Black Sheep Sunday – Illegitimate or Widowed?

Editor's note: Today's post was written by Richard Hanson.

Johanna Hilda Anderson (left) and her daughter Hilda (right).
Photo was taken in the U.S. Provided by Richard Hanson.

Hilda Charlotte Anderson was born as an illegitimate child in Sweden, according to the family rumor. Easy to confirm? Maybe yes or maybe no. The obituary says yes. But that is just echoing the family rumor. Sometimes you may get lucky by finding specific records (e.g., a birth record) or a note written by a contemporary. In my situation, I have not yet found either. But sometimes a tiny detail in an existing record may answer the question.

Johanna Hilda Andreasdotter had a daughter named Hilda while in Sweden. She and her daughter continued to live with her her parental family as indicated by a 1856-72 Swedish parish register.

The Johanna and Hilda lines of the parish register containing the Larsson/Andersdotter family.
Photo provided by Richard Hanson.

If you look closely at Hilda's name the above parish register excerpt, you will see "Hilda Charlotte __". That underline means her last name is the same as above person, in this case her mother. In Sweden, the last name of the mother does not change when she is married. So looking at the mother's name does not tell anything about her current or prior martial status. But her daughter's name being the same as hers appears to answer the question. In Sweden, a child's surname is taken from the father's first name. If the first name is Olof, then sons will have a surname of Olofsson, daughters Olofsdotter. Family rumor confirmed.

Johanna, daughter Hilda and some of Johanna's siblings emigrated to the United States where the past is unimportant or easily hidden. Once in the U.S., both started using using the surname of Anderson. They are my direct ancestors.

Shop and Support Root Cellar Sacramento Genealogical Society.
Click here for details.

Black Sheep Sunday – People vs. Horn

In 1886 my Prussian-born great great grandfather, William Horn of St. Louis (Sierra County, California), pointed his shotgun at a man and was subsequently arrested by the local sheriff for assault with a deadly weapon.

1863 wedding painting for William Horn and Amelia "Bridget" Keenan.

From there the case takes an unusual turn. The sheriff returned the shotgun to him without checking whether it was loaded. During the trial, William Horn's attorney contended that the gun was not loaded since a weapon is not a weapon unless it is capable of doing harm. Since the District Attorney wasn't able to prove that the gun was loaded, the judge "instructed" the jury about the law in that regard. To nobody's surprise, the jury returned a not guilty verdict.

This didn't sit will with the District Attorney who wanted a new trial and appealed the case saying the judge should have "advised" the jury. The case worked its way up to the California Supreme Court. That Supreme Court apparently didn't see much difference between instruction and advice, ruling that a retrial was out of the question due to the protection of double jeopardy.

From a genealogical perspective, there is good news and bad news.

Good news – During several months in 1886, the Mountain Messenger (local newspaper) included a lengthy article about the case on an almost weekly basis.

Bad news – Surprisingly little information of genealogical interest was present in those articles. The level of repetition was high and any new material was a legal discussion of the case.

During this time, William Horn owned two saloons and possibly some mining claims. His primary saloon competitor was Charles Brundage. According to my aunt (quoting a series of people leading to one of his daughters), he wasn't the easiest to get along with. Ten years later, after the last of the daughters got married, his wife Bridget (Amelia Keenan) walked out to live with one of her daughters saying "I divorced him." That was a bit surprising since the born-in-Ireland Bridget was supposedly a devout Catholic.


Submitted and posted by Richard Hanson

Black Sheep Sunday: Joan Beaufort

Baaa...

My “Black Sheep Ancestor” is Joan Beaufort. She led a very interesting life!

I am a descendant of John of Gaunt, 1^st Duke of Lancaster (6 March 1340—3 February 1399). John was the third son of Edward III, King of England (13 November 1312—21 June 1377).

John first married Blanche of Lancaster in 1359; she died in 1369. He next married Infanta Constance of Castile in 1371. In the meantime John had a mistress, Katherine Swynford, with whom he had four illegitimate issue: three sons and a daughter, Joan Beaufort. The children were given the surname of Beaufort after a former French possession of the Duke.

After Constance died in 1394, John married Katherine in 1396 and obtained both royal (by Parliament) and papal decrees of legitimization of their four children. Thereafter, the now legitimate Joan Beaufort became Countess of Westmorland, and later grandmother of Kings Edward IV and Richard III.

Joan Beaufort, my direct ancestor and having been born illegitimate, allowed me to qualify for membership in the Descendants of the Illegitimate Sons and Daughters of the Kings of Britain (known as the “Royal Bastards”) as well as qualifying me for membership in the following royal societies (requiring legitimate descent):

• Order of the Crown in America
• National Society of Americans of Royal Descent
• Friends of St. George/Association of Descendants of the Knight of the Garter
• Society of Descendants of Knights of the Most Noble Order of the Garter

Submitted by Jack Willoughby, Vice President, Root Cellar Sacramento Genealogical Society

Black Sheep Sunday is just one of the blogging themes suggested on GeneaBloggers.  Get your ancestors noticed here, send a short story, image and/or document to rootcellarsgs@gmail.com.

Posted by Ron Setzer