Marriage

Eugene and Emma – An Intercontinental Love Story

by

 

Eugene Sullivan was born in Bangalore, India in around 1833. His parents were British subjects, and his birth place suggests that his father may have held either military or governmental positions in the ever-expanding British Empire. Eugene appears to have continued the colonial legacy of his parents by joining the British army at the age of 18. His active military career lasted eighteen years before he requested to be discharged in 1870. During the discharge process a Manchester-based military hearing was given a synopsis of his career. The hearing was told that Sullivan had spent over twelve years of his military career stationed abroad. Through piecing together Eugene’s war record it would appear he witnessed both the Crimean War (in 1853) and the Indian Rebellion of 1857 (also known as the Indian Mutiny or The Great Rebellion). Eugene’s military postings had taken him to the farthest frontiers of the British Empire – often into dangerous and politically dubious areas. Greater detail of his posts were given as follows; three and a half years in the East Indies, just under five years in the West Indies, seven months in the Mediterranean, a year in Crimea and five years in Canada.

During one of his postings abroad Eugene married his English-born wife Emma Parsons. They were joined together on the 4th March 1857 within an Anglican Garrison in Canada. Together the couple had a total of eight children over a twenty-four year period, with Emma and the three eldest children having followed Eugene across the world.

Their eldest child, Hannah E, was born soon after their marriage in 1858. Following her birth the family moved to Bermuda for a short period, where William J was born in 1861. They then returned to Canada and in 1868 Eugene D was born. Eugene the younger would grow up to become a reverend with a keen eye for financial sales and shares, whilst William would become a skilled workman crafting cabinets. Both brothers would subsequently die in the same death year: 1923.

Following Eugene’s request to be discharged from the army the Sullivan’s settled in Northumberland.  A third son, Ernest Lewis, was born soon after their return to England in 1871. He was baptised at St Paul’s church in Alnwick, near the family’s lodgings at Alnwick’s militia depot on Hotspur Street. From census material it would appear the family lived here whilst Eugene was working as a Drill Master on the site. A second daughter, named Emma Jessie Parsons, was born in 1873 and baptised at the same church as her brother but she tragically died during infancy.  The family’s grief over the death of their youngest child was soon replaced with joy as a third daughter, Amelia Gertrude Edith, arrived in 1878. She was followed in quick succession by two more girls; Ada Madoline in 1880 and Mabel Violet Florence in 1883. But the birth of Ada was overshadowed by the death of the Sullivan’s eldest daughter, Hannah, occurring in the same year.

 

A solicitor’s notes on the Sullivan case, showing the ages of the youngest daughters and the address of Emma’s elected trustee. REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT

 

By 1885 the Sullivan’s marriage had spanned almost thirty years. It had created eight children, and endured the death of two. It had survived extreme warfare and stretched its affection across three continents. Perhaps the marriage had run out of steam, or perhaps the recent death of their eldest child was too great for the couple to overcome. Whatever the reasoning behind their decision the couple decided to amicably separate in 1885. They hired the Dickson, Mornington and Archer firm (as the Dickson, Archer and Thorp firm was known during a short period in the late nineteenth century) to settle any legal issues relating to the custody and financial support of their remaining children.

Separation and Agreements

The Sullivan’s separation was a unique one, and their micro-case can be used to trace seismic changes occurring throughout the nineteenth century with respect to divorce, women’s rights and familial settlements. Neither party sought a full legal divorce, perhaps because they wished to avoid any reputational shame or financial demands, but instead opted for a legally-supported separation. During their separation neither party received blame or vilification for the breakdown of the relationship. Contrary to the perceived character of an estranged husband, Eugene Sullivan penned letters to his lawyers filled with warm and affectionate words for Emma. However Eugene’s strong emotions were muted within official separation documents, and his actions were revealed to have been more complex. What therefore follows is an analysis of the couple’s official and private documents, framed within the greater concepts of nineteenth century divorce and marriage.

 

Correspondence regarding the settlement. REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT

 

The indenture outlining the terms of their separation cites “unhappy differences” which “have arisen between E.V Sullivan and Emma his wife” as the reason why “they have consequently agreed to live separate (not under the same roof) from each other for the future.” The document was made in the presence of a witness, William Bean, who was to act as Emma’s trustee. Parting to live under a separate roof was important phrasing which Eugene pushed to have included. But the inclusion of the phrase becomes confused when one reads his personal correspondence with the solicitors. In this series of documents Eugene repeatedly emphasises, and encourages, his assumed responsibility to furnish and finance Emma’s new lodgings.

 

Notes amending the legal separation, discussing the clause “to live apart.” REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT

 

Only four of the couple’s children were subject to the document’s conditions (and a potential custody battle) as, by 1885, two had predeceased the settlement and another two no longer lived in the family home. The document decided, and ultimately divided, custody over the children with the following statement;

“E.V Sullivan shall have custody and shall also maintain and clothe the said Ernest Louis Sullivan and the said Emma Sullivan shall have the custody of Amelia Gertrude Edith Sullivan aged 8 years, Ada Madoline Sullivan aged 5 years and Mabel Violet Florence Sullivan aged 3 years. And that the said E.V Sullivan shall have access to the said Amelia Gertrude Edith Sullivan, Ada Madoline Sullivan and Mabel Violet Florence Sullivan and the said Emma Sullivan shall have access to the said Ernest Louis Sullivan under such arrangements as shall to be made between them for this purpose or if they are unable to agree under such arrangements as shall be made by the said William Bean.”

It is perhaps telling that, whilst custody of the children takes up two pages of the document, references to the settlement of property take up three and a half pages. It was agreed, as part of the separation, that Emma would receive a weekly payment from Eugene, to be handled by her Trustee. However, the payment would be forfeited should the marriage be permanently dissolved by “any other jurisdiction.” This clause acted to prevent Emma from pursuing a total divorce. Regarding the inheritance of property, should Emma predecease Eugene, it was stated that he would inherit as was his “marital right.” The document also noted that Emma should not expect, and would not be given, any further financial support for the payment of future debts or every-day expenditure from Eugene.

But Emma also maintained her own conditions; rooted in her personal freedom and independence. She added a clause that, upon following the separate living arrangements, Eugene could not “molest or interfere with the said Emma Sullivan in her manner of living or otherwise.” This clause throws Eugene’s ‘caring’ letters into question. Was he really trying to provide for his estranged wife, and the children she maintained, by keeping her financially and furnishing her new abode? Or was it a way to maintain a level of control over Emma? The inclusion of so many specific clauses appeared to insinuate that, at least for Eugene, the bonds of marriage relating to property and name remained – even if the couple occupied separate lodgings.

Nineteenth Century Divorce and Marriage

During the nineteenth century the concept of divorce and marriage underwent drastic legal change. Marriage became more secular following various parliamentary acts. This drove separation and divorce out the ecclesiastical courts and into the jurisdiction of secular judges and solicitors; such as Dickson, Archer and Mornington. Married women were also afforded greater legal status as the century progressed, with specific regard to the custody of children – developments Emma clearly capitalised upon.

Prior to the latter 1800’s ecclesiastical divorce could be granted in extreme cases of adultery, cruelty or desertion although no party would be allowed to remarry. In 1857 the Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Act created a Probate and Divorce Court in London which allowed civil divorces. When using these courts parties still had to prove, with sufficient evidence, that serious adultery, cruelty, incest, bigamy or other heinous offences had occurred. Unfortunately, evidential proof was often difficult to establish and pursuing a divorce case could be costly to ones finances and reputation. There was no reference to ill-treatment or adultery in the Sullivan’s case, and perhaps this lack of vilification can be attested as the reason why a full legal divorce had not been sought.

The Married Woman’s Property acts of 1870 and 1882 gradually gave married women the right to hold property in their own name. The 1882 act gave women possession of all property held before or after their marriage – thus allowing women to become independent financial entities. But this still did not entitle married women to sue their husbands (as they remained one legal person) or be allowed to keep a legal residence apart from her husband. Thus Eugene’s acceptance of his wife’s second residence, forming part of a legal separation, was a double-edged sword. Although it allowed Emma to live a separate and more autonomous life, it would doubtlessly have been poorly judged by their contemporaries.

 

A letter from Eugene discussing the furnishing of Emma’s new lodgings. REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT

 

The Sullivan’s settlement had been carefully crafted by both sides to suit the middle ground between marriage and complete divorce. The document mediated between both sides, by allowing Emma to keep a separate residence and splitting custody of the children, as well as feeding into broader changes and trends. Emma therefore benefited from legal change and shifting social perceptions.

A Happily Ever After?

In the years which followed their separation neither party pursued an official divorce. Eugene retired as a Drill Master in Alnwick and moved across Northumberland; from 65 Beaconsfield Street in the ward of Arthur’s Hill, Newcastle Upon Tyne to Westgate.

In 1891 the couple appear to have either reconciled, or at least agreed to cohabit, with their extended family. The couple can be found on the census living in Westgate with their son Ernest Lewis. Ernest had returned to the family home having been married at 17 and widowed, during the birth of his son, at 19. Also living in the new family home were daughters Amelia, Ada and Mabel.

The family did not live in the Newcastle area for long, as they subsequently moved onto Alnmouth. Eugene died shortly after the move, in 1896, whereas Emma was still living in the area in 1911 at the age of 71. She peacefully lived out her final days under the care of her eldest son, William, in Alnmouth’s Percy Cottages on Front Street.

 

Ann Wilson – Widow, Pauper and Eloping Lover

by

The Poor and the Law

During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries local parishes were made responsible for the care of paupers within their jurisdiction. This care was given in the form of poor relief legislated by a series of ‘Poor Laws;’ the most notable being the 1834 Poor Law Amendment Act. The concept of poor relief was a controversial one, attracting numerous critics. One its major flaws related to the notion of ‘settlement.’ Parishes naturally resented paying for paupers whom had originated beyond their jurisdiction, and would often try to forcibly return them to their ‘home’ parishes. Yet the fluid nature of society, especially during the industrial revolution, made it increasingly hard to prove where a “pauper” should be placed. Thus solicitors, such as the Dickson, Archer and Thorp firm, were often called upon to resolve settlement disputes.

This exact issue arose in September 1853 when two Overseers of the Poor from the parish of Saint Nicholas, situated within Newcastle Upon Tyne, began legal proceedings to forcibly remove two “paupers” from their jurisdiction. These Overseers signed themselves in the removal order as Sir John Fife and William Armstrong. The order directed the “paupers” to be moved into the northern parish of Bamburgh. Although it is not clear from archival documents as to why Bamburgh was chosen it is perhaps telling that Bamburgh’s own Overseers of the Poor fiercely disputed the removal order and so employed the legal aid of Dickson, Archer and Thorp.

Widowed Paupers

The two “paupers” facing removal from the parish of Saint Nicholas in September 1853 were the widow Ann Wilson, aged just 25, and her daughter Elizabeth, aged about two years. Sending widows away from a parish of settlement, previously adopted by their deceased spouses, was a common occurrence in nineteenth century Northumberland. The process often caused heart-breaking social and economic turmoil, as vulnerable women were removed from established networks of friends and family and placed in often unfamiliar areas without obvious employment or emotional support.

 

Order to remove Ann Wilson to Bamburgh 1853. REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT

 

It is therefore unsurprising that the potential move was also sternly opposed by Ann herself. Ann had already faced the stigma of possibly welcoming a child out of wedlock, braved her employer’s wrath to elope with her lover and tragically endured early widowhood – clearly she was not a woman who would be moved easily. Thus, whilst her experience of parish poor relief could be deemed atypical of a nineteenth century Northumbrian widow, her situation was far more complex and it made fighting the order a matter of survival and reputation.

Young Lovers

Ann was the daughter of a sailor, named in legal documents as Henry Pryle Gibson. He was recorded in ejectment proceedings as living near Forth Banks, close to Newcastle’s Quayside, but in Ann’s personal testimony he seems to have had little to do with her life.

Instead Ann had spent the majority of her youth working as a domestic servant. In this occupation she had spent almost 3 years living in Newton on the Moor whilst working for the publican-come-blacksmith Mr Wall. In her testimony, given to prove she had been legally married to her deceased husband, she tenderly recalled how it was during her first few weeks in Newton on the Moor that she met the colliery engine-man James Wilson.

 

Copy of James Wilson’s baptism certificate, produced as evidence of his existence. REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT

 

The young couple began a three year courtship which reached a decisive point when Ann became pregnant in the beginning of 1851. To have maintained a child out of wedlock would have put great financial pressure and reputational shame upon Ann; probably forcing her to give up domestic employment and seek the support of parish organisations. Thus, probably to avoid moral judgement, the young couple decided to elope to the Scottish borders and resolve their situation legally.

The Legality of Love

Marriages conducted by eloping couples on the border were clandestine in the eyes of the Church, this made them notoriously hard to prove in retrospect. Ann’s account of her elopement is lengthy, witty and fast-paced. It was recorded verbatim by the solicitors and had been carefully crafted to prove the legality of her marriage and, in turn, the legitimacy of Elizabeth – two facts which the Newcastle Overseers had questioned. Being a legal widow, and having a legitimate child, would have put Ann in a much stronger position to fight the parish removal order and lift the reputational slur the men of Saint Nicholas’ parish had placed on her. Ann’s account was also verified by a number of witnesses including her mother-in-law (even though her testimony infers that she may not have wholly approved of her new daughter-in-law.)

 

A letter containing extracts of Ann Wilson’s statement. REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT

 

According to these accounts Ann and James eloped to the Scottish border on the 6th June 1851, travelling via train from Newcastle to Berwick. Once at Tweedmouth Station they met with the man who was to marry them; Anderson Sommerville. Sommerville first took the lovers by horse drawn carriage to a public house in search of witnesses; here they met George Dobson and George Davison. The latter was a soldier tasked with recruiting in Berwick that day. The group then moved onto the Lamberton toll booth to conduct the ceremony.

The Lamberton toll house was a popular place for clandestine marriages. One of Lamberton’s previous toll keepers, John Foster, had even received lifetime banishment from Scotland for conducting clandestine marriages on his land in 1818. This punishment had little effect though, as Foster primarily lived in England and he would often ignore the notice anyway.

Within the toll house the Wilson’s were taken to a room with a table, bottle of whiskey and a prayer book. It was in this room where they exchanged their vows and signed the relevant documentation. After the brief ceremony all five drank a toast of whiskey to the marriage’s prosperity which was, unfortunately, to be short-lived.

Hanover Street and a New Start

Ann clearly thought she had embarked upon a whole new, exciting life following her elopement. When the couple returned to Northumberland it would appear James returned to Newton on the Moor, to tie up the loose ends left behind by their hasty departure, he then followed Ann down to Newcastle where she had found them a home in the city’s Hanover Street.

It was here that Ann gave birth to their daughter Elizabeth, on the 28th September 1851. But sadly, around the same time, James died following a short illness.

James’ death left Ann with a young child to feed and care for. It was during this painful, and probably traumatic, experience she found herself seeking poor relief from parish officials. Evidence also suggests she was possibly forced out of her new home. These circumstances therefore assembled to bring her to the attention of senior parish officials, whom questioned her marriage and associated right to remain in the area, and set in motion the removal order.

A Legal Success

Proving Ann Wilson’s right to settle in Saint Nicholas’ parish was dependent upon her having been legally married to her husband, however this was difficult to evidence due to the secret nature of their union. Nonetheless, through tireless county and cross-border investigation, solicitors at the Dickson, Archer and Thorp practice were able to successfully evidence an appeal against the removal order on behalf of Bamburgh’s Overseers of the Poor and prove the authenticity of a small marriage certificate, given to Ann on her wedding day. Officials from the parish of Saint Nicholas eventually revoked their removal order and Ann and Elizabeth appear to have found somewhere within Newcastle to stay.

 

Letter adjoining the Appeal notice accepted by all parties. REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT

 

Ann had asserted her right to remain within the Newcastle Parish, but it is unlikely she would have had the tools to fight the removal order on her own had she not also had the support of Bamburgh’s parish officials. Hence this is a story of two parties working simultaneously with the solicitors – if only for their own gains.

A final triumph for the unyielding Ann, and an appropriate end to this blog, potentially occurred on the 7th October 1854. When an Elizabeth Wilson, recorded as being the daughter of an ‘Ann Wilson” and born towards the end of 1851, was christened at Saint Nicholas Cathedral in Newcastle.

 

This Week in World War One, 2 November 1917

by

 

BERWICK ADVERTISER, 2 NOVEMBER 1917

 

 

BELFORD LAD MAKES SUPREME SACRIFICE

 

 

We are deeply grieved to have to report that Sergt. Ernest Falla, third son of Mr and Mrs Thomas Falla, North Bank, Belford, has fallen at the post of duty in France. Prior to enlisting this young fellow was employed as footman with Mr Graham, Cartin, Carluke, Scotland, and had a most comfortable place, but his sense of duty to his King and Country was Treasurer, Mr J. Brand, Bank of Liverpool, call for help was given, so on September 3rd, 1914, he enlisted into the H.L.I., and soon after was transferred to the Machine Gun Corps and later to South African Infantry Brigade. On May the 10th, 1915, he sailed for France, and with the exception of one leave in January last has been doing his best to beat the Huns since that time. He won his stripes on the battlefield, and that is sufficient proof of the excellent way his duties have been performed. Ernest was a smart pleasant lad, and his loss is greatly mourned, and widespread sympathy is expressed for the bereaved relatives.

RECRUITING CHANGES

 

As has already been announced by the Minister of National Service, Great Britain will, for the purpose of recruiting, be divided into 10 regions, at the head of each there will be a civilian Director of Recruiting.

The Director for Scotland is Mr C.D. Murray, K.C., and his region will include the whole of Scotland, except the town of Berwick. Mr Murray is a well-known advocate at the Scottish Bar.

The Director for the counties of Northumberland, Cumberland, Durham, and Westmorland, with the Cleveland District of Yorkshire, and Berwick, is Mr D. H. L. Young, a member of the firm of Messrs James Templeton and Co., of Glasgow. He has had experience of administration of the Military Service Acts as a member of an appeal tribunal.

THE NEW CATEGORIES

According to an Army Council Instruction just issued by the War Office, it has been decided to abolish the distinction between categories B and C in the classification of men by categories. As to men fit for service overseas in categories lower than A, the Instruction points out that this will be provided for by special medical examination when the men are required to proceed abroad. The new classification comes into force on November 1.

Category A is for men fit for general service in any theatre of war, from the point of training, as well as good physical and mental condition, and who are able to stand active service work.

Category B will consist of those who are not fit for general service, but will do for home service. There are three sections in B (i.) men fit for field units (at home only) or garrison duty (ii.) in labour units, (iii.) sedentary work.

These are followed in the Instruction by category D for men who may be deemed temporarily unfit for service in categories A or B, but who are likely to become fit within six months.

Category E provides for those who are unfit for services in categories A or B, and who are not likely to become fit in six months.

Category B (iii.), it should be added, also comprises those who, if skilled tradesmen, are able to work at their trades.

Category D is temporary, so far as reserve units are concerned, and a man in a higher category will automatically come under D3, if under medical or dental treatment, rejoining his original category until transferred either upwards or downwards, as the case may be, by the medical officer or travelling medical board.

 

AGRICULTURE

 

WOMEN AND SCHOOL CHILDREN HELP

 

This year real service has been rendered in work of this class by school children, also women. Many of the rural school boards have risen well to the occasion this year in the way of granting leave. Farmers generally are grateful, not only for the assistance which they have got in this way, but also for the help which women and soldiers have rendered. Many increased their potato area this year to meet as far as possible national necessity, and it is not easy seeing how the crop could have been handled but for the extra help that has been obtained in this way.

 

 

LOCAL NEWS

 

The marriage which has been arranged between Lieut. Cecil Olcher Fedden, 22nd Punjabis attached to the Royal Flying Corps, eldest son of Mr F. Player Fedden, Glenthorpe, Barnet, and Miss Shena Lennox Fraser, eldest daughter of Colonel C. l. Fraser, V.D., Berwick, will take place quietly on Monday, 3rd December, in Berwick Parish Church. Lieut. Fedden has seen a good deal of active service, and fought on the Indian frontier in 1911 in the Abor expedition.

Berwick Parish Church. © John Box – Friends of Berwick and District Museum and Archives website.

He was fourteen months in Mesopotamia at the beginning of the present war, being badly wounded at the battle of Ctesiphon. He made his escape out of Kut the day before it was besieged – 3rd December, 1915. Miss Fraser is well known for her good work in Berwick and district. She acted as Secretary for the Berwickshire Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Family Association and worked enthusiastically for the cause, while she also took an active interest in her work as a member of the local War Pensions Committee.

 

D.S.M. FOR HOLY ISLAND MAN

A.B. Robert Lilburn

 

We are pleased to announce that the Distinguished Service Medal has been awarded to Able Seaman Robert Lilburn, R.N.R., for bravery in saving the lives of the crew of a mined ship in December last. Seaman Lilburn, who is a Holy Island man, and a son of the late Mr James Lilburn, who was drowned many years ago at the Island under distressing circumstances when piloting a steamboat into the harbour, has seen two years’ service with the mine sweeping sections of the Fleet, and has been regularly at sea since then. In civil life he followed the calling of a fisherman. His many friends will heartily congratulate him upon the honour just awarded.

HOLY ISLAND

 

Gallant Lifeboatmen – A pleasing ceremony took place at Holy Island. Mr A. Logan, of Berwick, acting on behalf of the Swedish Government, presented handsome cups to Coxwain George Cromarty and Second Coxwain Thomas Kyle, and a sum of £2 to each of the crew of the Holy Island No.2 Lifeboat, for the rescue of the crew of the Swedish barque Jolani, in Nov. 1916.

An early photograph of the Holy Island lifeboat crew, pictured left to right are Tom Kyle, John Markwell, George Cromarty, Tom Stevenson and Robert Henderson. © Berwick Record Office, BRO 2421-018.

The rescue took place under exceptional difficulties, the wind blowing a gale from the east. The two coxswains expressed their thanks to Mr Logan, and through him to the Swedish Government, Mr Kyle declaring that all the members of the crew had done equally well. On the suggestion of Mr Logan a collection was taken for the Royal Lifeboat Institution, to which all responded heartily.

+ More