Jane Jones (Newport) - Samuel or Stephen Newport?

There is no confusion - they are two different people.

Jane Bright

Jane Jones

Please read Jane Jone's obituary in the timeline. it is very specific.

Yes I understand that there are two Jane Newports.

However the article in the Wanganui Herald states as follows:

"
ANOTHER OLD WANGANUI SETTLER.

Another old resident of Wanganui and one of New Zealand's earliest colonists, in the person of Mrs John Jones (the death of whose husband was recorded in our columns last week) passed peacefully away at her residence, Dublin Street, this morning. The deceased was a member of the Newport (Stephen) family of Buckinghamshire, England, who arrived in New Zealand in 1842
"
Jane Bright was alive when this was published, published on the date of Jane Jones death.

The Timeline for Jane Jones mentions the article in the Wanganui Chronicle (DIFFERENT NEWSPAPER) which does not state which family she belonged to.

Link to paper:https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WH19171109.2.53?

If you look at the respective timelines, Stephen Newport never left the South Island - neither did his daughter Jane Newport/Bright, until she retired to Wellington. Jane's children were also born in the South Island. None of them ever went near Wanganui.

Jane Newport/Quin/Jones, on the other hand, spent the greater part of her life in the North Island and died there in 1917.

Ok so Jane Jones was in Wanganui however you are saying there is no evidence Stephen lived in the North Island.

I did find Stephen's death notice - it does state he died in Takaka, South Island in 1888.
(The Colonist, Volume XXXI, Issue 5299, 22 August 1888).

This still does not explain why the article states Jane Jones is from the Stephen branch. Perhaps she moved to be with John Quin? Or did Stephen move back to the South after a short stay in Wanganui?

Samuel also died in the South (The Colonist, Volume XXII, Issue 2757, 7 September 1880). So at least one of them had to of moved from Wanganui if Jane didn't move to Wanganui on her own accord.

To be clear I'm not doubting either Stephen or Samuel's life but rather Jane Jones' parentage.

I've found the Wanganui connection in this obituary,,,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TC18880905.2.7?query=s...

The war was under way in Wanganui, and daughter Jane at age 17 married John Quin who was fighting with the 65th regiment.

If this makes logical sense, then Jane's parents will need to be flipped yet again.

Ah I see this explains why Stephen moved back south. John Quin moved to Auckland with Jane so I guess Stephen left without her.

Oh well I guess Jane's parents need to be swapped again, assuming no evidence of Samuel being her father surfaces.

Cite the article and I'll leave the swapping to you.

Please check

https://www.geni.com/family-tree/index/6000000021308614946

https://www.geni.com/family-tree/index/6000000019118686435

Cool, thanks Angus.

All,

I have been asked to merge Charles Henry Quin with Charles Henry Quin which seems reasonable to me based on this thread and the text in the About sections of the profiles.

Any objections?

Hi Alex,

I am reasonably sure that both Charles are the same. My genetic results match me as an approximate third cousin to a descendant of a "Charles Quinn" and "Maanga Mourea" (through another website). I would say this couple is the same as the Geni listed Charles Henry Quin and Maanga Maurea couple.

I say merge the two.

Charles Quin, according to the evidence in the timeline, was born in 1859.

Somehow, he gained a middle name of Henry, married Maanga Mourea (born 1832) in 1920 (who died on 14-05-1920, buried on 17-05-1920) then changed his last name to Quinn to match the Quinn who died in Hamilton (Charles Henry QUINN 85 Male 30/12/1929), giving him a birth-date of 1844, which is prior to the parents marriage.

Maanga was born in 1832, making her 27 years older than her husband.
Adding a death-bed marriage makes the profile more interesting.

The names quoted as being on the marriage certificate are interesting (even the father became John Henry Quin) which makes me think that this is a proxy marriage at best. Please add this certificate to the profile.

A brief investigation showed that Maanga also married George Hull.

I can't escape the conclusion that Charles Quin born 1859 and the Charles Henry Quin/Quinn who married Maanga are two different people. There is absolutely no evidence to say otherwise.

Thank you Elaine, i went no further than the briefest of glances at the two profiles. I am satisfied to follow your lead in this.

Based on the paper trail I would agree with you Elaine, I too would be hesitant to connect the two profiles. To elaborate on my genetic match, it is to two paternal half sisters, who's father was a grandson of Charles Quinn and Maanga Maurea.

Given I myself have no Maori heritage, it limits any possible connections we would all share. All of us also share a genetic match to a Christie (who is a descendant of Lavinia Newport, Jane's sister, common ancestor of all four of us being Stephen and Leah Newport).

The genetics add a considerable weight to the argument that the Charles are the same. The chances of a secondary genetic common match between four people is extremely low.

Thoughts?

Jane Quin, the supposed mother of the Charles Henry Quinn who died in Hamilton in 1929 would have been 10 years of age at the time of his birth.

https://www.hamilton.govt.nz/our-services/do-it-online/cemetery-sea...

Can we please put this to bed.

I would love to settle this, however there is an inconsistency between official records, family records, and genetics. The image of Jane Jones uploaded is from a family bible.

There is the possibly that the informant for Charles Quin (and therefore possibly the subsequent purchaser of his gravestone) was incorrect in their assessment of Charles's age. It should also be noted that Charles's alleged wife Maanga seems to be buried alone, and not with either George Hull or Charles.

https://billiongraves.com/grave/person/26337681

In terms of genetics, I have been genetically tested, and through the paper trail I am a descendant of John Quin and Jane Newport. I genetically match to a pair of paternal half-sisters whose father is, through the paper trail, a descendant of Charles and Maanga. We all share a genetic match to a paper trail descendant of Stephen and Leah (through Jane's sister Lavinia).

This level of genetic connection almost always suggests that the four of us have a common ancestral couple, in this case it would be Stephen and Leah. This would make the Charles Quins the same person.

Really we need the death certificate of the Charles Quinn who died in 1929. I believe Teena Lawrence was in the process of getting it. Otherwise we might be stuck at this question of heritage forever.

Jane Jones's death notice notes that "C. Quin" is alive in Kawhia. This is where Maanga was living. It's no solid evidence on its own, but interesting when paired with other stuff.

There are several items placing Charles at Kawhia, including a 'Licence to discharge cargo, Kawhia' in 1884 issued by the Customs Dept.

The challenge is to link this Charles to the Charles Henry Quinn who died in 1929. Basically, how did Charles Quin become Charles Henry Quinn?

His middle name could have been an afterthought (i.e. given to him after his birth registration). My own middle name is not on my birth certificate because I got it later. The same could have happened to Charles.

Quin changing to Quinn could simply be a mistake by the death informant. It is spelt as "Quin" on the marriage look up. (1920/10183 Maangi Mouriari Charles Henry Quin). Again Charles's death certificate would probably answer a few questions.

DNA doesn't lie however, I am related to the pair of half-sisters. The DNA segment is the same in all three of us (i.e. it is from the same ancestor). There is a very slim chance it is not through John and Jane, however this would involve both of us to have a pair of unknown adoptions in our family, that in turn are from the same natural family. The genetic relation to another Newport descendant further places doubt in this unknown adoption theory.

Ultimately, I am convinced that the two Charles are the same person, with an unfortunate level of official record keeping. At the very least I think that the two Charles should be kept linked until something can definitively prove otherwise.

Elaine what certificates do you currently possess?

With a death-bed marriage where the groom is 27 years younger than the bride, a groom who doesn't know his birth date, a marriage certificate that contains a mountain of information that is not normally found on a marriage certificate, but cannot be produced, name changes (including the father) that just 'happened', assorted birth dates, and dna that is not available - I'll leave you to it.

It's a strange case, but these strange cases have to happen to someone's family!

Although we don't have Charles's DNA, we do have the DNA of a descendant of Charles and DNA from a descendant of John, and they match.

Is it possible to for you to upload the certificate? I would like to see it and it probably belongs on here anyway.