Jane McLauglin Inglis again.....

[ninatoo]

Hi all,

Well this is my last desperate hope to find Jane. If you have been reading here for a while, she is my ancestor who married John Cotterill in Glasgow in 1870 under the name Jane McLaughlin, giving her parents as Michael McLaughlin and Jane Queen. However all childrens' birth registrations list her as Jane INGLIS.

16 years after marriage she gives her parents as Thomas Inglis and Jane McLaughlin on a poorhouse record for her husband John Cotterill. She also states she is RC, although only two of her children married in the Catholic Church, and several seem to have been baptised non Catholics (I only mention this knowing that the Catholic Church demanded all mixed marriage children be baptised Catholics).

Jane Inglis/McLaughlin states in the poorhouse record that she was born about 1845 in Woodside, Glasgow. On the 1871 census, Glasgow. 1881, Partick. 1891, Glasgow. And 1901 Glasgow.

I am hoping she perhaps told the truth about her place of birth, religion and her most used maiden name, Inglis. So now the logical step would be a search of the Catholic baptismal records for her. Trouble is here I am in Australia!

Is there anyone able to tell me how I could go about searching from here? Or perhaps someone is willing to have a look for me, although I know it is a tedious process...

All help appreciated to help smash this brick wall!



Nina

[CatrionaL]

Hi Nina

I see that you are still hopefully waiting for an answer to your question about Jane Inglis.

Unfortunately, I can't offer to look up church records for you. I did wonder though if you had tried to find her death on SP using her different names and a birth date of +- 5 for example.. The death search for a woman can, as you possibly know already, be done using maiden and one or more married
names.

Best wishes

Catriona

[ninatoo]

Hi Catriona,

Thanks for the reply. I have her death certificate. It states her parents as Michael McLaughlin and Jane Queen, and the informant was her son James. I am assuming he got the names of her parents from the marriage registration, and there is no mention of the name Inglis. She was also presumably married first to --- Kane, but I have never been able to prove this. She did have a seven year old son William when she married John Cotterill, (well he is living with them as 'son' in the 1871 census a year after their marriage, as William Cotterill by the way, and no sign of him after this) and the only one I thought might be hers was an illigitimate William Inglis, born 1864.

All her children's marriage and death registrations state her maiden name as Inglis. James the informant did not marry...it would have been interesting to see what he would have put on his own registration. His death in 1954 was signed by a brother in law, and mother's surname was Inglis. She is such a mystery...driving me nuts!

I have since found out that the Catholic registers only begin in about 1850 (well that is what one of the web pages said) so I don't think they are going to be any help, but thanks again for writing.

Nina

[ninatoo]

I am revisiting Jane in my tree because she periodically drives me crazy...her hubby too, but that is for another thread. Anyway, I was bored yesterday, so I decided to yet again look for the first marriage so I pulled up all the KANE marriages in Lanark at the IGI. Not too hard as there are only 367 of them or something.

There are very very few who could be referring to Jane McLaughlin, but there were two tantalising ones which had a Jane Hanlan marrying William Kane in Partick in 1863 and a Jane McClellan marrying a William Kane in Anderston, same year. The details on the latter didn't ring any bells, but the first one did.

The Jane on this marriage (right age) said her parents were Michael Hanlan, deceased, and Jane McGlaughlin. That blimmin' McLaughlin thing again and parents christian names are the same...oh I know it is probably coincidence and I will never find this woman's real history, but I have to TRY! No kids for this partnership at IGI which does not surprise me if they were RC.

So trying to find out about Jane Hanlan, I searched the 1861 and came up with only one (Hanilan), aged 15 living with a 74 year old female as a boarder. Is it possible Jane never knew her mother or her history until after she married this William? A possible scenario is that her mother Jane McLaughlin had Jane out of wedlock by a Mr Inglis. She then married a Michael Hanlan who raised Jane as his own, but after he died the truth came out about Jane's father being someone Inglis? So Jane being confused by the time she married John Cotterill, thought she was illegitimate and so used her mother's maiden name, but then by the time her first child was born she knew who her real father was and that he perhaps he had admitted paternity? She was SO persistent in her use of the surname Inglis on the births of her children (actually hubby was, as he registered all but the first, who Jane did and still called herself m.s Inglis, previously KANE - I missed that until yesterday!) She must have been sure her surname was Inglis by 1871. Arggghhhhhhhhhh! I am writing a soap opera!

ANYWAY...I think there is a way to prove it but I can't do it from here without spending millions. I need to find a marriage and/or a death for Jane Hanlan/William Kane's son William born Partick in 1863. I have that birth certificate (IF this Jane is MY Jane, then son William is the one alive and living with Jane and new hubby in 1871, but called Cotterill).

Trouble is, I can't determine anything about this son after that census. He is not mentioned on the later poorhouse records I have, but it was husband John doing the application, so he may not have had to mention a stepson. If he died before 1886, (date of poorhouse application) I can't find him. I think if he knew that his mother had found out the truth about her past it might be reflected on his own marriage and death details (ie: her surname would be Inglis or McLaughlin - not Hanlon as on his birth registration).

So...is there anyone able to have a look at the William Kane mariages and deaths in order to see if one of them has a father named William, deceased, and a mother named Jane Hanlon/McLaughlin/Inglis afterwards Cotterill? This is the one hope left to try and find out the truth about my gg grandmother. Please, can SKS have a look for me?

Sorry if this post totally confuses anyone...please ask me anything you can think of to make it clearer for you.

Nina

[Jack]

Hi Nina,
This looks like your William - seems he never married.
But he should be somewhere in the censuses after 1871....
--
DC 1946. 644-3. 507 (Camlachie)
William KANE (82) u/m labourer, d. 28 JUL 1946 at 253 Duke Street.
UR: 77 Drygate, Glasgow.
pas - William KANE (dcd) & Jane m/s HANLON (dcd).
Informant - Mary NELSON, occupier.
--
Jack

[ninatoo]

Thank you very much Jack! I do appreciate you finding the record. Pity it doesn't give me any proof that MY Jane was really Jane Hanlon. And what a shame that William didn't seem to marry, as there goes another bit of potential evidence. However, I do know that it is slightly possible that he DID marry...I have another ancestor who did, but had separated or divorced before death. The death registration said single, but he HAD married at one point. I have high hopes, hehe.

There is most certainly something very very odd about my Jane. As far as I can see from my free searches at ancestry.com she is NOT on the 1841 1851 1861 (except for that mentioned above) censuses with or without her mother Jane under any of the surnames, nor is her mother Jane about with any of the supposed husbands (Michael McLaughlin, Thomas Inglis, Michael Hanlon). NOR are any of those men anywhere either!

But I am certain of only three things:

1. Her mother's first name was Jane (evidenced on every document I have)
2. She MUST have a connection to the surname Inglis as it is on every birth registration of her children.
3. McLaughlin figures somewhere as it is mentioned on her marriage to John Cotterill and also on husband's poorhouse record.

I can make up scenarios which allow for all the discrepencies, but without proof it is worthless!

This is a whole branch of my tree that I can get no further on, as her husband is equally elusive. The pair of them frustrate me no end!
Thanks again Jack,

Nina

[ninatoo]

Hello everyone! Long time since posting!

I cannot believe I am writing this - I am fairly certain that I have just found the elusive Jane (above) after all these years!

I found a record with the name Jane Hanlane or Kane, alias McLaughlin or Cotterill, dated 1873.

It is a prison record for Duke Street Prison in 1873 indexed on Scottish Indexes. (Well not really a shock, I suspected something seedy might be in her life).

I have ordered it to have a closer look, so hopefully I will know more soon. I am bursting to know more but I suppose I can want a little bit longer!

This means that I was on the right track for some o the information above, but I still can't work out why she used the name Inglis, as it isn't mentioned on the above entry. Maybe it will be within the actual record.

I wonder what she was up to in 1873 to find herself in prison? She was married at the time and either pregnant or not long after giving birth to her second child with John Cotterill.

[WilmaM]

Oh, I do hope your finally burst through that brickwall .
prison records helped us iron out a mother's maiden name problem - the daughter didn't give the correct one for her mother on her marriage cert.

Poor woman spent the rest of her days in Perth Goal nowdays she'd have been treated for postpartum depression.

Do let us know what information the record contains, as prison records are a fairly new development.

[ninatoo]

Hi Wilma!

Nice to see you're still here!

Wow, that site (Scottishindexes.com) was quick! I awoke this morning to have the record from the prison in my inbox.

Jane Hanlon, Kane, McLaughlin or Cotterill had committed bigamy and was sentenced to eight days jail or a fine of 10/6 and the fine was paid. It also confirmed she was a Roman Catholic and she was the same height as me (5' 1/2", haha - that 1/2 inch is important).

What this record has done for me with all the surnames listed, bar one, is that it has confirmed some suspicions I had about the birth of her son William because she is on that certificate as Hanlon. She DID marry a William Kane - I thought she might have made that up to cover an illegitimate birth but no, and on that certificate she gives her mother's maiden name as McLaughlin, so that explains the use of that surname.

What is not clear is why she so regularly used the surname Inglis on all the birth registrations of her children and on a poorhouse record.

I wonder if her bigamy case made the paper? I have another ancestor who also committed bigamy and it was in the paper. I wonder where else I can search now!


Sunday sorted!! More digging to do!

[SarahND]

Congratulations!!

So glad you finally found some more proof of your ancestor's elusive existence! Gives us all hope for a similar breakthrough

Best wishes,

Sarah