|
Post by pollyq on Aug 14, 2018 7:47:05 GMT -5
I've found a newspaper article that goes into some detail on the Quick vs. Quick trial that concerns William and Peter Quick.
It's in the Royal Cornwall Gazette dated 5th April 1844.
The article identifies William Quick as from Zennor (and a Blacksmith later in the article) He identifies his aunt as Betsy Christopher, and a witness in the case further identifies his aunt as Elizabeth Christopher nee Quick.
Peter is identified as Peter Baragwanath Quick living near St Ives.
The case concerns a spat between the two over a house on Sweet's Tenement, i.e. William claims possession and Peter turfs him out and proves ownership.
Lots of information here on deeds and prior ownership in this article that will help with research, so I'll send it to you CT if that's ok and maybe Poyle can contact you for a copy?
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Aug 14, 2018 9:06:30 GMT -5
Thanks Polly and yep, that's fine. I've received the article and can forward a copy on request.
But this is a few years before William Quick ended up in prison so I still don't quite know what he was in for. The Bridewell Gaol Master Index shows several mentions of William in 1848 and 1850!
CT
|
|
|
Post by poyle on Aug 14, 2018 11:32:58 GMT -5
Thanks Pollyq and CT. I would like to have a copy of the article. What is the best way to have it forwarded?
In the Bridewell/Bodmin case indexes, the 1843 case is what likely leads to the 1844 article. The 1845 case is probably a different William Quick, unless he lost about 40 pounds. The remaining cases are Williams continuing dispute with Peter and his brother William. He also stole a cow from John Quick.
|
|
|
Post by pollyq on Aug 14, 2018 13:48:01 GMT -5
I've found some VERY interesting documents on FMP within their criminal records, that outlines the dispute between William and Peter Quick which extended over a 5 year period, and culminated in the imprisonment of William Quick.
The documents are from the National Archives, Series HO18, Home Office: criminal petitions, part 2.
William petitioned against a sentence in 1848, hence the documents accumulated in this dossier. There are quite a few images to download. If you could personal message me on this board with your email address Poyle, I can send you these images.
Would you like these images too CT?
One of the documents mention an Israel Quick brother of William Quick.
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Aug 14, 2018 15:01:12 GMT -5
Poyle - I have sent you a copy of the article via email.
Polly - yes, please, I am particularly interested in the mention of Israel Quick. If this Israel is the brother of William who ended up in gaol then any information I can find is of interest. All I know is that he was an AB Seaman - no sign of him after the 1841 or 1851 Census so I don't know whether or not he married or when and where he died.
CT
|
|
|
Post by Glazin2018 on Aug 14, 2018 15:30:29 GMT -5
CT
In my database I have William Quick, the son of William Quick and Margaret Polmear as being in jail in the 1851 census. He had a brother Israel.
This younger William went to Australia in 1854 and I reckon died there in 1885.
Lannanta
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Aug 14, 2018 17:15:58 GMT -5
Lannanta - yes, that is the man we are talking about and brother Israel is the one that I think is mentioned in the articles Polly spoke of. I am hoping there might be some small clue to help find what happened to him.
I did do a little searching earlier tonight and it appears he was still alive around 1857-1860. At one point a brother was in a little bother of an altercation in a pub and there was mention of brother Israel being back soon and that he would sort it out. I know this is the same family again because the article also mentioned the Medlin brother-in-law being involved. I reckon William was already in Australia by this time so the 'brother in bother' must have been John Osborn Polmear Quick.
CT
|
|
|
Post by poyle on Aug 15, 2018 8:00:52 GMT -5
On John Medlin as a bailiff, this is what I believe we know about him (and my be old news) - 1841, census and marriage is a laborer - 1845, bailiff in the Stannous Courts (news article) - 1851, bailiff on Kenegie Manor and farmer - 1857, sub-bailiff (news article) - 1858, under bailiff, Divisional Court (death notice)
Since there is so much evidence that William is the trouble maker, are we sure he left for Australia in 1854?
Pollyq, the earlier (1844) court case I believe does provide additional evidence that William Quick (b. 1789) is the son of William Quick and Elizabeth Hollow. Son William (b. 1815) says he was given the property by his Aunt Betsy/Elizabeth. That would presumable be William elder sister.
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Aug 15, 2018 8:37:00 GMT -5
Absolutely!
In the 1851 Census William was still in Bodmin Gaol and the next entry I have for him in my database is from the NSW Assisted Passenger lists - William Quick arrived New South Wales 29th September 1854 aboard 'Lady Ann' as an assisted passenger. His entry in the passenger list records his parents as William and Margaret Quick, both dead.
William Quick died at Wiseman's Creek, NSW 26th October 1885 age 72. His cause of death is recorded as 'debility accelerated by starvation and neglect'. He was buried two days later on 28th October at O'Connell, NSW.
CT
|
|
|
Post by poyle on Aug 15, 2018 12:29:41 GMT -5
Thanks for this additional information. His age at death is off but I am not surprised given his condition. All but one of his sister's (Elizabeth) children ended up in Australia after first traveling to the US (New Jersey). As far as I know, none settled in the Sydney area. They were Adelaide and Beechworth.
|
|
|
Post by pollyq on Aug 21, 2018 22:08:48 GMT -5
Hi Poyle, I've left you a personal message - and hopefully a resolution to getting the documents to you.
|
|
|
Post by poyle on Aug 27, 2018 11:08:17 GMT -5
In the materials Pollyq sent there is a letter written on 17 May 1849 by or on behalf of William Quick seeking to be released from Bodmin jail. The letter concerns his long-running feud with Peter B. Quick over the ownership of the Treveale estate in Zennor. In the letter, William states: ... that your Petitioner's [i.e. William's) father died 7 years ago leaving your Petitioner a certain estate in the Parish of Zennor called Treveale.
William's father is presumably William Quick the bailiff, married to Margaret Polmear. William (bailiff) is at this son's marriage in 1846 (John O.P. Quick). He therefore could not have died in 1841 or 42.
Question: Would it be reasonable to assume that the letter saying William received the estate from his father should say grandfather, who died in 1841? In an earlier account, William said he received the estate from his Aunt Betsy (Elizabeth Quick Christopher). Any comments?
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Aug 27, 2018 14:58:24 GMT -5
Exactly where did you get that idea? The Witnesses to the marriage of John Osborn Polmear Quick were Christopher Jennings and Tobias Read (Parish Clerk). The ONLY mention of William Quick in the marriage record is in the column requesting the name and occupation of John's father - which does not mean he was alive! William Quick (husband of Margaret Polmear) did not leave a Will and his father William (husband of Elizabeth Hollow) was living at Breja when he died and according to his Will had estate in Trevessa which was left to son Thomas. There is no mention of Treveale at all but he did leave son William a shilling! William Quick, husband of Elizabeth Hollow, died 6th March 1841 and was buried at Towednack 11th March 1841 William Quick, husband of Margaret Polmear, died in 1841 and was buried at Towednack 21st November. CT
|
|
|
Post by poyle on Aug 27, 2018 16:03:44 GMT -5
Good points and I stand corrected. Yes, William is mentioned under father's occupation for both John's and Margaret's marriages so it is not evidence that he is still alive. The November 1841 date of death therefore seems convincing. Thanks for this.
The disputed property between Peter B. and William is listed in several sources as Treveale, not Trevessa? This is in both newspaper accounts and the court documents. The Cornwall map lists both Trevessa Farm and Treveal Farm, in close proximity.
I have not been able to locate the William's will. Can you provide a reference?
If both William's died in 1841, the estate could have come from William the son, but I doubt that, which means the reference in the court letter is wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Aug 27, 2018 18:18:21 GMT -5
As I said in my previous post William Quick the younger (i.e. husband of Margaret Polmear and father of the miscreant) did NOT leave a Will. The elder William (i.e. husband of Elizabeth Hollow) left a Will naming his estate in Trevessa which he left to his son Thomas. Son William (husband of Margaret Polmear) was bequeathed one shilling by his father which generally means that he had already been taken care of earlier but there is NO MENTION of any property being left to William. The Will was dated 20th July 1831 and proved 5th July 1841 with bequests as follows:- wife Elizabeth Quick 12 pounds a year 'out of my Estate in Trevessa' together with sufficient furze and turf from the said estate. She also received two rooms in the higher house (in the Court) being the little parlour and the chamber over the kitchen and any other 'of my goods' that may be convenient for her use. daughter Elizabeth one pound sterling to be paid three months after her father's death son William one shilling to be paid one month after his father's death son Paul one Guinea to be paid one year after his father's death son Israel one Guinea to be paid one year after his father's death daughter Grace thirty pounds sterling to be paid one year after her father's death daughter Mary thirty pounds sterling to be paid one year after her father's death son Thomas 'all my Estate in Zennor in the County aforesaid I do give unto him and he is to take possession thereof one year after my decease paying unto the Executors One hundred pounds of British money at the time of taking possession of the Estate.' 'Likewise I do give unto my two sons James Quick and Robert Quick all my other Estates of Every kind and sort whatsoever'. James and Robert were named as executors. There is no ambiguity in this and whatever son William may have received prior to his father's Will it does not appear to have been property else why should William have spent most of his life after marriage at St Ives and Penzance and much of that time as an Innkeeper? The Will above can be found in the Cornwall Record Office catalog - AP/Q/153 William Quick, yeoman, of Towednack 1841. Another document at the CRO that you might find interesting. I have not seen this but the brief details in the catalog suggest that it 'might' be a dispute amongst brothers in the above Will. Here is a link:- crocat.cornwall.gov.uk/DServe/dserve.exe?dsqIni=Dserve.ini&dsqApp=Archive&dsqCmd=Show.tcl&dsqDb=Catalog&dsqPos=2&dsqSearch=%28%28%28%28text%29%3D%27william%27%29AND%28%28text%29%3D%27quick%27%29%29AND%28Date%3D%271841%27%29%29In case you have a problem with it the CRO reference is ARD/166/221 Ref No ARD/166/221 Title Testamentary cause, William Quick of Towednack Date 1841 Format Manuscript Extent 2 pieces Description William Quick and Paul Quick versus James Quick and Robert Quick. Going on the bequests outlined above this particular document might be a dispute involving brothers whereby William who received one shilling and Paul who received one guinea are disputing the fact that James and Robert are executors or the fact that James and Robert got everything that was not left to brother Thomas. Maybe there is something in that document that might help solve the problem for you. CT
|
|