Accidental paradise

It has been a while since I posted on this blog, partially because I have largely completed the research phase of my project, and partially because I have been rethinking what I am trying to achieve. What set out to be an update of a landmark family history from the 1980s has evolved into something quite different. 

I have now worked through at least four different versions of this book. Most of the other family histories that I have read document the lives of individual people, which involves a degree of duplication for a married couple. I had the feeling that in most families, the story of a man or woman cannot be easily separated from the story of their spouse and children, and telling of individual stories can easily undervalue the contribution of the women of the family. So I decided to base the book on a series of small ‘family’ biographies. This works very well, except for the unusually complex family of Robert Henderson II. But he is a special case.

Next, I started to look at how I would organise a printed book. I had written over 40 separate chapters, mostly biographies of families, and no mater how I organised them, it seemed clumsy and difficult to navigate. 

There was one recurring thought that came to me as I was researching many of the convict generation was the likelihood that many of them must have had a 'light-bulb' moment. They had been sent to the Colony of New South Wales as a punishment, but it was turning out to be a better life that they would have had if they had stayed in their homeland.

This led me to a new way of organising my intended book. I have divided it into three parts.

Part 1. Ancestral roots

The first part will look at the ancestral roots of our family in the British Isles. My starting point is 1770 when James Cook was making the discoveries that would eventually lead to the establishment of the British Colonies on the Australian continent. This is also an important point in time when you look at the reasons most of our ancestors ended up in Australia. 

Across most of the British Isles people were living a largely rural existence. Most families had lived out many generations within a small local area. But agricultural revolution was driving an unprecedented population growth and the industrial revolution was stirring. People were starting to move around to find work and the drift of people to the larger cities was increasing.

Part 2. The immigrants

16 of our ancestors made the journey from Britain to the Colony of New South Wales. They arrived over 60 years starting in 1793. They included eight convicts, six free settlers and one soldier with his wife. Three married couples made the journey. The remaining ten immigrants met their partners in the colony.

This part of the book will comprise eight chapters, each covering the lives of a couple and their children.

Part 3. Colonial pioneers

The final six chapters will be the stories of the colonial-born generations. As in the immigrant section, each chapter will cover  the lives of a couple and their children.

Some rule breakers

While most of the immigrants either arrived as couples, or married another immigrant in Australia, Sarah Lewis and Hannah Wallbridge did not quite fit that rule. Sarah Lewis was colonial born, but married a convict, while Hannah Wallbridge arrived as an immigrant, and married a colonial-born man. 

• I included Sarah Lewis with her husband, Thomas Watkins in the immigrant section. 
• I included Hannah Wallbridge with her colonial born husband, Robert Henderson II in the pioneers section. The fact that Hannah’s parents followed her to Australia means that this makes more sense.

Progressive rewrite

I have created a new section of my website for the new version of the book and will be linking in the new chapters as I go. I am trying to rewrite the new chapters more as a story and less as a commentary on the records that have been found. I will be referencing the sources of key facts and will make my rougher notes available under the resources section of each chapter.

Purse of gold

I was recently reading back through a family history prepared in the mid 1980s by Joan Taylor, a granddaughter of Manasseh and Madeline Ward. Joan's mother was Doris Ward  (always known as Dolly), the youngest of Manasseh and Madeline's children. Joan was a very thorough researcher, and recognised the importance of recording things, even if she was unable to verify them.

Towards the end of Joan's folder, there is a small collection of family stories. In my latest skim through, I noticed the story below which I did not remember. It is possibly the story of how an unnamed couple first met.

The family story from page 95 of Joan Taylor's landmark family history.

So who were this couple? The source of the story was Dolly Pierce nee Ward. It is very unlikely that this was about Dolly herself. In fact, it is an unlikely story for anyone to recount about themselves, because it paints them as either a thief or an accomplice. I suspect that it was told in the third party to protect the identity of the protagonists, but was likely one of Dolly's ancestors.

My logical mind stepped back through the family tree to see who might fit the story. The key facts are that it was in Sydney or Parramatta, and the couple went on to do well - the sovereigns were the basis of the family fortune.

• Manasseh and Madeline Ward met in Gosford. ✗
• William and Catherine Ward almost certainly met at Killcare. ✗
• William Ward and Catherine Mitchell both arrived as convicts, so that rules out any of their ancestors. ✗
• Madeline's father, Robert Geary Henderson squandered rather than made a family fortune. ✗
• Madeline's mother, Hannah Wallbridge, arrived from England, so it could not have anyone in her family. ✗
• Madeline's Henderson grandparents, Robert Henderson and Catherine Geary cannot be ruled out! 
• Robert Henderson's parents arrived together as Irish convicts, so they are rued out. ✗
• Patrick and Elizabeth Geary arrived together, Patrick as a soldier and Elizabeth as his wife. It cannot be them or any of their family. ✗

Dolly's only ancestors who I could not eliminate were Robert Henderson and Catherine Geary. They fit the story nicely and if the story was true, it may explain a few things. 

They both grew up in Parramatta and married there when Catherine was only 16. Neither was from a privileged background, and it is very unlikely that the young couple had much money. Robert's father was a tenant farmer and petty criminal and had been in prison in the years leading up to his son's marriage. Cathrine's father was a private in the NSW Corps. While many of the officers had done well for themselves, Patrick Geary was a working-class man.

Shortly after they married, Robert was granted land at Pittwater. There was an error in the grant documents and Robert's name was recorded as 'Anderson'. Was this really an error - or did the couple intentionally give the wrong name? And why take up land so far from where they had grown up? Was this just where the opportunities were, or was it to escape a poor reputation in the Parramatta district?

Their Pittwater farm prospered quickly. They quickly built up a herd of cattle and within five years they were buying nearby properties for cash. How were they able to build up their resources so quickly?

Robert and Catherine had setbacks and windfalls along the way, but of all of Dolly's ancestors, theirs was probably the largest family fortune.

If my logic is sound, this story puts a different light on Robert Henderson. While I had his father down as a petty Irish villain, I thought that Robert may have lived a more honest life. Sure he had a reputation as a rum smuggler, but that was just a bit of 'character'. 

But if this story is about Robert and Catherine Henderson, it paints him as a character more like his father. He may have been a thief from a young age, but was clever enough to stay a step ahead of the authorities and used his ill-gotten gains to establish a legitimate business empire. Maybe not the law-abiding good citizen that my imagination had created?

Which Thomas Watkins?

 I have been working this week going over the information that I have on Thomas and Sarah Watkins, who were early settlers of Mangrove Creek, a settlement in the lower Hawkesbury River region of Colonial New South Wales. I have written previously about both Thomas Watkins and his wife, Sarah Lewis. Thomas was a convict who arrived in Sydney on the Baring in 1815. Sarah was born in the colony, probably of convict parents.

The problem is that there were a number of people in the Colony who carried the name 'Thomas Watkins'.  That is not particularly unusual with the more common surnames. Christian names like Thomas, William, James, John and Joseph where also a dime a dozen at the time. William Ward was another relative that had the same problem - there were 35 or more convicts of that name over the history of convict transportation!

When considering a new piece of evidence that refers to a person of interest, in this case Thomas Watkins, I usually look for a second collaborative detail to make sure I have the right person. For a convict, this is often the ship on which they arrived, but I also accept locations or other details that give added assurance. So with William Ward, we can be sure that any reference that mentions the Almorah or Brisbane Water are likely to be my ancestor.

But this gets more complicated for Thomas Watkins, because there were two convicts of that name aboard the convict ship Baring. The two men often appear on the same page of convicts and the key detail that separates them is the place that they were tried.

• One was a native of Bristol and had been convicted at Gloucester on 6 April, 1814. His occupation was carter.
• The other was a native of Herefordshire and had been tried at Hereford. He was a labourer.

Both had been sentenced to transportation for life and were of a similar age (within five years). You can often find them both on the same list of convicts.

Click to enlarge - list of convicts in Baring.
There are two men named Thomas Watkins.

So which one was the Thomas that married Sarah Lewis? They had to get permission from the Governor to marry, but the records of that permission just describes Thomas as coming on the Baring.

The answer requires a bit more detective work than normal.  

In 1826 our Thomas Watkins was accused of stealing wood and his Ticket of Leave was revoked. Sarah appealed to the Governor and in her letter says that Thomas had held his Ticket of Leave for seven years. This matches up with a request to the Governor in 1919, which says that Thomas was recently married.

The investigation cleared Thomas of any wrong-doing and a new Ticket of leave was issued. This document is the clue I neeeded. It gives his native place as Bristol, his place of trial as Gloucester and the date of trial as 6 April 1814. It also  details the cancellation of the earlier Ticket of Leave. So there is no doubt that the Thomas Watkins who married Sarah Lewis was the one from Bristol. They are linked by Sarah's letter to the Governor.

The Hereford Thomas was granted his Ticket of Leave in 1824, at which time he was in the Illawarra region. I have not traced his history further.

It is not surprising that some family historians have mixed up the two men, and you will find some family trees that have the events of both men combined into a single story. 

At one point a few years ago, I was living at Wentworth Falls in the NSW Blue Mountains. Our house was on a section of the original 'Cox's Road' that had been built in just six months by William Cox. I had a short-lived thrill when I found the name of Thomas Watkins, who arrived on the Baring among the convicts assigned to work on the road. Of course it was the Hereford Thomas, not our relative.

The coincidences are interesting. I was browsing old copies of 'The Gloucester Journal', where I knew there were reports of Thomas's trial. I did a search for 'Thomas Watkins' and 'horse-stealing' and got an immediate hit in the right timeframe. I was about to save my find, when I noticed that it was a report of the Hereford Assizes (courts). I was sure I was in the right edition of that paper, and did some page flipping, and sure enough, the Gloucester Assizes, and our Thomas's conviction, were reported on page three, while the more distant courts, with the other Thomas, were on page four. And they were both convicted of horse-stealing.

Madeline Geary Henderson's trust

This is the story of the property trust established by Robert Henderson for his granddaughter, Madeline. Read my earlier post for the background to this trust.

Madeline Mary Geary Henderson was the second child of Robert Geary Henderson and Hannah Wallbridge.  Her grandfather, Robert Henderson Sr set up a trust in his will to provide for Madeline's care and schooling and to give her a good start in life. He may have had concerns that Madeline's father would squander the family fortune and not care properly for Madeline and her brother. (If you read about the other trusts, you will see that any such fears were well justified.)

Madeline's trust consisted of two parcels of land in Darling Harbour:

Diagram of the property included in Madeline Henderson's trust. This diagram was contained
with the papers from Robert's lawyers.

• The hotel known as the Dove Inn in the corner of Erskine and Sussex Streets in Sydney.
• A row of houses running from the Dove Inn, along Sussex Street.

It is likely that there was a wharf at the end of the row of houses, and this would have been linked to the Inn through the yard shown behind the houses. This wharf would have been included in the property.

Madeline was 14 and at boarding school when her grandfather died. While she remained a minor, any income from the trust was be applied to her care and education, as well her advancement in life. Once she was 21, she would be able to use the income for her own benefit or choose how it would be applied.

Madeline remained at her boarding school until she was married Joseph Keele in 1875. Tragically, Joseph died six months later and Madeline was left a widow (and pregnant) at just 20 years of age. After her daughter Josephine was born, Madeline went to stay with her brother, Robert, at the Kincumber property he had inherited in his trust. While there, she met Manasseh Ward, whose family owned the neighbouring property. They married in 1877.  In the ensuing 20 years, Madeline gave birth to another 13 children, 10 surviving to adulthood.

In 1878, the Trustees leased part of the property to John See and James Kidman for 90 years, for an annual rent of £248. They separately leased the hotel and boarding house for seven years. In 1887, the hotel and boarding house were leased to John See for 50 years for £400 per year. The £648 combined rental was the equivalent of almost 10 times the income of an average worker in 1888.

The trustees appointed under Robert Henderson's will retired in 1897 and the Permanent Trustee Company was appointed to administer the trust. 

In 1900, The Colonial Government announced the resumption of a large swathe of the Sydney waterfront for a redevelopment project. Madeline's property was included. Compensation was paid in 1903, with over £19,000 paid for the Dove in and houses belonging to Madeline. Unfortunately for Madeline, 92% of the compensation was paid to the people who held the long-term lease, and Madeline's trust was left with just over £1,800. While this was a lot less that the property was worth, it was still about 18 times the average wage at the time.

The trustees reinvested the money on terrace houses in Glebe. I am not exactly sure how many houses they bought and an earlier family researcher found that some of the houses were also resumed. But at the end of the trust, there were 20 brick houses in two terraces. There were 16 houses in Glebe Road (now Glebe Point Road) and four houses in Bridge Road.

Madeline and Manasseh were not dependent on the trust for their daily needs, but the trust enabled them to educate their family and also to live comfortably. Both Manasseh and Madeline had other property holdings that would have earned money from rents. The reliability of the trust income probably allowed Manasseh to devote his time to civic duties and he served many terms on local Councils.

While Madeline seemed content to let her trust run its course, not all her children were as patient. The youngest child Bruce first mortgaged his rights to the trust in 1918 and then sold them in 1920. Roy likewise sold his rights in 1920.

Madeline died in 1934. The trustees sought to get the approval of the beneficiaries to sell the real estate properties. However Madeline's eldest child, Josephine was in care in the USA and was not able to approve the sale. The trust would not be wound up until after Josephine's death in 1964. I have not discovered the precise details of the final winding up of the trust, but based on documents from Josephine's Australian probate file, and family recollections, it was finalised in about 1965. An estimate of the value of the trust done for Josephine's probate was over $140,000, roughly 60 times the average annual income. Each of the 11 shares would have been worth around $12,800. 

I think that Madeline's grandfather would have been happy with the trust he established for Madeline. It probably the only one of the four trusts that he created that did what he intended, and allowed Madeline to live a comfortable life.

Thomas Henderson's trust

The single property i Thomas's trust is
shaded in red.

This is the story of the property trust established by Robert Henderson for his son, Thomas. See my earlier post for the background to this trust. 

Thomas Henderson was the second son of Robert Henderson, an Innkeeper in early Colonial Sydney. Little is known about Thomas. Details of his birth have not been discovered, leading some to speculate that he may have been adopted as a companion for Robert, his older brother.

Thomas grew up around the Dove Inn in Darling Harbour. The little we know of Thomas paints the picture of a spoiled youth with rich parents. He comes into some focus in 1858 when he is repeatedly taken to court in an effort to get him to support a child he had fathered with Eliza Wallbridge, a barmaid at the Dove Inn. To make matters worse, Eliza washis sister-in-law, younger sister of Hannah, his brother's wife.

At around the same time as Thomas was creating a scandal for the family, his brother Robert was busy doing the same, deserting Hannah and her children and running away to Woy Woy with another woman. 

These joint scandals were quite possibly behind their father's decision to leave his property in trusts, rather than to his sons direct.

Robert Henderson Sr created a property trust for Thomas that contained a single property, known as the 'Bethel Chapel'. This had been a seaman's mission run by an interdenominational organisation called the 'Bethel Union', but the property was sold to Robert Henderson when a new chapel was built in The Rocks. The property was right on the waterfront at the foot of Erskine Street. From descriptions contained in later conveyancing, it seems to be on the opposite (southern) side of Erskine Street, opposite what was then known as the Clarence Hotel.

The property was left in Trust to Thomas for his lifetime. He was entitled to receive any rents or profits from the property, but was not permitted sell it or convey it to someone else.

Thomas fell seriously ill shortly after his father died. In his last weeks of life, he made a will, naming the publicans at the Dove Inn and Clarence Hotel as his executors and leaving all of his estate to Catherine Larkin, housemaid at the Dove Inn. There was a Catherine Larkin born in St James, Sydney in 1854 and if this was the girl, she was only 16! Thomas was 32.

The trustees signed over the Bethel Chapel property to Catherine Larkin in September 1870.

Catherine married Matthew Smith in 1872, but the couple held onto the property and there are several records of the property being leased in the following years. I have not traced it further, but it is likely that the property was resumed by the Government either in 1890, when the Clarence Hotel was resumed, or in 1900 when the Dove Inn and the other Phoenix Wharf properties contained in other trusts were resumed.

I can't help it, but I don't have a good opinion of Thomas Henderson. I think his father would have been horrified to see the property leave the family in this manner less than a year after his death, left to a slip of a girl. 

Robert Francis Geary Henderson's trust

The Brisbane Water properties included in
Robert's trust.

This is the story of the property trust established by Robert Henderson, for his grandson, Robert Francis Geary Henderson. See my earlier post for the background to this trust.

Robert Francis Geary Henderson was born in 1856, the third child of Robert Geary Henderson and Hannah Wallbridge. He was about 18 months old when his father deserted the family and ran away to Woy Woy with another woman. His half-brother, named Robert Frederick Henderson, was born at Brisbane Water in 1860. (In this post, a reference to just 'Robert' is to Robert Francis Geary Henderson).

After her husband left, Hannah Henderson took over the running of the Clarence Hotel, but the family probably continued to live with Robert's grandparents, Robert and Catherine Henderson, at the Dove Inn. Robert's older sister, Catherine, died of tuberculosis in 1866, followed in 1868 by his mother Hannah. By this time his grandparents had retired to live at Brisbane Water, and they were both unwell, so Robert and his sister Madeline were sent to boarding schools. 

Meanwhile, Robert's father had four children in his second family. Shortly after Hannah died, Robert Geary Henderson married his defacto, Elizabeth Delaney.

Robert was 14 when his grandfather died and created the property trust. It is likely that Robert Henderson Sr. was not confident that his son (Robert Geary Henderson) would properly care for the children of his first marriage, and so created trusts that he hoped would see them properly educated and given a good start in life.

Robert's trust contained seven parcels of land:

• Lot 3 of Phoenix Wharf, including the Clarence Hotel. This was on the corner of Erskine Street and Shelley Street and the property ran all the way from Shelly Street to the high water mark of Darling Harbour. (see the map in my earlier post for the location).
• 80 acres of land at Pittwater, known as Bryant's grant. This was portion 30, Parish of Narrabeen.
• 100 acres of land at Cockle Creek. This was Portion 29, Parish of Kincumber.
• 300 acres of land at Brisbane Water known as Culcorin. This was Portion 285, Parish of Kincumber.
• Three adjoining lots of land in Holden Street Gosford, each ½ acre.

Robert Henderson Sr's Pittwater land holdings.
Only Bryant's Grant remained when the
trust was create

Under the terms of the Will, income from the properties was to be used for Robert's care, education and furtherance of his life, until he was 21, when he would be able to use the income as he wished. But is was not entitled to sell the properties.

The trustees leased the Clarence Hotel several times before Robert turned 21. 

It seems that Robert may not have understood the terms of the trust, or decided to ignore them, because in 1881 he entered into a contract to sell the Pittwater property. The trustees had to step in six weeks later and legalise the sale by transferring the property to the purchaser.

Then in 1888, at Robert's request, the trustees signed over the absolute title of the remaining properties to Robert. They overcame the legalities with a token payment of 10 shillings from Robert to the trustees. Under the terms of the trust, an attempt to sell the properties possibly ended the trust. Regardless, this was effectively the end of Robert's trust and he was free to sell the properties as he wished. He immediately mortgaged all of the properties, possibly to fund other land transactions in Chippendale.

Robert eventually sold all the properties:

• Portion 29 at Kincumber was sold to Austral Verge in 1890 for £700. Verge was probably acting as an agent, because he on-sold the property for the same price in 1892 to the trustees of the Sisters of St Joseph (including Mary McKillop) for the development of their Kincumber boys home.
• The Clarence Hotel and Lot 3 Phoenix Wharf were resumed by the government in 1890 (ten yeas before the Dove Inn). Robert received £9,489 in compensation.
• Portion 285 at Kincumber (Culcorin) was sold for £700 in 1893.
• Robert converted the three lots in Holden Street Gosford to a single Torrens Title in 1896. He finally sold the property in 1912.

The trust established by his grandfather gave Robert a good start in life and he was able to live as a relatively wealthy man.  He does not come across as a happy man, but that can probably be explained to some extent by his difficult childhood. He spent many of his formative years in a boarding school, and he never had the benefit of a guiding fatherly hand. He died in a traffic accident in 1930. 

I am not sure how the original Robert Henderson would have viewed his grandson's treatment of the trust, and he may have been disappointed that the properties did not remain in the family. But he might also have been quite happy to see his grandson assert himself and would have been satisfied that his fortune was not entirely wasted.

Robert Geary Henderson trust

The three Brisbane water properties included
in Robert's trust

This is the story of the property trust established by Robert Henderson for his eldest son, Robert Geary Henderson.  Read my earlier post for the background to the trust.

Robert Geary Henderson was born at Brisbane Water in 1832, the first child of Robert and Catherine Henderson.  Robert proved to be a man of unreliable temperament and he drank too much. In 1858 he deserted his wife and three children in Sydney and ran away to Woy Woy with another woman. 

The Robert Geary Henderson Trust was established under his father's will, quite possibly to ensure that Robert was able to live comfortably, but not waste the assets that had been accumulated by his father.

Robert Henderson Sr died in 1869. Robert Jr was living at Brisbane Water with his second wife, Elizabeth and two sons, Robert Frederick Henderson and Patrick Bin Henderson. The two boys had been born before the couple married, but were named in their grandfather's will, making them legitimate heirs. The trust established in Robert Sr's will was four properties:

• Lots 4 and 5 Phoenix Wharf at Darling Harbour (see map in earlier post). This property was on the corner of Erskine and Shelley Street,
• 100 acres at Brisbane Water known as 'Veteran Hall', Portion 26 Parish of Kincumber.
• 50 acres adjoining Veteran Hall to the west, Portion 71.
• 100 acres to the south east of Veteran Hall, Portion 116.

The properties were in trust for Robert's lifetime, but he was able to occupy the properties and to receive any rents etc. He was not allowed to sell or transfer the properties and there were clauses that would terminate the trust under certain circumstances. On termination of the trust, presumably by Robert's death, the property was to be divided between Robert Frederick Henderson, Patrick Bin Henderson and any future children.

After the activation of the trust, two more boys were born. Herbert Geary Henderson was born in 1870 and Charles Arthur Henderson was born in 1872.

In 1877, the Trustees leased the Phoenix Wharf property for 30 years, for a yearly rent of £104 per year. remembering that Robert also had the use of 250 acres of land at Brisbane Water, this was a substantial income, about 160% of the average average annual wage for the time.

Robert's second wife, Elizabeth, died in 1885, but Robert immediately formed a new relationship with Gertrude Stretton and more children soon followed. Florence (also known as Kathleen) was born in 1886, Kenneth in 1890 and Nellie in 1893. Robert and Gertrude finally married in 1869, after Nellie's birth.

The first hint of problems was in 1888 when Robert Frederick Henderson mortgaged his interest in the trust to Robert Malcolm, who later transferred it to James Malcolm. It seems that he did not repay the mortgage, and Malcolm owned Robert Frederick's share from this point.

In a similar vein, in 1893, Patrick and Herbert tried to sell their share of the trust to Joseph O'Brien.

Then in 1895, under and order of the Sheriff, Robert Geary Henderson's life interest in the trust was sold at public auction, seemingly to recover debts. This interest was purchased by Robert Miller.

Charles Henderson then approached the Trustees to see if he should be receiving a share of the income from the trust. The trustees were perplexed and asked the Equity Court to clarify who was entitled to the income from the trust. It took the Court almost three years to resolve. The Court eventually ruled that Robert's life interest was terminated and that any income from the trust was to be shared by James Malcolm (Robert Frederick's share),  Patrick, Herbert and Charles. Florence, Kenneth and Nellie were not entitled under the laws of the time, because they were illegitimate. The sale of rights to Joseph O'Brien were ruled invalid and Patrick and Herbert were ordered to pay him £50 each in compensation.

The Court case proved to be the last straw for the trustees and a final decree from the Court transferred the trusteeship to The Permanent Trustee Company Ltd, a private trust management company. 

Importantly, the Court ruled that the same four parties were entitled to an absolute share of the properties on the death of Robert Geary Henderson, but any future born children would have an equal share of both the income and the absolute property.

Soon after the Court decision, Robert and Gertrude had another child, named Archie, born in 1897, followed by Cora in 1899. This added two more to the list of people who would share in the trust. Sadly Cora died at 6 months old, but her entitlement remained.

In 1900, the Colonial Government resumed the Darling Harbour property. The compensation of over £7,000 was paid in 1903. Once again the Courts were involved, because Robert was still alive and any yet-to-be-born children were entitled to a share of the property. So the proceeds were paid into another trust fund, to be distributed after Robert's death.

Patrick, Charles and Herbert had now accumulated substantial Court costs from two cases and they each sold any future interest in the trust to Eva Hordern. They may have enjoyed a small cash benefit after the costs were paid, but it would not have been much.

Robert Geary Henderson finally died in 1907. The Equity Court had to receive special medical evidence that there would be no more children. The trust fund from the property resumptions was then distributed in six equal shares, estimated at £1,175 each.

The three Brisbane Water properties were sold at auction, generating a further £1,816. Assuming these were fully distributed in the same shares, each share would have been about £1,500, or about two years annual earnings. Remembering that James Malcolm and Eva Hordern would have received four of the shares! And Cora's share was somehow under mortgage, so the only share that I believe stayed in the family was placed into trust until 10-year-old Archie Henderson reached the age of 21.

I can find no trace of Herbert or Charles after their 1903 sale of their inheritance. Patrick's family tell that he was so upset by the whole saga that he changed his surname to McDonald for many years. Perhaps Herbert and Charles did the same and changed their name.

Robert Frederick moved with Gertrude and her children to live out their lives in Nowra. Kathleen was a somewhat delinquent child before settling down and raising a family in Sydney. Kenneth and Archie never married. Nellie became a nun.

The only known descendants of Robert Geary Henderson's second and third families are the children of Patrick and Kathleen.

Robert Henderson Sr probably created this trust to prevent his wastrel son from spending the family fortune. It seems that his fears were justified, and I think he would have been extremely disappointed by the outcome.