at Annafarney and both were the daughters of the same parents James Nulty and Catherine Carolan. Sometimes the surname Carolan was listed as Carroll. 

I looked for a death of Bridget Nulty between 1864-1879. I found a 13 year-old Bridget that died on 25 Jul 1878. She was of Annafarney and had drowned and been found dead according to the coroner’s inquest. Since Ireland utilized a death register several other deaths were also listed within the same view. Several deaths had the identical notes about being found dead after drowning. It was quite a shock to see that many deaths from one event. I automatically asked myself would that many drownings have made the newspapers? I did find an article from The Nation 3 Aug 1878. It listed the names of the many school girls, their teachers and chaperone who all drowned after a leak occurred on the lake near their home while sailing. The assistant teacher was named Mary Nulty but I am uncertain if she was an aunt or a cousin. It is possible that she was a relative. 

I did other searches and found a few more deaths and a couple of marriages as well. Catherine Carolan (Mc)Nulty died in 1921. She was reported dead by her son-in-law Philip Brady. I found he had married Mary Nulty in 1905 and apparently had no children. The younger Bridget Nulty was the maid of honor for this wedding. Interestingly, none of the five Murray daughters had godparents named Nulty. Their brother did not have a baptismal entry but he married in 1934 in Ireland. 

Secretaries are Golden

Parish secretaries can be a blessing or a curse to work with. Recently, I was pleasantly surprised when a cursed effort became a very nice blessing. I had written to a parish in the Bronx for two wedding certificates. I indicated that I specifically wanted the baptismal notation data listed in the marriage registration. This would be the simplest and best way to identify the parish of origin for a Catholic immigrant post 1907.

After several weeks with no reply, I called the rectory to see what was causing the delay. The secretary was very friendly and she took my information details again over the phone. A couple of more weeks went by and finally my SASE was in my mailbox. 

The secretary sent along a letter stating that she had done the search and then misplaced the certificates causing the delay. I looked at the certificates, noticed that there were no baptismal notations and became very annoyed. That was the whole reason I sent the request, $20 and a SASE.  It was to see if the church records would record a place of origin in Ireland for the 4 spouses that the civil records did not. 

Haste reading her correspondence on my part was responsible for negative thoughts and plans to call the next day and ask again about the notations. I later collected the contents from my letter and noticed two xeroxed marriage registrations that were from the original register. She had sent them along with her letter because she could not exactly make out the names in the notations column. She thought perhaps I might be able to make out what was written in the notations column. 

I was able to make out the place of origin for my grandfather’s cousins and their husbands. The brides were both baptized at St. Joseph’s, Glenville, County Cork, Ireland. Their husbands were baptized at Knockbride, County Kavin(sp) and St. Patrick’s, Mohill, (Leitrim), Ireland. I believe these notations are another example of couples providing oral testimony and not necessarily an actual baptismal certificate for these nuptials in 1931 and 1941. The four baptisms in question were from 1876, 1884, 1902 and 1905. The older couple were listed as being baptized in 1877 and 1888 on their 1931 registration. The misspelling of Cavan was obvious. Of the four the 1876 baptism is available at nil.ie online for free and when checked did not provide the corresponding marriage notation from 1931 that would be expected.   

The parish in the Bronx was originally a heavily Irish parish since its founding in the 1920s. Today it is a very Hispanic neighborhood. The pastor is named Father Gonzalez and his secretary is Miss Rivera. The names of the couples, their witnesses and the celebrants were traditional Irish surnames and Miss Rivera misread both maids of honors’ surnames and one of the officiants. This is an reminder that one must always consider that a transcription is not an accurate representation of the record. Do not accept information provided from a transcription without a pinch of skepticism. It reminded me that I would likely misread Hispanic surnames that unfamiliar to me if I were a parish secretary in Havana or San Juan. 

Look at all possible records to make out difficult handwriting. In 1941 the church register was not crystal clear for the celebrant’s name. The parish secretary read it as Shaullez. This was a surname I had never seen before. Looking at the signature on the civil marriage certificate did not shed any light on the subject either. A careful and full analysis of the civil marriage certificate showed that someone other than the priest had filled in the names and addresses in easily read and immaculate penmanship. The priest in question was Father Timothy J. Shanley. 

Hoping for a DNA Link

I got great news this Christmas season. My maternal uncle has already sent in his Ancestry DNA test and I am awaiting the results. Better still is a descendant of Hugh Goodwin(1842-1926) has agreed to test. I will drop that kit in tomorrow’s mail. 

I have been searching Hugh Goodwin for a long time now. I know that my great-grandfather was John Goodwin(1860-1897). I know that both John and his brother Peter Goodwin(c.1855-1901) emigrated from Ireland and settled in Hell’s Kitchen in Manhattan. They each had several children baptized there at Holy Cross and St Raphael. They both purchased their graves at Calvary Cemetery across the East River in Woodside, Queens within days of each other in Feb 1893 to bury their 5 month-old sons, who had been baptized the same day at Holy Cross in Sep 1892. 

What I noticed from the sponsors on the baptismal certificates for Peter Goodwin’s sons in 1891 and 1892 were their names; Owen Goodwin in 1891 and Peter Goodwin in 1892. I was unaware who these men might have been. Most peculiar was the name Francis in 1892. The father was named Peter as was the baby baptized. The godfather would have to have been a second Peter Goodwin. A parent cannot be the baptismal sponsor for his own child. 

Trying to answer this question led me to my first discovery of the Hugh Goodwin family in the 1880 US Census. Living on West 38th Street and born in Ireland, Hugh Goodwin was married and listed with four children: Margaret, Owen, Peter and Sarah and an adult male with an unspecified relationship named Owen Goodwin. I had found a likely sponsor for the 1892 Peter and two potential Owens for the 1891 Owen. Working from knowns to unknowns I started down the Hugh Goodwin trail. I was unable to find a Hugh Goodwin in the 1900 or 1905 census records that matched him. I was able to find one living in almshouses in the 1910-1925 census trail. He died at the Staten Island Farm Colony in 1926. His parents were listed as Patrick Goodwin and Catherine Rogers on the death certificate. 

Government institutions are often excellent repositories of data. Over his long history of poor house living he recorded more than once that his parents were Patrick Goodwin and Catherine Rogers. His son Peter Goodwin was listed as his next of kin as late as 1912. 

A check of the International Genealogical Index many years ago, revealed that Hugh had married his first wife, the widow Ellen Rafferty, in 1872. His parents were listed as Patrick Goodwin and Catherine Rogers. This also cleared up why such a large gap existed between Owen and Peter in the 1880 census. They were not full brothers but half-brothers. Owen Rafferty was enumerated correctly with his mother and sister as Rafferty in the 1870 census. 

Hugh and Ellen had three children: Patrick(1874-1876), Peter(1877-aft 1911) and Sarah(1879-1904). Patrick’s godfather was named Owen Goodwin, suggesting the possibility that the Owen Goodwin from the 1880 census might be a relative , possibly a brother. 

I learned that Hugh Goodwin was buried at Calvary Cemetery in a grave purchased in 1901 by Martin English. I found that Hugh had purchased a grave in 1876 that contained three burials; his son Patrick in 1876, his wife Ellen in 1890 and a Helen Flaherty in 1901. 

I found the 1890 Police census for Hugh with his two surviving children on West 46th Street. He remarried a widow Helen Connigham in 1894 but no sign of her appears after the wedding. 

As I searched I found that my ancestor and his brother Peter were the sons of Patrick and Catherine Goodwin. I wondered if Hugh and possibly Owen might be their cousins but they also could have been full brothers. That would reveal a maiden name for Peter and John’s mother, which I do not have. 

These four men live within blocks of each other for a decade. All of the circumstantial evidence points to a connection. Both Hugh and John had daughters named Sarah Goodwin. I know that John and Peter had a sister named Sarah Goodwin(1850-1925) back in Ireland. 

My test target is the great grandchild of Sarah Goodwin Flaherty(1879-1904). She had three children in 1899, 1901 and 1902 but only her eldest survived infancy. That son had issue and my target is from that line. If we match it will point further to a connection but not definitively link the four Goodwin men as brothers. Margaret Rafferty Moons English(1864-1920) was Hugh's stepdaughter and Martin English was her second husband. That explained why Hugh was buried in the grave he was. 

My uncle and potential cousin did both test and got the ethnicity results. Neither would change their settings and allow a comparison of their DNA to mine and others.