Drogheda Railway Viaduct

nikonuser

I didn't know whether to post this question in my 'India Connection' thread as it is related but decided a new Thread was justified.

An elderly Aunt of mine, who has since died, was adamant that my Great Great Grandfather, John Meroe (multiple variations on the spelling) came from India to Ireland as a labourer to work on the construction of the Drogheda Railway Viaduct in the mid-1850's.

It was designed by John McNeill & the contractor was William Evans. Construction ran form 1853 to 1855.

Has anyone heard of such a thing in their own stories? I have absolutely no proof and don't know whether to start researching the truth or not of this story.

Any thoughts?
J

L1011

The IRRS have detailed but incomplete personnel records for the older railway companies - definitely worth contacting them. You generally have to turn up in person to view though.

nikonuser

I'll get in touch with them. Thanks for that,
J

wexflyer

nikonuser wrote: »

I'll get in touch with them. Thanks for that,
J

It is possible to waste almost unlimited amounts of time on genealogical research that will not lead anywhere. The records held by the IRRS relate to employees of the railway companies - NOT employees of contractors. If your relative worked just on railway construction, I would not expect to find him in the IRRS collections.

As an aside, I am a member of the IRRS. It operates as a voluntary organization, relying on the members who donate their time and effort. Checking these records takes some effort.

wexflyer

You are in luck. As it happens, the next IRRS meeting in Dublin, on September 24th, has a talk on the “History of the Boyne Viaduct at Drogheda”.
You might wish to attend.

nikonuser

wexflyer, this idea re my GG Grandfather working on the viaduct comes form one of my elderly, now departed aunts. I have no idea where the idea originated.
You are aware, from my India Connection thread that John Meroe was in India ca 1855. From his documented time in Dublin from 1864 he is described as a 'dealer' living in various addresses near Christchurch. I have no knowledge of this man living in or near Drogheda. Likewise I have no reference to him working for the Railway Company so if he was a labourer for a contractor?
Has anyone, including yourself, ever heard of labourers being brought in to work on construction projects here?
As you suggest, I do not want to 'waste almost unlimited amounts of time that will not lead anywhere.'
Thanks for the heads up re the Sept 24th talk.

Cheers, J

wexflyer

I can't really comment specifically on your family tradition, but I will make some general comments.
- I personally place far more store in family tradition than most. In my own case, I found it very, very accurate indeed - more accurate even than some written records. This is counter to what you will find stated in most genealogical guides, which typically depreciate such sources. Only you can really decide how much faith to put in your traditions - were they accurate in other things?
- Some traditions probably can't be verified via other means, so you just have to make a decision. For example, my great-grandfather is supposed to have worked on the construction of the (original) Rosslare Harbour. I am absolutely sure this is true, even though I have never found any documentary evidence for this (and don't expect to). You will probably be in the same situation.
- Railway construction was the boom industry of the mid 19th century, so it is not a priori unreasonable that someone in India might return to Ireland in the expectation that a job would be readily available. Only fly in the ointment is that he was later a "dealer".

Anyway, the meeting on September 24th would be a good place to ask if any records have survived for those who worked on the construction of the bridge.

nikonuser

wexflyer, I think, like yourself, that family stories aren't always just made up. They tend to be passed down through generations, bits added, bits taken away certainly but often the core of the story is there.
The story of why my GG Grandfather coming from India to Drogheda may be just as plausible as him coming from India to end up being a 'dealer' in the Liberties.
I haven't discounted it, just, like your GG Grandfather working on the harbour in Rosslare, I have not proof...yet.
I have farmed out the IRRS meeting to a cousin, daughter of the Aunt who had the story. Hoping it may bear out.

Cheers
J

tabbey

Perhaps I am mistaken, but I seem to remember that the first contractor for the Boyne viaduct went bust because he had underestimated the difficulties, associated with the depth of sand or mud to be gone through before reaching solid rock. This structure was reputed to be the longest or largest bridge in these islands at the time. If your ancestor had rare skills or capabilities, eg a tolerance of heights or depths, he might well have been in demand.

nikonuser

tabbey, on a few Birth Certificate records my GG Grandfather is listed as a 'dealer'. Whether he had skills needed at the time would be great to know. The upcoming talk on the Viaduct by the Railway Record Society may shed some light on the subject.
Cheers, J

Waitsian

wexflyer wrote:

I can't really comment specifically on your family tradition, but I will make some general comments. - I personally place far more store in family tradition than most. In my own case, I found it very, very accurate indeed - more accurate even than some written records. This is counter to what you will find stated in most genealogical guides, which typically depreciate such sources. Only you can really decide how much faith to put in your traditions - were they accurate in other things? - Some traditions probably can't be verified via other means, so you just have to make a decision. For example, my great-great-grandfather is supposed to have worked on the construction of the (original) Rosslare Harbour. I am absolutely sure this is true, even though I have never found any documentary evidence for this (and don't expect to).

How can hearsay be more accurate than verified documents? In genealogical terms if you can't prove something, you can't record it as fact. You can though record it as a possibility in your family history but that's a different thing altogether.

How can you be sure your ancestor did as you think he did? Without evidence you can't. It's not verified fact. I'm not saying he didn't, but without proof that information can't be part of that mans genealogical record.

wexflyer

mod9maple wrote: »

How can hearsay be more accurate than verified documents? In genealogical terms if you can't prove something, you can't record it as fact. You can though record it as a possibility in your family history but that's a different thing altogether.

How can you be sure your ancestor did as you think he did? Without evidence you can't. It's not verified fact. I'm not saying he didn't, but without proof that information can't be part of that mans genealogical record.

I entirely disagree. First and most important: family tradition IS "evidence" - a sloinne is legal evidence in Ireland and Scotland. At the same time, many written records were created on the basis of what you dismiss as "hearsay", so how can they be any more accurate or reliable? And as for the documents being "verified" - the heck they were!

I have seen many, many examples of erroneous documentation. How can one know? Well, some are impossible or obviously wrong. Others can be shown to be incorrect by other documentation. In yet other cases, I simply believe my sources to be more accurate than the "record". My sources were all talking about their own family/ancestors. By contrast, the authors of the records were recording what they thought they heard, or thought they knew. Do you realize just how high the error rates were in the "official documentation"?

Some examples:
- Gravestone inscription for a great-uncle of my grandmother, showing date of death in 1857. My grandmother and her sisters always asserted to me that the year given on the tombstone was incorrect. I believed them - why would they have any cause to invent a story about an incorrect date? Just last month I found an entry in the parish deaths register that proved them correct.
- A US cousin of my father has a valid baptismal certificate for his mother, issued in the 1920s. Yet, we know the date given on it to be impossible, given the timing of birth other members of the family. A subsequent search of the parish registers shows no corresponding entry - in fact, there is no entry for her at all. The priest in the 1920s simply invented a date/year, and put it on a cert.
- An example of a record created by someone who "thought he knew", but did not: the civil-registration record for a marriage of a great-grandfather of mine actually contains the details of a second cousin, with the same father's name. The priest obviously "thought he knew", and put down what he knew about the cousin.
- Marriage registration where the wrong sister is shown as the one who got married!
- I seem to recall once seeing what appeared to be a 19th century "gay marriage" (if one were to believe the names).
- Multiple other examples of incorrect parents names and other details on civil registration records.
- The intentionally incorrect records, such as the second marriage record for my bigamist great-great-uncle.
- And on, and on.

To sum up, I think that the current tendency to dismiss the veracity and utility of oral sources is one of the most fundamental mistakes in modern Irish family history research. This attitude is unhistorical, self-defeating, and fundamentally incorrect. If you are honest, I think you will admit that in the end most everyone in Ireland has to rely on oral family history in creating their family trees - the information on Irish BMD records is simply insufficient to prove a unique descent. As for the specific example at issue, I personally have no doubt - none - that my great-grandfather worked on the construction of Rosslare Harbour. My evidence for that is the personal testimony of his daughters, some of whom were alive at the time, and whose other testimony has proved remarkably accurate for events far more remote than that. I have a hard time understanding why the testimony of direct witnesses should be disbelieved, simply because they told me this in person, rather than originate on a scrap of paper.