Sharon Don't have very much to add, just an observation ot two which may be useful: Having made an extensive study of the musters and other primary sources especially for women up to 1819 so far, I can confirm that there are indeed no other apparent Ann Fowlers as you suggest. In fact no other female FOWLERs at all. That's not to say that someone isn't lurking there married with a FOWLER maiden name - or its spelt some other way etc - but no obvious other Fowlers. Thus, given the relatively small population, and hence limited logical possibilities, it is likely that Ann Fowler who baptised James in 1811 is indeed the same Ann FOWLER who was then "married" to William Presnell. I say "married" because I haven't located a marriage on NI (not that I'm looking too hard in that direction yet). After looking at many records in this period (musters bdm etc), it is very apparent that many women, even those who are known to have married, kept there maiden name as their chief identity, especially those who were ex-convicts (even after their sentences had expired). This occurs a lot in the musters and in marriage and baptismal records etc. Thus I have no qualms in suggesting that James is probably the child of William Presnell and Ann Fowler (even tho only Ann is present at the baptism). Indeed many children who were apparently baptised with only their mother present, turn up later with the father's name. In fact I have to observe that the baptismal ceremony is one in which the child is given its "Christian" name(s) only, a point we often forget! It is not a registration of the child's birth as such, just a christening. Too often we assume that the child is thus named after its mother (ie with her surname as well) when in fact the only evidence that can be relied upon is that it was given its first names only. Just happened that the father saw fit not to be there at the ceremony! It definitely cannot be assumed that the child did not otherwise take and use its father's surname if you see what I mean. Regarding this James (baptised 1811) then, I will keep this info and one day when I get more done on the men I'll see if he turns up in later musters etc. From the evidence before me, it seems that children were regarded as "adult" for the purpose of musters from about the age of 13 to 15. So, he may just miss out on being mustered on that count, depending of course on when he was actually born! What I can tell you tho is that Ann Presnell appears in the 1818 Muster off stores and with three children. Now this basically means that the three children would have had to have been under about 15, ie born after about 1804 at least. Elizabeth (b 1802) is on the 1818 and 1819 musters in her own right. As Thomas (b 1804) isn't on the 1818 muster in his own right (and doesn't appear to have died) then the three children probably include Thomas 1804, Sarah (b about 1808) about whom you are aware from family sources and for the third child take your pick from Joseph who is supposed to have come on the City of Edinburgh with the family (it was in Reg Wright's book I think that you must have seen this) or the James baptised in 1811 to Ann Fowler. In fact it would not surprise me in the least, now that I have seen many similar examples, that Joseph and James are one and the same child. Firstly, you only need only one child to make up the numbers in the 1818 muster entry, secondly the baptism of James doesn't give the child's age, thirdly I don't know how many times I've seen Jas interchanged for Jos in the records, or even adopted as a name change!, and finally, as you say, there is no other mention of Joseph anyway. So an infant son names Jos or Jas born about 1806 is very likely to have been baptised around 1811 if the pattern for other NI persons is taken into account. But as I say, an analysis of later musters, especially for the men, may help us unravel that a bit further (with either a Joseph or James turning up!). So that's my best guess for the moment. It's just that the data for this early period is quite self contained and some intelligent deductions can be made which I have to admit have proven to work out for me in the light of other data. A bit of lateral thinking etc and its amazing where it leads LOL. Actually just took a quick squiz at the 1819 muster of free persons in Hobart, and a quick scan only located William Presnell, details as you would expect. In the remarks column there appears to be an abbreviation of "Emancipated" which you may not have come across. This remark only appears in a second "version" of the muster I have come across, which together with some other unique material is not widely known to exist! Hence my interest in these musters etc. The well known version at SRNSW for 1819 Hobart free males (4/1235.4) does NOT have an entry in the remarks column for Wm Presnell!, whereas this copy (the one I believe to have been kept in Tasmania as distinct from the copy sent to Port Jackson) definitely has that remark. I say copies in each case because I now feel that these are not truly the "original" drafts taken at the muster table as it were. I've seen one of those now (for 1816 I think it was) and they look just like that, if you know what I mean, messy and untidy, and in different hands etc, just as you would expect. These copies were neatly written out to be sent to Port Jackson and presumably kept on hand as a record in VDL. Hope this helps a bit. Regards Garry > > > Subject: Re: [TAS-CONVICTS] Re:Presnell > Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 19:38:31 +1000 > From: "Norman W. Long" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > > Hi Diane and listers, > Thankyou for your kind welcome to the list. I do have quite a bit of info > on William PRESNELL and Ann FOWLER, but am always looking to increase my > knowledge of this family, which is quite perplexing in many ways. I will > try not too bore you with all the details, but here are some: > > Ann FOWLER was sentenced to seven years in Shropshire (no details of her > birth (abt 1764) or offence known at this stage). She was sent to Port > Jackson on 'Royal Admiral' in 1792. She had a baby to another convict, > Joseph Abbott (not the marine with the same name as some have mistakenly > assumed), also named Joseph, but he died as an infant. Ann was sent to > Norfolk Island around 1800 but I have not found any details of the trip. > > William PRESNELL was sentenced to Life at Essex in 1797 for three counts of > cattle stealing and one of horse stealing. He came to Pt J on Barwell in > 1798. I have not found records of his birth (abt 1765) or parents either. > He was sent to NI around 1800. There he met Ann. They had Elizabeth in > 1802 and Thomas in 1804. The family came to Hobart on 'City of Edinburgh' > in 1808. There is however, a record of a third child accompanying them, but > details are not known for sure. Its name is given as Joseph (in a > publication whose name escapes me at the moment), but there are no other > records of such a child. Some have conjectured that there was another > child, William, who later was a tanner in Hobart, but I have found nothing > to convince me that this person was their son. William and Ann also had a > daughter, Sarah, about 1808. Records of her birth have not been foound, so > perhaps she was an infant on the trip, or perhaps was born shortly after > their arrival in Hobart. There is also a James Fowler recorded as being > born to Ann Fowler in 1811. Whether his mother is this Ann or not I am not > sure, but I have not found any other records of an Ann Fowler. > William and Ann spent most of their time in Argyle St, and William was a > very successful business man, supplying the government with meat and running > the Eagle Tavern, amongst other things. > > Several other Presnells came to VDL in the 1820s. Among these was Mrs Sarah > Presnell 'and family', who arrived at the end of 1822 on Regalia. When she > died in 1823 at the age of 86 there was a notice in the paper from her son, > William of Argyle St - so it assumed that she was 'my' William's mother. > Of the other Presnells who came on various ships in the 1820s, the > connection to my family is not entirely clear, although it does seem quite > likely that they were all related in some way. Among these were Thomas, > James, John and Abraham. It appears that they were also from Essex or > thereabouts. There is a lot more that I could tell you about them, but I am > not sure if this is the place. > > William and Ann's daughter Elizabeth married a whaler from the USA, George > Robinson, with whom she had 10 children, and after his death married a much > younger man, Thomas Chapman, with whom she had one daughter, Sarah, from > whom I am descended. Their son Thomas died without issue. There is a > plaque commemorating him and his father on the wall at St Davids park. > William's daughter Sarah married Thomas Pragnall (Pregnell, etc) and had > about 4 children. > > If you are interested in more details please contact me. If you are > descended from any of these people, or any other Presnells from Tasmania, I > would dearly love to hear from you. If you have any information about these > people i would also love to hear from you. The more of us that work on this > complicated family, the more loose ends we can tie up. At the moment I have > records of more than 3000 people who are descended from William and the > other Presnells who came to VDL in the 1820s. The main problem is working > out the origins of, and connections between, all of the original Presnells. > > If you have got this far I thank you for taking the time to read it all. > Kind regards, > Sharon.