George Cooper Green-Child 4
The 1828 New South Wales census shows a 22yo George Green (born in the colony), living with his 21yo wife Sarah (came free), 3yo daughter Emma (born in the colony) and 1 month old son William (born in the colony). This corresponds with Australia Birth records that show the birth of Emma Green in 1826 and William in 1828; the children of George C Green and Sarah. Their son George does not appear on the census because he was born in 1827 and died a few months later, also in 1827. The Australian Death Index shows the death of a George C Green in 1827. Unfortunately early death records did not include the names of the parents, although this particular record states that the deceased was an infant. This corresponds with the Australia Birth record that shows the birth of George C Green in 1827, son of George C Green and Sarah.
Though the 1828 census does not contain his middle name, George is listed as a cooper and the family is living at the residence of William Newtown (or Burton) in O'Connell Street, Sydney. The information on the 1828 census provides further evidence that this is the same George Green referred to in the Sydney Gazette and NSW Advertiser in 1825 and he was also the same George Green, who was a cooper aboard the Harriet, who was murdered and cannibalised in New Zealand in 1834 at the hands of the natives.
George was born on 8th March 1806 and baptised on 13th April in Sydney.
Adapted Biography of George Cooper Green by Stephen Wilson and updated by Viv Cunningham-Smith [in bold]
There are many conflicting marriage and death records on numerous family tree websites, including ancestry.com, for George C Green, the son of Jonathan Green and Elizabeth Cooper. Similar discrepancies about his wife (or wives) and their 3 children appear on those same family trees.
It is known that Jonathan Green and Elizabeth Cooper had a son named George C (born 1806 per Australian Birth Index), however no official document can be located to confirm his middle name (Jonathan and Elizabeth had a son named Jonathan Cooper Green who was born/baptised at St Olave's in Southwark in March 1800). Birth Transcript Below Confirms His Middle Name As Cooper.
In 1825 the Sydney Gazette and NSW Advertiser published an article about a George Cooper Green who was charged with purchasing goods that he knew to be stolen. The article also states that he was a cooper by trade and had purchased a quantity of staves which are used to make barrels. He was committed to trial and placed on bail. The outcome of the trial is uncertain, however George appears on the New South Wales Gaol Description and Entrance Book on 28th October 1825 so presumably he was found guilty. On 29th November it appears that he was convicted and charged then 'discharged to bail'.
George was a cooper like his brother William Richard Green.
In the 1822 general convict muster for Jonathan Green (and family), his son George is not listed with the other family members. He would have been 16 at the time and based on the aforementioned 1825 newspaper article naming George Cooper Green, his non-appearance on the muster suggests he was already working and living elsewhere by 1822. The colony was not yet 40 years old in the mid 1820's, so the likelihood of there being 2 totally unrelated George Cooper Greens is very remote. The 1822 general convict muster names George Green who is employed as a servant to Major Ovens. The record also states that George was 16 at the time and was born in the colony. This certainly appears to be the son of Jonathan and Elizabeth Green.
When Sir Thomas Brisbane was appointed governor of New South Wales in 1821 he brought Major John Ovens with him as aide-de-camp and made him acting chief engineer which gave him general supervision of convict gangs. He improved the efficiency of the convicts employed on public works, supervised 'clearing gangs' with much success, and ultimately had 50 gangs preparing extensive tracts of land for cultivation. He also accompanied Captain Currie on an expedition to the upper Murrumbidgee and Monaro district in 1823 and helped John Oxley to survey Twofold Bay shortly before his death at the end of 1825 – the same year that George C Green married Sarah Papps.
The 1825 muster lists George Green aged 19 years born in the colony and son of Jonathan Green .
It might seem incongruous that the son of a convict was working for a man whose responsibility was supervising convicts. However, as early as 1815, George’s father had been employed as a deputy gaoler and a district constable in Sydney and was listed as 'provost Marshal's Bailiff' in 1822, so it is likely that Jonathan Green and Major Ovens were known to each other.
In 1824, Ovens had been promoted to Major in the 57th Regiment in recognition of his services to the Colony. He had been in poor health for some time and was planning to retire to his estate. Conceivably, during this period, it is likely that George was no longer required to serve under Ovens due to his promotion and failing health, thus explaining why he was working as a cooper by 1825.
Some family trees show that George C(ooper) Green was married twice. The Australia Marriage Index shows the marriage of George C Green and Sarah Papps in 1825 and the Australia Birth Index lists 3 children born to George C Green and Sarah Green from 1826-1828. Some family trees also have him marrying Mary Ryan with a daughter named Ellen born in 1836. Sarah Green (nee Papps) apparently died in 1855, so unless she and George divorced or separated, it's unlikely that George re-married and had more children before then.
There are no records supporting this 2nd marriage; however the Australia Marriage Index shows the marriage of Henry Green and Mary Ryan in 1835. The following year Ellen Green was born and the Australia Birth Index names the parents as Henry and Mary Green. Henry is also named as the father in Ellen’s 1895 death record (under her married name of Spillane). Possibly it was George’s younger brother Henry who was married to Mary Ryan.
Many family trees show that George C(ooper) Green died in 1860. In fact, the George Green who died in November 1860 was George Charles Green, a lunatic prisoner according to the Queanbeyan Age and General Advertiser which reported in part;
‘MISERABLE DEATH OF A LUNATIC…a man named George Charles Green, died a miserable death at the Queanbeyan lock-up. He was a prisoner on escort to Goulburn Gaol, committed by the Kiandra bench as a dangerous lunatic. An inquest was held in the course of the same day, at the Harp Inn, before Andrew Morton, Esq., coroner for the district…’
The report also stated that the deceased was aged between 40 and 50 years and the NSW Death Index states he was 48, implying he was born in 1812. There are a number of records for at least 3 other convicts named George Green, some with birthdates around 1812. It is likely that the George Green who died in 1860 is a completely different person to the George C Green who was born in 1806 to Jonathan and Elizabeth Green.
The 1825 Sydney Gazette and NSW Advertiser article about George Cooper Green, together with information sourced from the 1828 New South Wales census (discussed later), almost certainly confirms that he is the same George C Green who was born to Jonathan and Elizabeth Green in 1806. The likelihood of there being another adult in the colony in the mid-1820’s with that same name and occupation is very remote.
The NSW Calendar and General Post Office Directory 1832 lists William and George both coopers in Sydney.
This still leaves the issue of George C(ooper) Green’s fate unresolved.
An article published in the Sydney Herald in August 1834 provides a lengthy account of a shipwreck in New Zealand of the British ship 'Harriet' in April of that year. It details the atrocities committed by the natives on some of the shipwreck survivors. They are referred to as ‘British’, but presumably this includes those who were Australian born. The captain of the Harriet wrote a harrowing account of the events that took place on the shores of New Zealand after the shipwreck. It states in part;
‘…the last and most revolting act of these savages has been the murder of twelve shipwrecked British seamen, attached to the Harriet, of Sydney, whom they tore to pieces and devoured in the presence of their comrades’.
The captain also recalled the names of some of the men who were killed, including;
"George Green, (a Cooper)."
I think we can confirm that George Cooper Green did die at the hands of the Maori in 1834. Could this be the same George Green who was the son of Jonathan and Elizabeth and could this explain why there is apparently no Australian death record for him? If George was a cooper, how did he come to be aboard a ship travelling to New Zealand with British seamen and other assorted settlers and traders? This may be explained by the fact that Sarah’s older brother, John Smith Papps, was a ship’s captain. He appears in numerous newspaper publications from 1836 until his apparent fall from grace and subsequent insolvency (twice) in the early 1850’s. John apparently lost 2 children, both under the age of 7, within a week of each other in 1850 whilst they were at sea with him aboard the ‘Harmony’. In 1853, another infant child died at the family residence at the age of 11 months. John had arrived in Port Jackson in August 1833 as the captain of the 164 tonne brig ‘Genie’. He may have been instrumental in securing employment for his brother-in-law in the shipping or trade industry soon after his arrival in the colony.
The Harriet also features in Jonathan’s history. It was mentioned in the Colonial Secretary’s papers related to the Chapman affair.
The rescue of Betty Guard and her two children from Ngāti Ruanui in the spring of 1834 involved the first action by British troops on New Zealand soil. A British House of Commons inquiry into the affair in 1835 criticised what it described as the use of excessive force by the rescue party.
In April 1834 the whaler John (Jacky) Guard, his wife Elizabeth and their two children returned from a trip to Sydney aboard the Harriet, commanded by Captain Hall. On the 29th the barque was caught in a gale and driven ashore near Rāhotu on the Taranaki coast.
In true survivor style the castaways made tents from the ship’s sails. Several days later, they were attacked by a group of Taranaki Māori who plundered the wreck. Then Ngāti Ruanui, perhaps aggrieved at the lack of booty, attacked the party. In the ensuing struggle, 12 of the Harriet’s crew were killed, including Betty’s brother. Betty herself narrowly escaped death.
A sensationalised account of Betty’s capture that appeared in the Sydney Herald on 17 November 1834 emphasised Māori savagery:
[The Maori] stripped her and her children naked, dragged her to their huts, and would have killed her, had not a Chief’s wife kindly interfered on her behalf, and when the bludgeon was raised with that intention, threw a rug over her person, and saved her life…. They afterwards delivered the youngest child [Louisa] to the mother, and took the other away into the bush, and Mrs. Guard did not see it [John] for two months after.
Betty Guard also described how she ‘saw the Natives cut up and eat those they killed belonging to the Harriet’. https://nzhistory.govt.nz/culture/maori-european-contact-pre-1840/the-harriet-affair
Whilst Mrs Guard and her children survived the ordeal (indeed it is suspected that she and Chief Oaoiti had cause of much titillation at the time), the twelve sailors captured with them met a grisly fate: one-by-one they were executed, cooked and eaten. Evidently Mrs Guard later reported that she was offered human portions of the feasts - but declined. https://tomahawknz.blogspot.com/2018/10/the-harriet-incident-south-taranaki.html?m=1
The climax came on the tenth, when the rival forces occupied the opposing banks of a river, the Europeans under arms the whole night through, determined that a fitting tribute of Maori life should accompany their own destruction. The attack commenced at eight o'clock in the morning, when the Maoris rushed the little party and cut PAGE 113down two of them, one of whom Guard says they cut into two and the other they cut up into joints for their cannibal repast. Then the Europeans opened fire, and an engagement commenced which lasted over an hour, when, although the Maoris had on several occasions been compelled to withdraw, they had, by taking advantage of their superior numbers, and utilizing the shelter furnished by the broken ground, killed some twelve of the defenders and forced the remainder to retreat. The Maoris fought from holes which they dug in the ground. Captives who were alive—with the exception of Mrs. Guard and her children—were at once killed. Even Mrs. Guard was twice cut down by a tomahawk, and was only saved from having her head split open by a large comb which she wore in her hair. Guard was amongst those who escaped. http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-McNOldW-t1-body-d1-d7.html
Was George one of the first two killed or the latter group who had fought the Maori but were captured? Painting of 1834 slaughter of Maori.
The 1828 census shows Sarah to be a 21yo free settler who arrived on the Friendship in 1813. I think there are 2 errors here. The Friendship made several trips to Australia, but none in 1813. The more likely date is 1818 and other records for Sarah and Amelia confirm this. Sarah’s implied birth date of 1807 seems at odds with other records that suggest she was born around 1802. Tracing and verifying her existence prior to the 1828 census has proved difficult because she and her mother may have come to Australia under a different surname. Certainly someone named Sarah Smith Papps existed in the UK where records show that she was born to Amelia Smith and Henry Papps in 1802. Henry apparently died in 1813 in the UK and numerous family trees show Henry and Amelia still having children up to 1812. Amelia, Sarah and at least one other child of Amelia’s eventually made their way to Australia.
If we accept that this is the Sarah Papps who married George C Green in 1825, then seemingly she lied about her age on the 1828 census. The UK records actually make her a few years older than George. It appears that once Sarah, her younger sister Eliza and their mother Amelia arrived in Australia, the latter was living as the wife of Mr. Wood (per the 1822 general convict muster). Amelia gave birth to a son named Joseph on board the Friendship before they arrived in Port Jackson in January 1818. The voyage took about 6 months, suggesting that Amelia was pregnant long before departing England in July 1817. The identity of Joseph’s father was probably known only to Amelia. Sarah and her siblings also appeared on the muster with the surname Wood and all are recorded as arriving free on the Friendship. This is consistent with Sarah’s entry on the 1828 New South Wales census. However, it appears that her mother was known to Mr Wood as early as 1809 based on the following extract from the 'Free Settler or Felon' website which provides various accounts of the voyage of the Friendship in 1817/1818;
".... on arrival in Port Jackson, the women of the Friendship apparently indicated to Superintendent Mr. Hutchinson, that they were perfectly satisfied with the conduct of the captain. Mr. Campbell's muster of them on board also declared that no complaints were made on the voyage. Nevertheless an inquiry was instigated after correspondence was forwarded to government including that of Amelia Wood on behalf of the other free female passengers...Peter Cosgreave forwarded correspondence of his own stating that Amelia Wood, wife of a convict who arrived in 1809, came on board with her daughter by order of government. She attempted to bring another child by surreptitious means; and on the voyage gave birth to a son..."
Amelia’s husband was apparently a solicitor prior to his death, implying that she was an educated woman. This may explain why she was chosen to act on behalf of the other free female passengers. If the Amelia Wood referred to in the above excerpt is Sarah's mother, then Sarah must be the daughter who has also been referenced. The excerpt states that a convict named Wood, already in the colony, was her husband. If Amelia and Mr Wood were 'married' prior to his transportation in 1809, how could she have still been producing children to Henry Papps up until 1812? This is not the behaviour one would expect of a professional and educated family.
There doesn’t appear to be a UK marriage record for Amelia Papps and Wood, so possibly they lied about being married in order to expedite her free passage to Australia. Presumably they were already known to each other in England and word must have reached Wood that Amelia’s husband Henry had died in 1813 allowing him to pass her off as his wife. The 1822 general convict muster shows that Amelia Wood and her children arrived as free settlers on the Friendship. This is consistent with the information on Sarah’s 1828 New South Wales census record (despite the obvious error of the year of arrival). There were only 101 females on the 1818 voyage of the Friendship. There is little likelihood that there were 2 women called Amelia, each with a young daughter called Sarah accompanying them, particularly when most of the females on board were convicts.
Presumably Sarah Papps is the same Sarah who appeared on the 1822 general convict muster as Sarah Wood and then 3 years later got married under the name of Papps. The explanation for using both Wood and Papps as her surname may simply be that it was easier to assume Mr Wood's surname when the 1822 muster was conducted - particularly as they had travelled "by order of government" under the surname of Wood.
Another family historian has written the Papps history thus far: Wendy from Armidale NSW
“ This is an intriguing and winding tale. My research to date has led me to conclude the following:
Henry Papps died in 1813 and Amelia (Ryland) married Joseph B. Wood, a London confectioner on New Bond Street, soon after. Emigration records show that Amelia sailed to NSW on the Friendship as a free settler with daughters, Sarah (age 14) and Eliza (age 5), She gave birth to a son, Joseph Friendship Wood, at sea. The ship departed on 3 July 1817 and arrived on 14 January 1818.
Her children, Hester (age 7) and Harry (age 5), remained in London. They both later married and raised families in London. Catherine Ryland (presumably Amelia's sister) witnessed Hester's marriage documents in 1829 so it is likely that she raised both Hester and Harry. Hester's marriage documents also state that her parents were deceased, yet her mother was alive and living in NSW. This is an unsolved puzzle at present. I also cannot find any information about what became of the two remaining daughters - Amelia Eleanor Papps (born 1797) and Catherine Matilda (the second, born 1807).
Amelia's son, (Captain) John, was a Master Mariner who had already sailed to Australia more than once before 1817. It is possible that he saw life in the new colony and believed that it offered a rich future for members of his family. It is also possible that Amelia followed her later husband, John Wathern, to the colony, as he had been sentenced and transported earlier in 1817. It is strange that she emigrated when two months pregnant with Joseph Wood's baby. Perhaps Joseph died in those two months and she made a hasty decision to leave the country. I have not been able to determine if Joseph B. Wood died between May and July of 1817. Would it have been possible to secure passage at such short notice?
There are records in my tree showing that Amelia Ryland, Amelia Papps, Amelia Wood, and Amelia Wathern are the same person. “
Another family history cites records:
Amelia Wood Also calling herself a Convict’s wife, stating that her husband was transported about 1809, had an Order for a passage for herself and daughter, ….. on board another Daughter of 4 or 5 years also. On the 6th Inst she was delivered of a boy…. [Surgeon’s Journal Friendship]
“ Emelia and Joseph WOOD are listed as the parents for the baptism of their son Joseph F in 1818, as per NSW BDM’s index of Early Church Records (Volume 7, line 739, and Volume 1B, line 4411).
C of E baptisms : January 1818, Joseph, born at sea, mother as Amelia Wood per Friendship 13 January 1818, came free – noting she declared her husband (Joseph Wood) to have been transported to NSW in 1809. “ No such convict can be found.
Amelia had married John Warthern in 1825 in Sydney.
Peter Cosgreave, surgeon on the Friendship, stated that Amelia was the wife of a convict who arrived in 1809, who had been transported by government order with one daughter and that she had secreted another daughter on board. But the surgeon’s report is doubtful. Amelia had formally complained in writing about him and others on board the Friendship on behalf of other women on board, so his character is dubious and his damning comments may have been made in retaliation to discredit her. There also appears to be no evidence that Joseph Wood was a convict in 1809, and Amelia was still married to Harry Papps at that time and gave birth to three children with him after 1809.
Sarah died in Camperdown where the extended Green family lived and new inquest was held on 1st September 1852. It looks like she died from accidental burns.
What happened to George’s children?
Emma Amelia GREEN: I wonder if William Richard Smith named his daughter Emma Amelia after his first cousin. She was born on 15th Feb 1826 in Sydney and married a Master Mariner Captain Lewin Wiles in 1848. They lived in Palmer St Sydney and on 3rd July 1851 she gave birth to a son who survived only 3 hours. A further son Lewin was born 26th March 1855 and survived only 3 days. In June 1851 Lewin Wiles was sentenced to 12 months gaol for assault. The court judgment was lengthy and published in the Sydney Morning Herald on 9th June 1851. The initial account on 4th June:
WOUNDING ON THE HIGH SEAS. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/12927657?searchTerm=%22Lewin%20Wiles%22#
Sydney Morning Herald 4th June 1851
Lewin Wiles, master mariner, was indicted for having, on the 24th January last, wounded one William Tarbuck, with intent to do the latter some grievous bodily harm. The prisoner was defended by Mr. Foster.
Wiles, it appeared, was master of the whaling barque Australian, and Tarbuck was chief officer of that vessel. According to the evidence of Tarbuck there had, on the day named in the information, been some difference and a little scuffling between himself and the captain on the deck, which ended in the latter ordering the former below. Tarbuck obeyed, but on arriving in the cabin they again grappled. The captain offered to strike Tarbuck, when the latter raised his hand to ward off the blow, and by so doing grazed the check of the captain, causing him to bleed. Wiles upon this exclaimed that Tarbuck had struck him, and called to the second mate, a New Zealander, for a bayonet, which was brought to him ; he struck Tarbuck with it upon the left temple. Tarbuck at this time said he was willing to go in irons, but Wiles exclaimed that he would have blood for blood. The prisoner then put Tarbuck in close confinement, and kept him in that position during the remainder of the voyage, allowing him, however, to take exercise upon the deck at stated periods. The evidence of Tarbuck was confirmed on most points by that of Short, the steward.
Mr Foster contended that although Captain Wiles might have acted somewhat hastily, it was only a fair conclusion that he had acted bona fide for the preservation of order and discipline on board his ship rather than from desire to injure Tarbuck. Mr. Daniel Cooper, Jun., Mr. Moses Joseph, and Mr. Buckland, were called, and gave Captain Wiles an excellent character as an efficient and popular commander, as a quiet and well disposed man.
The Jury, after having retired for about a quarter of an hour, found the prisoner guiltyof a common assault. He was then remanded, on bail, until Saturday, for sentence.
9th June 1851
Lewin Wiles, who had been indicted for wounding with intent to do some grievous bodily harm, and convicted of common assault,having been called up for judgment, certificates of good character from Captain Browne, Mr.S. A. Donaldson, and Mr. Thacker were read. Mr. FOSTER also proposed to read an affidavit from Captain Wiles, contradicting the evidence which led to defendant's conviction. This, however, being irregular, was not permitted ; but their Honors agreed to read the affidavit, and to consider so much of it as would come properly within their cognizance. Mr. Foster likewise urged in mitigation the injury already sustained by defendant by losing command of the vessel, and by having had a civil action commenced against him in reference to this very transaction. The CHIEF JUSTICE then proceeded to pass sentence as follows
Lewin Wiles, - It would be matter for serious regret, if, the sentence of the Court which I am about to pass, or any observation which may fall from me in passing it, were likely to relax the bonds of discipline on board of merchant vessels, or calculated to weaken in any degree that subordination, and readiness of obedience, in their officers and crews, which it is so important, and indeed so essential to preserve. The ocean would cease to be traversed in safety, and commerce itself to exist, if either the men or officers of ships could assume, at any time, but especially on the high seas, the right of judging what orders were or not to be obeyed, or could lawfully dispute the commands of the master, much less venture to resist or oppose him. But officers and sailors, as well as the captains and owners of vessels, have their rights ; and subordination and obedience, I am entirely persuaded, will be best maintained, and the interests of commerce promoted, by its being seen and felt that those rights are, on every fitting occasion, but above all in a Court of Justice, not only acknowledged, but practically vindicated and upheld. It is as important, in point of expediency, as it is abstractedly just, that, while commanders of ships have their authority enforced, the law should equally protect from injustice, from tyranny, or unlawful aggression, those who are placed under that authority. Now the prosecutor in this case, himself an officer, and therefore having authority over others, was undoubtedly bound to have set an example of strict obedience, and deference to his immediate superior, and in this respect, I cannot hesitate to concede to you that, on the occasion which led eventually to the offence of which you stand convicted, he failed. On the other hand, some allowance must be made for natural, perhaps unavoidable irritation ; to which, according to the evidence, he seems to have been not very judiciously provoked. He was willing, and offered; to obey you quietly, and even submit to confinement, if you would only take your hands off from him; and this you would not do. The blow which your after- wards received from him, in the course of the struggle which ensued, he declared at the time, and distinctly swore at the trial, was inflicted accidentally, in the effort to save his own person from a blow aimed by yourself. It is certain, however, that you thought it was struck deliberately ; and your counsel maintained, that, could you have adduced as witnesses two of the crew who were present, the fact would clearly so have appeared. Courts, however, can only deal, with cases, according to testimony winch is adduced ; and I saw no reason to distrust that of the prosecutor. Even, however, if you had been struck intentionally, nothing can excuse, nothing extenuate, the act of violence which followed, and for which you are now to receive deserved punishment. You have, it appears, borne for many years a very high character, and this has not been lost sight of by myself or my brother Judges. But, on the occasion now in question, you acted neither the part of a humane man, a cool and judicious comman-der, or a good subject. Although all resistance (such as there was) had ceased, and the man was then about to be handcuffed-an act on which I offer no comment, or on the lengthened imprisonment of him which fol-lowed, because an action for them is now pend-ing,-you deliberately sent for and used a bayonet, wounding the prosecutor with it, in avowed retaliation for his blow ; but in plainer and truer language, in revenge or anger, against an unarmed man, passive under your attack, and wholly in your power. Affidavits are now offered by you, made by yourself and your wife, that you used no expressions towards the prosecutor, indicating that the wound was inflicted in revenge. But it is the bounden (I might say the sacred) duty of Courts and Judges, to punish with extreme severity every instance of a resort, illegally, to weapons of a deadly nature, The wound actually inflicted was not very serious ; but it was inflicted on the temple, near the eye, and it might have been fatal. He who uses such a weapon, with his blood heated, cannot tell, and does not stay to calculate the consequences ; and he must answer for them. If undue leniency be exhibited, towards men so offending, many lives may be sacrificed, which the terrors of the law, and the fear of the consequences, may otherwise preserve. The sentence of the Court upon you, Lewin Wiles, under all the circumstances here alluded to, is this: -that you be imprisoned in her Majesty's Gaol at Sydney, for the term of twelve calendar months.
William Jonathan GREEN: like his uncles William owned Inns but became insolvent in 1876 in Tamworth and again in 1876 in Deepwater near Glen Innes. In 1859-1867 he is licensee of the Marine Hotel in the Rocks now The Orient Hotel. In 1879 he buys the North Shore Hotel from Rachael Blue and he has licenses in 1880 and 1881 it is located at 116 Blues Point Rd MacMahons Point Sydney. By the time his son Sydney is married in 1889 William’s occupation is listed as a traveller. He died at his property Mycroft Myagah Rd, Mosman on May 24th 1908 aged 79 years.
