What’s the biggest skeleton in the closet you’ve discovered?

OU812 · 22-02-2021 7:06pm #1

There’s been a couple in my tree regarding paternity which surprised the hell out of me, also a couple of people in prison and the cause of death of one (murdered). All within the last 120 years

BingCrosbee · 22-02-2021 7:10pm

I’m a Genealogist and I have come across some mighty stuff. Wrote a family history report for a neighbour and hid his paternal great grandfather was a Parish Priest and the mother was his housekeeper. His grandfather is in the Parochial House in the 1901 census as a Priests Boy.

BingCrosbee · 22-02-2021 7:11pm

Also, incest was very common in the Ireland of the nineteenth century.

OU812 · 22-02-2021 7:13pm

BingCrosbee wrote: »

his paternal great grandfather was a Parish Priest and the mother was his housekeeper. His grandfather is in the Parochial House in the 1901 census as a Priests Boy.

Technically true ðŸ˜

L1011 · 22-02-2021 7:56pm

I'm almost certain a reputed father for four siblings (across three pregnancies) doesn't exist and is cover for illegitimacy.

Mother is on the 1911 census as 'widowed' with the surname she gives as the apparent father - the births are later that decade - it is not her maiden name. There is no marriage record for her marrying anyone let alone two people with that surname.

One of the daughters gives a different maiden name as an "or" at her wedding which has thrown me, and not been any use so far in tracing anything.

Everyone who'd know is dead.

looksee · 22-02-2021 8:09pm

My paternal grandmother apparently lived near me as I was a young child, but I have no recollection of meeting her. She was apparently a young woman of a large, well to do family of daughters who ran away with the gardener and ended up living in a council house in a pretty grim bit of a northern (England) mining village. That would have been in the early 1900s. Their eldest daughter (my aunt) was, apparently, illegitimate, again I never met her. My dad had nothing to do with his older siblings, though I did know three of his younger brothers. I hadn't a clue about any of this till the last couple of decades.

shar01 · 22-02-2021 8:25pm

Based on DNA matches, the man who fathered my grandmother had children with at least three other woman (excluding his wife).

8valve · 22-02-2021 8:26pm

My great grandfather was the illegitimate child of the local British landlord, who seemingly 'had his way' with the servant girls in his house on a regular basis. He was raised by a local family whose surname he was given.

I had a granduncle who emigrated to New York in the 1920s, reportedly became a part of the Irish organised crime mob there, and met his end badly, at the hands of the rival Italian mafia. To hide the shame of his criminality, it was stated that he died from 'the drink'.

Garlinge · 22-02-2021 10:41pm

Yes quite a few skeletons, problem is do you 'air' them or let them rest? Some are corroborated by records and other are just stories handed down generations that explain some odd circumstances.

pinkypinky · 23-02-2021 12:01am

BingCrosbee wrote: »

I’m a Genealogist and I have come across some mighty stuff. Wrote a family history report for a neighbour and hid his paternal great grandfather was a Parish Priest and the mother was his housekeeper. His grandfather is in the Parochial House in the 1901 census as a Priests Boy.

You withheld information from your client?

p15574 · 23-02-2021 9:56am

8valve wrote: »

I had a granduncle who emigrated to New York in the 1920s, reportedly became a part of the Irish organised crime mob there, and met his end badly, at the hands of the rival Italian mafia. To hide the shame of his criminality, it was stated that he died from 'the drink'.

In my wife's family, it was the reverse - they'd emigrated to New York, and there was a family story was that he'd died at the hands of the mafia - but when I got the death cert it was just 'the drink'.

There was also a direct ancestor of hers who was dragged from his bed and murdered by a mob during the Land Wars - I think he was collecting rents, unfortunately.

In my own, there was a (non-direct, thankfully) ancestor who seems to have been jailed for taking advantage of a neighbouring young lady.

Plus, my and my mother's DNA tests have shown a shockingly high percentage of Eastern European DNA, instead of the expected 100% Irish, so I suspect a travelling circus or something visited the area about 100 years ago...this story remains to be discovered.

Garlinge · 23-02-2021 1:17pm

I would give some credit to family lore about mafia, the 'drink' might have been a convenient cause of death. I had a gr gran uncle who emigrated to USA and family were told he was murdered on a train. I was never able to pin down a record to fit but there was a lot of gang rivalry on the trains of the day, or it could simply have been a robbery. My grandfather wrote about his father getting told and correspondence ensuing. They were told he left no effects and just enough money to bury him. In the same family the story was they had to flee Wexford when implicated in a fatal incident with landlord's agent!

crossman47 · 23-02-2021 1:26pm

Family lore has it that my great great grand father was sent to Van Diemens land for non payment of tithes and that he fathered my great grand father on his return. However, i could find no evidence.

KildareFan · 23-02-2021 2:21pm

Great great grandfather jailed for stealing two pairs of boots in the 1806s - that was a come down as he started with his own business, having a shop at one stage ... I think the drink done him in.
One of his sons working as a jeweller, drank cyanide & died, and made a big splash in the newspapers.
One of his daughters married a clerk in the Freeman's journal, had 16 children, ended up in prison a couple of times for assault and drunkenness, her two youngest children were taken away from her and sent off to Canada; she fell down stairs and fractured her skull & died, again making a splash in the papers & again drink was involved.
My great grandmother was fined for not sending her children to school.
Various ancestors were fined for allowing their pigs/horses/goats/dogs to wander on the king/queen's highway
My da was fined for having defective lights on his Ford Prefect. He was never allowed to live it down!

Captain Havoc · 23-02-2021 3:17pm

Not really a skeleton, I didn't discover it, my ma told me but going back over a hundred years ago my great-great-grandfather give or take a generation or two came from a landed protestant house in Kilkenny. He married a catholic, which was frowned upon by the family. The next bit is sketchy, his father was shot in a hunting accident and while on his deathbed the local vicar did up a new will making sure my great-great-grandfather was omitted from any inheritance.

What I think I may have found online is that the split may in fact have come about from the marriage of my female ancestor from another county, to a divorcee from the locality here who later died, and then she married my big house ancestor. She may have been divorced herself also.

By today's standard it's pretty mundane.

Mick Tator · 23-02-2021 10:56pm

BingCrosbee wrote: »

Also, incest was very common in the Ireland of the nineteenth century.

Where did you get that from? Source?
I have never come across a source that shows incest to have been common in the 19thC; quite the reverse actually, with most foreigners commenting on the chastity and modesty of Irish girls (e.g. Prince von Puckler-Muskau
"The natural grace of the Irish peasant-women, who are often truly beautiful, is as surprising as their dress, or rather their want of dress; ……but you would fall into a great error if you inferred from that, any levity or looseness of conduct. The women of this class in Ireland are, almost universally, extremely chaste, and still more disinterested."

Mick Tator · 23-02-2021 11:00pm

Captain Havoc wrote: »

Not really a skeleton, I didn't discover it, my ma told me but going back over a hundred years ago my great-great-grandfather give or take a generation or two came from a landed protestant house in Kilkenny. He married a catholic, which was frowned upon by the family. The next bit is sketchy, his father was shot in a hunting accident and while on his deathbed the local vicar did up a new will making sure my great-great-grandfather was omitted from any inheritance.

What I think I may have found online is that the split may in fact have come about from the marriage of my female ancestor from another county, to a divorcee from the locality here who later died, and then she married my big house ancestor. She may have been divorced herself also.

By today's standard it's pretty mundane.

People in the 1800’s did not get divorced. Up until the Matrimonial Causes Act of 1857 it took an Act of Parliament to obtain one, which precluded almost everyone. After that date proceedings transferred from Parliament to a Court of law, allowing commoners to divorce, but it still was extremely expensive, beyond the reach of most, socially unacceptable and as a result extremely uncommon.

If he married a Catholic, the will would have been changed almost immediately; why chance waiting for the deathbed when life expectancy was so short in the 1800's?

Mick Tator · 23-02-2021 11:01pm

pinkypinky wrote: »

You withheld information from your client?

I'd be amazed if that poster were a genealogist!

Mick Tator · 24-02-2021 12:04am

crossman47 wrote: »

Family lore has it that my great great grand father was sent to Van Diemens land for non payment of tithes and that he fathered my great grand father on his return. However, i could find no evidence.

Nobody ever was transported for nonpayment of tithes. (Goods were distrained and sold, hence the Tithe Wars.) The last ship to reach Van Dieman’s land was in 1853, the records (including offence) are there, so if true you will find your ancestor and his crime. Very few had the cash or inclination for a return voyage, it often took the best part of six months.

srmf5 · 24-02-2021 1:48am

Probably the biggest confirmed skeleton is a previously unknown second cousin of my dad's. Not completely confirmed but it appears that my great grandmother's wealthy brother had a child outside his marriage. He never had any children with his own wife. I haven't confirmed this one and I probably never will but a great uncle or a cousin of my dad had a child who we never knew of. The child had believed incorrectly through rumours that the father was a priest. All through DNA tests.

I found out that my great grandparents only married two months before the birth of their first child. I found ancestors in the petty court records but mostly for stuff that isn't very dramatic like animals trespassing, animals killed by dogs, unpaid dog licence, not paying money owed, inefficient windscreen wipers, no light on vehicle, etc. Assault, threatening language and abuse sounds dramatic but there are no details surrounding it for most. My 3x great grandfather had his leg broken in an assault. My 2x great grandfather spent 14 days of hard labour in prison for assault. Not a skeleton in the closet but my 2x great grandfather was assaulted and robbed. His father brought a man to court for burying a corpse in his private burial ground (there's the skeleton!). My 1st cousin 3x removed was summoned to court for dangerous driving in an uninsured car. I learned that my great uncle died of strychnine poisoning. My great grandfather was sued for possession of someone's money but it was dismissed. My great grandfather's sister was left most of a millionaire's fortune without his knowledge that she was secretly married. I learned that my great grandmother's brother-in-law died aged 53 in a mental hospital from melancholic exhaustion which was sad to read. They gave him a lovely obituary.

My great grandfather sued a neighbour for the trespass of sheep and assault. He confronted the family and they told him to clear away to hell, called him a bloody w---- from the bogs, etc. and two men struck him with sticks and was hit on the side of the head according to his wife. He was originally from an area around a half hour drive away. One of the brothers was fined for trespass, assault and expenses. In another case, relating to my great grandfather getting back £50 he lent to his cousin, it was mentioned that the sister of the defendant used to go to my great grandfather's house occasionaly. She met him one night and, being under the influence, he struck her when advising him to go home so they were not friendly. She often did washing for his dad since there was no woman in the house since his mother died when he was 6. His sister died when he was 12 and 7/8 of his brothers had died by the time he was 11 with the last brother also dying young. I don't think that I'll ever tell my mum about that since my mum never knew him and he died in an accident when my granny was 16. My mum only ever heard good things about him and, even then, it wasn't much since granny got upset when talking about her parents since both died in accidents.

My 3x great grandmother and 3 of her children were evicted from their home under an order made in an equity suit instituted against her son by the Ulster Bank. They were arrested for taking forcible possession of their home. The farm was purchased at public auction held by order of the Court. The solicitor for the family set up a question of title to the lands on behalf of the mother and claimed to have a right to the lands. The Judge charged the jury, telling them that the rights of the parties were ascertained by the court and that the prisoners had no right to take forcible possession and that the orders of the Court must be obeyed. The jury found them not guilty after half an hour consideration. A newspaper in the US noted my 3x great grandmother's son's connection and services in the cause of Irish Nationality. Her son was sent to prison for conspiracy to defraud in 1898, threatening language in 1899, obtaining money under false pretences in 1899.

My grandfather's brother was at court for false pretences with intent to defraud obtain a cow by means of a worthless cheque. My great grandfather's brother was brought to court for having 5 people in his pub at 12:35am. He had 2 men on his premises another time, 4 another time, 6 another time. Another time, whiskey was sent to the public analyst and there was an excess of eight point three seven of water. He wasn't accused of tampering the whiskey but put it down to moisture of utensils being the cause and he claimed that he did not notice on the bottle was written in Irish that the spirit was 30 underproof. A girl was paid £7 in damages for being poisoned by a pork pie. However, the Justice said that he would like it clearly understood that there was no reflection on the pub owner who had exercised all reasonable care and had not been guilty of negligence. My 3x great grandfather was charged for selling drink after 21:00.

My grandfather's first cousin was on hunger strike in Newbridge and was reported to be in a dying condition in 1923. He was a First Lieutenant of the IRB. He drilled, raided for arms, took part in the burning of 3 barracks, an attack on a dispensary and the burning of a courthouse. He was trained in the use of a machine gun. He attended training camps and learned to make bombs. He mined a barracks. He emigrated to the US. His brother was also an officer in the IRB. Their father had taken part in the Fenian Rising, was excommunicated and on the run for 3 years according to the family.

24-02-2021 1:57am

I found out my great grandfather assaulted a constable in Fermanagh, spent time in Sligo prison and then moved to Cork after release, slightly changing the spelling of his surname.

I'd love to know the full story there.

srmf5 · 24-02-2021 2:03am

Deleted User wrote: »

I found out my great grandfather assaulted a constable in Fermanagh, spent time in Sligo prison and then moved to Cork after release, slightly changing the spelling of his surname.

I'd love to know the full story there.

I'm the same with those cases. I'd love to know the context. Did he have a reason for his anger or was he just under the influence, etc.? It would definitely be interesting to know more in those cases.

srmf5 · 24-02-2021 2:05am

Mick Tator wrote: »

Where did you get that from? Source?
I have never come across a source that shows incest to have been common in the 19thC; quite the reverse actually, with most foreigners commenting on the chastity and modesty of Irish girls (e.g. Prince von Puckler-Muskau
"The natural grace of the Irish peasant-women, who are often truly beautiful, is as surprising as their dress, or rather their want of dress; ……but you would fall into a great error if you inferred from that, any levity or looseness of conduct. The women of this class in Ireland are, almost universally, extremely chaste, and still more disinterested."

I suppose that it depends what's considered incest by the poster. It could be just referring to people who were 3rd cousins, etc.

Nqp15hhu · 24-02-2021 2:09am

Great Uncle is a half brother of my granny.

BingCrosbee · 24-02-2021 2:18am

pinkypinky wrote: »

You withheld information from your client?

No, I gave him all of the info. I found

gozunda · 24-02-2021 2:37am

8valve wrote: »

My great grandfather was the illegitimate child of the local British landlord, who seemingly 'had his way' with the servant girls in his house on a regular basis. He was raised by a local family whose surname he was given.

I had a uncle who emigrated to New York in the 1920s, reportedly became a part of the Irish organised crime mob there, and met his end badly, at the hands of the rival Italian mafia. To hide the shame of his criminality, it was stated that he died from 'the drink'.

Is that you dev?

A great grand uncle whose father owned a number of public houses left for the US the early 1900's. Got on well and became a US citizen and married, worked for the US Navy and returned to Ireland after his father had died and his brother lost the vinters licences due to ill feeling with a local RIC Sargent. Shortly after his mother tragically fell to her death from a window. His brother left for England leaving his wife and young children behind, never to return. The brother who had returned from the US - took over the running of the business but sadly died within a few short years - leaving his widow to return to the US alone. Found all this out by checking records, newspaper reports and finding some distant relatives on the Internet!

pinkypinky · 24-02-2021 11:17am

BingCrosbee wrote: »

No, I gave him all of the info. I found

In your first post you said you hid the info? If was a typo,you can edit your post.

Mick Tator · 24-02-2021 12:13pm

srmf5 wrote: »

I suppose that it depends what's considered incest by the poster. It could be just referring to people who were 3rd cousins, etc.

I somehow doubt that. Cousins at that remove are very distant for the word ‘incest’ to be used. Second cousins share about 3% of DNA, it drops to less than 1% for third and about 0.25% for fourth cousins.

edit
What is the point of a a skeleton in the closet? Those stories often have an element of truth. Surely any half-serious genealogist would try to ascertain the facts? What is the point of perpetuating a myth?
If you cannot get rid of the family skeleton you may as well make it dance. (GBShaw)

Captain Havoc · 24-02-2021 3:22pm

Mick Tator wrote: »

People in the 1800’s did not get divorced. Up until the Matrimonial Causes Act of 1857 it took an Act of Parliament to obtain one, which precluded almost everyone. After that date proceedings transferred from Parliament to a Court of law, allowing commoners to divorce, but it still was extremely expensive, beyond the reach of most, socially unacceptable and as a result extremely uncommon.

If he married a Catholic, the will would have been changed almost immediately; why chance waiting for the deathbed when life expectancy was so short in the 1800's?

No idea, it was my mum who told me this story, it's obviously been told down to her. I was reading on the history of the smaller house (which is now a B&B) where my great-grandmother came from that it belonged to a local family. My ancestor (not from the big house) married into that family to a divorcee and later married my other ancestor (from the big house).

Hermy · 24-02-2021 4:54pm

Mick Tator wrote: »

What is the point of a a skeleton in the closet? Those stories often have an element of truth. Surely any half-serious genealogist would try to ascertain the facts? What is the point of perpetuating a myth?
If you cannot get rid of the family skeleton you may as well make it dance. (GBShaw)

I suppose for some people researching a family tree is a sentimental journey and the more one indulges in sentiment the less one is inclined to allow the facts get in the way of that journey.

As I get older I have less and less time for sentiment and especially so in genealogy. There are no heroes and villains in my tree - just lots and lots of dead people who are complete strangers to me despite their apparent familiarity.

However, I do think there is great merit in shining light on these so-called skeletons in the closet, either dispelling a myth or confirming a story that's been handed down.

As to my own research I have no significant skeletons to speak of, though in the case of one relative whom I had always been told had died young due to cancer, her death record gives cause of death as abortion which I'm not sure what to make of.

And while I write this it has just occurred to me that I myself, being an adoptee, am somebody else's skeleton in the closet!

srmf5 · 24-02-2021 7:37pm

Mick Tator wrote: »

I somehow doubt that. Cousins at that remove are very distant for the word ‘incest’ to be used. Second cousins share about 3% of DNA, it drops to less than 1% for third and about 0.25% for fourth cousins.

edit
What is the point of a a skeleton in the closet? Those stories often have an element of truth. Surely any half-serious genealogist would try to ascertain the facts? What is the point of perpetuating a myth?
If you cannot get rid of the family skeleton you may as well make it dance. (GBShaw)

You'd be surprised how disgusted people can get by finding out that a couple are/were third cousins, etc. Some people tend to use the term inbred quite loosely, particularly younger people. My own great grandparents were 2nd cousins and my aunt married her third cousin. I remember telling a friend that my great grandparents were 2nd cousins and she called me inbred. It wasn't in a malicious way but it also wasn't completely in a joking manner. I learned to keep it to myself after that. I personally wouldn't marry a known cousin but I wouldn't be judgemental about it either. However, it could easily happen that I'd unknowingly marry a distant relative if I married someone from the area where I was born. I've seen so many familiar names among matches who I had never known I was related to. I was actually surprised that Mum and Dad didn't end up matching each other when I got their DNA results.

srmf5 · 24-02-2021 7:41pm

pinkypinky wrote: »

In your first post you said you hid the info? If was a typo,you can edit your post.

I think that the poster might have meant that the client requested the information to be excluded from the report. I could be wrong though.

Mick Tator · 25-02-2021 12:55am

srmf5 wrote: »

You'd be surprised how disgusted people can get by finding out that a couple are/were third cousins, etc. Some people tend to use the term inbred quite loosely, particularly younger people. My own great grandparents were 2nd cousins and my aunt married her third cousin. I remember telling a friend that my great grandparents were 2nd cousins and she called me inbred. It wasn't in a malicious way but it also wasn't completely in a joking manner. I learned to keep it to myself after that. I personally wouldn't marry a known cousin but I wouldn't be judgemental about it either. However, it could easily happen that I'd unknowingly marry a distant relative if I married someone from the area where I was born. I've seen so many familiar names among matches who I had never known I was related to. I was actually surprised that Mum and Dad didn't end up matching each other when I got their DNA results.

I wouldn't bother with people like that and certainly would not class them as friends. The marital pool in rural Ireland was very small before mechanised transport and a cash economy. Look at any village and even today you will find the butcher's son marrying the baker's daughter.

Mick Tator · 25-02-2021 12:57am

Hermy wrote: »

I suppose for some people researching a family tree is a sentimental journey and the more one indulges in sentiment the less one is inclined to allow the facts get in the way of that journey.

As I get older I have less and less time for sentiment and especially so in genealogy. There are no heroes and villains in my tree - just lots and lots of dead people who are complete strangers to me despite their apparent familiarity.

However, I do think there is great merit in shining light on these so-called skeletons in the closet, either dispelling a myth or confirming a story that's been handed down.

As to my own research I have no significant skeletons to speak of, though in the case of one relative whom I had always been told had died young due to cancer, her death record gives cause of death as abortion which I'm not sure what to make of.

And while I write this it has just occurred to me that I myself, being an adoptee, am somebody else's skeleton in the closet!

Great post Hermy but I disagree with your concluding sentence. Thankfully that day is over.

spurious · 25-02-2021 10:05am

Deleted User wrote: »

I found out my great grandfather assaulted a constable in Fermanagh, spent time in Sligo prison and then moved to Cork after release, slightly changing the spelling of his surname.

I'd love to know the full story there.

The assault may have made the papers, so you might be able to find a mention.

Balmed Out · 25-02-2021 10:42am

There are things I discovered as being new to me but known to older generation.
Two gran aunts, one had a child with the others husband.
A great grand uncle who died after being stabbed during a new york bar fight.
My grand father had an older half brother who had a disagreement with his father never to be seen again. Years and years later a nun from the area returned home and called in to tell the family she had met him at some point in south africa. I haven't been able to find records of him.
I have a distant relative with two hollywood stars in the hollywood walk of fame
My maternal grandparents refused to talk about the war of independence etc and I found my grand father had been a baby when his father passed away from pneumonia. His wife tried to get a military pension as he had been sleeping rough with the ira but was turned down as could have got sick regardless.
Ive gone back to about 1800 on all lines but for the main part I just know birth death and marriage info unfortunately. Other than the IRA link everything was known already by aunts or parents.

OU812 · 25-02-2021 11:50am

Balmed Out wrote: »

I have a distant relative with two hollywood stars in the hollywood walk of fame.

Oh come on!!! You can’t just casually drop that into the thread and give more detail.

Two stars means double threat (possibly a third they went recognised for).

What is it they have them for and who is it?

paumurp · 25-02-2021 1:39pm

One paternity issue, but my favourite, which I don't know if it counts as a skeleton as such, but my father's uncle was technically 'an escaped lunatic'. He escaped from what was then called the National Lunatic Asylum in Dundrum in 1926, with some help from the IRA.

We generally like to refer to him as mad uncle Jack now.

Balmed Out · 25-02-2021 3:58pm

OU812 wrote: »

Oh come on!!! You can’t just casually drop that into the thread and give more detail.

Two stars means double threat (possibly a third they went recognised for).

What is it they have them for and who is it?

Not that famous just got one for tv work and another for movies, barry sullivan.

KildareFan · 25-02-2021 4:07pm

2nd cousin once removed one of the stars of Ballykissangel; another 2nd cousin played a Sergeant Callan in M.A.S.H......

paddysdream · 26-02-2021 2:26pm

Now I feel disappointed as have found nothing like this at all in my tree.
Kinda boring from what I have seen ie born, married,had loads of children many of whom died at or shortly after birth ,died and were buried all within maybe a mile or less.

Only things that seems different to nowadays is the disparity in age at marriage.Farmers seemed to be 40 plus a lot of times whilst their wives were rarely over 30 at marriage.
Fair few 5 month pregnancies as well .
This contrasts with other sides of my tree where urban labouring couples seemed to marry in their late teens or early 20's.
Also the speed of remarrying ie wife dies and widower married again within a year or two,in many cases to a sister, cousin ,niece etc of his previous wife .
Assume this was to help rear the large families of the time .
Couple of other things that stand out as different to present times include the amount of females living at home with no occupation at marriage,the amount of "boarded out" children and the custom of people,mainly women ,moving in with an elderly and/or unmarried relative at a young age to help out/work with on the farm or business.

Afraid none of the above qualifies as a "skeleton" or came as any surprise but is interesting in its own way.
Trying to imagine the elderly relative you either remembered or have perhaps just seen photo's of as a young child/adult having all the same issues etc that people still have today along with a few that thankfully have disappeared is for me a most interesting part of it all .

Wyldwood · 26-02-2021 8:35pm

The skeletons in my cupboard are in Australia.

A great-granduncle, who was an engineer went to Melbourne in the late 1800s to help with the construction of the rail system. His grandson was convicted for embezzlement in the 1940s. He worked for the State Insurance Office and faked compensation documents in order to pocket the money. The amount totaled £1,165 which was a significant amount back then. He was imprisoned for 4 years with hard labour. He had a wife and three children at the time and had apparently inherited a large sum of money and lived the good life until it ran out. He then started stealing from his employer to fund his lavish lifestyle until he got caught.

An unmarried grandaunt emigrated to Oz and had a son, who she raised as her nephew, who she claimed was the son of her brother back in Ireland. There are numerous newspaper reports of his graduation from medical school, his engagement and marriage to a socialite. All the reports refer to him as the son of X (her brother) from Cork and giving a contorted version of the grandaunt's homeplace address. The son never knew she was his mother and the whole convoluted story only emerged after her granddaughter did a DNA test.

srmf5 · 26-02-2021 9:21pm

Mick Tator wrote: »

I wouldn't bother with people like that and certainly would not class them as friends. The marital pool in rural Ireland was very small before mechanised transport and a cash economy. Look at any village and even today you will find the butcher's son marrying the baker's daughter.

Well she's not my friend anymore. We were only about 15 at the time. That's why I mentioned young people being more likely to be surprised at it since they don't seem to realise how common it was back in the day in a rural area. I grew up in a small town that I went home to pretty much every weekend (pre-pandemic) so I know all about it.

I was actually surprised when I first started researching that my grandmother and two of my greatgrandmothers were in their 30s when they married. It's something that was brought up in the people living longer thread. However, I wouldn't have known any of my great grandparents even if they all lived to 100. I only knew two of my grandparents with one dying before I was born and the other a year after I was born. It's still better than my mum who had one grandparent die when she was aged 2 and the other 3 before she was born. Previous generations in my family never knew their great grandparents either so it's a phenomenon that will be missed in my family since we never experienced it.

Dad was 33 when he married Mum aged 28.
Grandfather 31 married grandmother aged 31 in 1956.
Grandfather 37 married grandmother aged 24 in 1952.

Great grandfather aged 25 married great grandmother aged 31 in 1923.
Great grandfather aged 32 married great grandmother aged 20 in 1911.
Great grandfather aged 33 married great grandmother aged 26 in 1914.
Great grandfather aged 35 married great grandmother aged 37 in 1923.

paddysdream · 26-02-2021 10:28pm

srmf5 wrote: »

Well she's not my friend anymore. We were only about 15 at the time. That's why I mentioned young people being more likely to be surprised at it since they don't seem to realise how common it was back in the day in a rural area. I grew up in a small town that I went home to pretty much every weekend (pre-pandemic) so I know all about it.

I was actually surprised when I first started researching that my grandmother and two of my greatgrandmothers were in their 30s when they married. It's something that was brought up in the people living longer thread. However, I wouldn't have known any of my great grandparents even if they all lived to 100. I only knew two of my grandparents with one dying before I was born and the other a year after I was born. It's still better than my mum who had one grandparent die when she was aged 2 and the other 3 before she was born. Previous generations in my family never knew their great grandparents either so it's a phenomenon that will be missed in my family since we never experienced it.

Dad was 33 when he married Mum aged 28.
Grandfather 31 married grandmother aged 31 in 1956.
Grandfather 37 married grandmother aged 24 in 1952.

Great grandfather aged 25 married great grandmother aged 31 in 1923.
Great grandfather aged 32 married great grandmother aged 20 in 1911.
Great grandfather aged 33 married great grandmother aged 26 in 1914.
Great grandfather aged 35 married great grandmother aged 37 in 1923.

Parents were 36 and 24 on marriage.
Grandfather 44 grandmother 39 in 1928
Grandfather 45 grandmother 28 in 1937

Great grandfather 25 great grandmother 27 in 1873
Great grandfather 30 great grandmother 27 in 1872
Great grandfather 42 great grandmother 22 in 1882
Great grandfather 24 great grandmother 24 in 1902

On my mothers side she has multiple people in her tree related 2 ways to her and a fair few related on 3 different lines.A real web of inter marriage over 2/3/4 generations and all with the most common names in the area.

Mick Tator · 27-02-2021 1:05am

Perhaps I am too analytical at times, but IMO many of the posts in this thread are not ‘skeletons’ and are simple family background stories. Most could be put to rest (or ‘the test’) by a simple bit of research in for e.g. newspaper archives. The fact that one of my second great-grandfathers lost twenty-odd of his sheep to marauding dogs is not a skeleton but it does demonstrate that on the introduction (1865) of the dog licence large numbers of dogs were turned loose by owners rather than pay the two shillings and sixpence licence fee. Another of my great-grandfathers age nine found a dead body on the road near their farm – a murder- and he was, despite his age, cross-examined in court as a witness. Shocking in today’s terms, but not a skeleton.

Hermy wrote: »

And while I write this it has just occurred to me that I myself, being an adoptee, am somebody else's skeleton in the closet!

To me the expression ‘a skeleton in the cupboard’ is a pejorative term relating to an undisclosed fact about someone which, if revealed, would damage the perception/standing of that person in the community. In no way does or could it relate to an adoptee.

Events must be seen in the context of the day – up to about 1970 an unmarried mother was perceived by the State, her family, the Churches and society at large as a ‘fallen woman’ and at best an embarrassment or at worst a ‘disgrace to the family’. (‘Fallen’ even derives from ‘fallen from the grace of god’.) Such a pregnancy would have an impact on the economic future of the family (“Is he suitable for that promotion, after all, he let his young daughter get pregnant!”) She would be a social outcast and some of that opprobrium would extend to her family and its standing in the community. Very few families would have the financial independence to provide support or the courage as it would be seen as condoning the pregnancy. That is the way it was, whether we like it or not. On her own the girl’s future would be fraught with difficulty, her ability to obtain a job unrealistic and to hold it unfeasible, her financial independence impossible, her marital prospects negligible, her morals forever questioned and her very existence forever open to snide remarks. The father invariably walked free and frequently denied involvement; paternity tests were unknown until the late 1980’s. Should he contest paternity it was an uphill battle for the mother to prove it / obtain maintenance, as she started from a negative position of ‘questionable morals’. That is why a move to a mother and baby home and adoption was seen as a ‘way out. The State and the families simply outsourced what they viewed as a solution to the Churches, who in turn took on the task (their traditional role being reforming ‘sinners’) and made money from it. The rights of the unborn child were not even an item for consideration, let alone discussion, at that time. Everyone in society was implicated and condoned the ‘status quo’.

Today, for those who have such a child in their past, the situation is very complex, emotive and any perceived ‘skeleton’ has assumed quite a different character. They are in what many would perceive as a ‘no win’ situation. Most have since married and have families of their own; some fathers might not even be aware of the child; most (probably?) unmarried parents have not told their spouses and/or children of the past childbirth. Bringing out the topic now would be viewed negatively by almost all – the spouse because by keeping the pre-marital child hidden it was a breach of trust/honesty in the marriage, the children of the marriage would view it the same or worse because they would be more openminded and view the concealment as unjust. There also are serious legal implications for the parent since the Inheritance Acts confer rights to a child born outside a marriage who now would share the estate on an equal footing with other siblings.

There is more for the parent to lose financially & societally than to gain in searching for a past child. Add a layer of case law, new Acts such as that covering GDPR, several reports (e.g. by Incorp. Law Society) on what should/should not be done and the deep complexity of the legal background is clear. Is it a skeleton in their cupboard? Perhaps, but not one linked to having a child outside marriage, but one as a result of hiding the fact and ignoring any attempt to search now that society’s view is changing.

From what I have read, (and I'm no expert) very few (other than the adopted child) want to delve into the topic. Most such adoptees now are aged over fifty and over time the problem will disappear. Unjust as it is to the adoptee, it’s another ‘Irish solution’.

byhookorbycrook · 27-02-2021 1:12am

Adopted person here. Both my birth parents are dead but I still can’t get my file fromEngland ( they say they don’t have it ) and TUSLA hiding behind GDPR.
Despite officialdom, I found both my birth parents families .It transpires that I have a half sister , 3 weeks older than I am ! She was also placed for adoption.
My birth father’s family thought he died childless and we’re delighted when my sister found them . They were gobsmacked a few months after when I popped up .

alibab · 27-02-2021 9:31am

Mick Tator wrote: »

Perhaps I am too analytical at times, but IMO many of the posts in this thread are not ‘skeletons’ and are simple family background stories. Most could be put to rest (or ‘the test’) by a simple bit of research in for e.g. newspaper archives. The fact that one of my second great-grandfathers lost twenty-odd of his sheep to marauding dogs is not a skeleton but it does demonstrate that on the introduction (1865) of the dog licence large numbers of dogs were turned loose by owners rather than pay the two shillings and sixpence licence fee. Another of my great-grandfathers age nine found a dead body on the road near their farm – a murder- and he was, despite his age, cross-examined in court as a witness. Shocking in today’s terms, but not a skeleton.

To me the expression ‘a skeleton in the cupboard’ is a pejorative term relating to an undisclosed fact about someone which, if revealed, would damage the perception/standing of that person in the community. In no way does or could it relate to an adoptee.

Events must be seen in the context of the day – up to about 1970 an unmarried mother was perceived by the State, her family, the Churches and society at large as a ‘fallen woman’ and at best an embarrassment or at worst a ‘disgrace to the family’. (‘Fallen’ even derives from ‘fallen from the grace of god’.) Such a pregnancy would have an impact on the economic future of the family (“Is he suitable for that promotion, after all, he let his young daughter get pregnant!”) She would be a social outcast and some of that opprobrium would extend to her family and its standing in the community. Very few families would have the financial independence to provide support or the courage as it would be seen as condoning the pregnancy. That is the way it was, whether we like it or not. On her own the girl’s future would be fraught with difficulty, her ability to obtain a job unrealistic and to hold it unfeasible, her financial independence impossible, her marital prospects negligible, her morals forever questioned and her very existence forever open to snide remarks. The father invariably walked free and frequently denied involvement; paternity tests were unknown until the late 1980’s. Should he contest paternity it was an uphill battle for the mother to prove it / obtain maintenance, as she started from a negative position of ‘questionable morals’. That is why a move to a mother and baby home and adoption was seen as a ‘way out. The State and the families simply outsourced what they viewed as a solution to the Churches, who in turn took on the task (their traditional role being reforming ‘sinners’) and made money from it. The rights of the unborn child were not even an item for consideration, let alone discussion, at that time. Everyone in society was implicated and condoned the ‘status quo’.

Today, for those who have such a child in their past, the situation is very complex, emotive and any perceived ‘skeleton’ has assumed quite a different character. They are in what many would perceive as a ‘no win’ situation. Most have since married and have families of their own; some fathers might not even be aware of the child; most (probably?) unmarried parents have not told their spouses and/or children of the past childbirth. Bringing out the topic now would be viewed negatively by almost all – the spouse because by keeping the pre-marital child hidden it was a breach of trust/honesty in the marriage, the children of the marriage would view it the same or worse because they would be more openminded and view the concealment as unjust. There also are serious legal implications for the parent since the Inheritance Acts confer rights to a child born outside a marriage who now would share the estate on an equal footing with other siblings.

There is more for the parent to lose financially & societally than to gain in searching for a past child. Add a layer of case law, new Acts such as that covering GDPR, several reports (e.g. by Incorp. Law Society) on what should/should not be done and the deep complexity of the legal background is clear. Is it a skeleton in their cupboard? Perhaps, but not one linked to having a child outside marriage, but one as a result of hiding the fact and ignoring any attempt to search now that society’s view is changing.

From what I have read, (and I'm no expert) very few (other than the adopted child) want to delve into the topic. Most such adoptees now are aged over fifty and over time the problem will disappear. Unjust as it is to the adoptee, it’s another ‘Irish solution’.

Just to clear this up once a child is adopted the have not legal right to inheritance from original Birth mother or father . This is not a factor and won’t be .

I am adopted I know exactly where my birth mother lives that I have 2 half siblings and that my birth mother has never told her husband regarding me . I looked for medical info etc and had no interest in getting to know her . She would not even give me medical history. Social worker at the time when through priest .

I have since done dna and have identified down to parish , names etc but will never make contact unless someone contacts me .

I am definitely there skeleton.

Hermy · 27-02-2021 11:20am

Mick Tator wrote: »

Perhaps I am too analytical at times, but IMO many of the posts in this thread are not ‘skeletons’ and are simple family background stories. Most could be put to rest (or ‘the test’) by a simple bit of research in for e.g. newspaper archives. The fact that one of my second great-grandfathers lost twenty-odd of his sheep to marauding dogs is not a skeleton but it does demonstrate that on the introduction (1865) of the dog licence large numbers of dogs were turned loose by owners rather than pay the two shillings and sixpence licence fee. Another of my great-grandfathers age nine found a dead body on the road near their farm – a murder- and he was, despite his age, cross-examined in court as a witness. Shocking in today’s terms, but not a skeleton.

To me the expression ‘a skeleton in the cupboard’ is a pejorative term relating to an undisclosed fact about someone which, if revealed, would damage the perception/standing of that person in the community. In no way does or could it relate to an adoptee.

Events must be seen in the context of the day – up to about 1970 an unmarried mother was perceived by the State, her family, the Churches and society at large as a ‘fallen woman’ and at best an embarrassment or at worst a ‘disgrace to the family’. (‘Fallen’ even derives from ‘fallen from the grace of god’.) Such a pregnancy would have an impact on the economic future of the family (“Is he suitable for that promotion, after all, he let his young daughter get pregnant!”) She would be a social outcast and some of that opprobrium would extend to her family and its standing in the community. Very few families would have the financial independence to provide support or the courage as it would be seen as condoning the pregnancy. That is the way it was, whether we like it or not. On her own the girl’s future would be fraught with difficulty, her ability to obtain a job unrealistic and to hold it unfeasible, her financial independence impossible, her marital prospects negligible, her morals forever questioned and her very existence forever open to snide remarks. The father invariably walked free and frequently denied involvement; paternity tests were unknown until the late 1980’s. Should he contest paternity it was an uphill battle for the mother to prove it / obtain maintenance, as she started from a negative position of ‘questionable morals’. That is why a move to a mother and baby home and adoption was seen as a ‘way out. The State and the families simply outsourced what they viewed as a solution to the Churches, who in turn took on the task (their traditional role being reforming ‘sinners’) and made money from it. The rights of the unborn child were not even an item for consideration, let alone discussion, at that time. Everyone in society was implicated and condoned the ‘status quo’.

Today, for those who have such a child in their past, the situation is very complex, emotive and any perceived ‘skeleton’ has assumed quite a different character. They are in what many would perceive as a ‘no win’ situation. Most have since married and have families of their own; some fathers might not even be aware of the child; most (probably?) unmarried parents have not told their spouses and/or children of the past childbirth. Bringing out the topic now would be viewed negatively by almost all – the spouse because by keeping the pre-marital child hidden it was a breach of trust/honesty in the marriage, the children of the marriage would view it the same or worse because they would be more openminded and view the concealment as unjust. There also are serious legal implications for the parent since the Inheritance Acts confer rights to a child born outside a marriage who now would share the estate on an equal footing with other siblings.

There is more for the parent to lose financially & societally than to gain in searching for a past child. Add a layer of case law, new Acts such as that covering GDPR, several reports (e.g. by Incorp. Law Society) on what should/should not be done and the deep complexity of the legal background is clear. Is it a skeleton in their cupboard? Perhaps, but not one linked to having a child outside marriage, but one as a result of hiding the fact and ignoring any attempt to search now that society’s view is changing.

From what I have read, (and I'm no expert) very few (other than the adopted child) want to delve into the topic. Most such adoptees now are aged over fifty and over time the problem will disappear. Unjust as it is to the adoptee, it’s another ‘Irish solution’.

Mick,

I don't know where to start with this post. It's by times contradictory, factually incorrect and completely at odds with the lived experiences of many of us whose lives have been directly affected by adoption.

Firstly, I'll echo alibab's point - adoptees have no claim on their birth families estate.

Secondly, lest there be any confusion, I don't personally view the fact of my adoption as a skeleton in my closet to be hidden from public view for fear of damage to my reputation or standing. But I was fortunate enough to grow up in a home where the subject of adoption was engendered with positivity. This view is not universally shared.

I know of one individual who was refused a drink in a local bar because the bar person took exception to the fact of their being adopted. I know of adoptees whose adopted parents would rather they not discuss the subject of their adoption with them. And there are adoptees who as a result of having to deal with this negativity feel shame about being adopted and keep it hidden.

But again that view is not universal. My own birth mother tried to find her children - me and my half-sibling - more than twenty years ago.

Thirdly, for those of us - adoptees, birth mothers, birth fathers, birth siblings, half-siblings etc. - who do want to know about ours and our families pasts it can seem at times as if everyone and everything is against us. Even today, in the third decade of the 21st century, there is still such an unwillingness on the part of Church, State, family and other interested parties to impart the most basic information any person could seek to know - the identity of ones parents, children or siblings, as the case may be.

So given all of that, given all that we know of the mishandling of adoption in this country, and given much of your own comment above, how could anyone conclude other than that adoption is very much a skeleton in some peoples closets.

threetrees · 27-02-2021 11:55am

My great grandparents married and a week later my grandfather was born. We do not know if my great-grandfather was the biological father or not. My grandfather was sent off down the country for a few years, my great grandparents moved house and along came this 4 year old, who was actually 5...

My grandfather had huge problems finding his birth cert one time and I believe it is because he had the wrong year of birth, but he never said. We found documents that my grandfather had in his personal files, baptism and birth records etc. Never took much notice other than to confirm dates etc, however on further inspection the dates of issue of these certificates show that my grandfather had researched this the old fashioned way back in the 1940s. So he knew he was born a week after his parents married but it looks like he may have been doubtful that his father was actually his father.

I reckon this scenario was pretty common back then, it's no big deal at all these days but back then it was a huge deal.

Reati · 27-02-2021 12:34pm

Pretty boring bar 2 things.

One, some family adopted a child but kept her original surname. Not sure what the story was.

Two. A great great grandfather died young about 35 of strangulation. No idea if it was an accident or murdered. Anyone got ideas where to look for information on things like that?

Lockheed · 27-02-2021 12:36pm

Great grandmother on my mother's side had her first child at 35. Grandmother ( her daughter) had her last child at 35. Grandfather would have been late 50s at that stage

What’s the biggest skeleton in the closet you’ve discovered?

Comments