Ron Williams's Blog

In my last blog, I shared thoughts as I began what I considered a “deep-dig” into both my own and my father’s DNA results.  It was a task I described as “daunting,” but certainly one that was essential to discovering the mysterious identity of my 2x great grandfather.

I began with a few of the excellent DNA videos available online, and soon I feel well equipped to begin.  With the knowledge my father had completed Ancestry DNA while I had done 23andMe DNA, I felt good knowing I had two of the largest sources covered.

I first want to establish that all three Crane children are of same father.  On both Ancestry and 23andMe, I find several matches to descendants of Agnes Crane.  Agnes had nine children resulting in over twenty grand-children and a very robust roster of great grandchildren.  Suffice to say, the matches of second, third and fourth cousins is impressive.

Conclusions for William Crane would not be so forthcoming.  William had only one child, who in turn also had only one child.  The trend was soon bucked as William would enjoy not one but two great grandchildren who as far as I could tell produced a total of three great, great grandchildren.  By pure math alone, the likelihood of a current DNA match was les-likely.

To be sure, I do have a few mystery Crane matches in the DNA results…none that I can qualify as descendants of the original William Crane.  I am able to identify three ancestors on Facebook and send each a personal message.  All remain unreturned as of this date.

If I’m being pragmatic, I’d have to guess that William – the middle child – is of the same father as both his older and younger sisters.  It just makes sense and it becomes my working theory. With the assumption that all three Crane siblings share this mystery father, I return to Ancestry DNA results in an attempt to identify this absentee man.

According to several popular videos, the first step is creating subgroups of DNA matches.  Using my father’s DNA results, I click on “Paternal Matches” and get to work categorizing.  Category “A” would be my father’s grandparents, Emily Crane being the female.  Category “B” is my father’s great grandparents on the Williams side, well established in my family tree.

Category “C” features my father’s maternal grandmother, Matilda Crane and her mystery partner…the object of my curiosity.  I proceed to categorize as many matches as possible as Category “C” and then eliminate any from the Crane family.  The ones remaining would theoretically be from my mystery 2x great grandfather.

What followed was approximately one week of searchable trees and shared matches.  Finally, I’m able to make some ground and I identify several matches in group “C” that are no doubt descendants of my target.

Looking over the matches’ shareable trees, I zero in on two surnames which seem to “pop-up” consistently: Stanton and Potter.

Evelyn Winnifred Maud Potter (1907-1994) is a descendent of both families and seems to appear in most of the shareable trees.  I decide to use this unlikely woman as the basis for my tree.  Yes, my plan is to use Ms. Potter as the “home person” in a tree I am about to construct. 

In an activity that is partly enjoyable and partly frustrating, I spend the ensuing two weeks clicking hints, searching databases and connecting with other Ancestry users before finally constructing a one-hundred- and fifteen-person tree that I feel fairly confident with.  Fairly confident.

From there, I focus on males of approximately the same age who live in the vicinity of Matilda Crane during the six reproductive years.  And after a handful only of indulgent nights in front of the computer screen, one name sticks out: Joseph Potter.

Joseph Potter is born in 1831, four years prior to Matilda but in the same small village of Chaddesley Corbett.  In 1856 when my great-grandmother Emma Crane came into the world, Joseph is a twenty-five-year-old blacksmith, living with the woman who would soon be his wife, Sarah Smith, together raising their own son, Joseph Jr., also born in 1856.

I am struck by two facts.  First, if I have the correct match, Joseph has two children with two different women in the same year.  I have to wonder the fallout, if any.

Second, on William Crane’s marriage record, he lists his father as “Joseph” and occupation, “blacksmith,” the only difference being William uses his own surname “Crane” for his marriage license, which could have been of necessity, the foreign surname “Potter” likely arousing both confusion and suspicion.  Was William offering a clue as to the identity of his birth father?

While Joseph and his wife, Sarah, would produce no further offspring, if correct, Joseph would experience fatherhood two more time in the next six years with William, then Agnes.  Census records show Joseph continues cohabitating with his wife until middle age. 

The England Census of 1881 marks the final record I am able to discover; although, my search is definitely ongoing. 

Curiosities aside, it seems I may have identified my man.  When I map out further DNA matches under the Potter name, it all seems to fit.  At this point, I can say it’s more than likely I’ve found the true identity of my 2x great grandfather.

It’s with a mixture of satisfaction and regret that I identify a new handful of cousins.  Satisfaction because I consider myself successful in finding the correct puzzle piece.  Regret because I now require a new puzzle to keep me occupied.

In the complicated genealogical puzzles we struggle to complete, there are bound to be some missing pieces.  Of course, that doesn’t mean we don’t continually and enthusiastically strive to discover these missing pieces or people.  Afterall, that’s part of the fun.

The fact that my 2x great grandfather was unknown may not seem that big of concern.  To be sure, the relationship is four generations removed from myself.  However, I soon learned, that in the genealogy DNA world, such an omission can cause problems in identifying third, second and even first cousin matches.  Simply put, the omission was making it challenging to identify a large portion of my matches.  Not good.

And so it was that a couple short months ago, I set my meager genealogical talents towards identify this missing ancestor.

A little background: my great grandmother was Emma Crane, born 1856 in Chaddesley Corbett, a small village in Worcestershire, England.  In the 1861 England Census, Emma is living with her single mother, Matilda Crane, and her younger brother William, born 1858.  The trio are in the house of Matilda’s parents, Thomas and Mary Crane.  The absence of a husband to Matilda, as well as the fact that both Emma and William carry the surname, “Crane,” leads me to speculate my 2x great grandfather is not a part of their lives.

Further documents show a third, potentially “illegitimate” child, Agnes, born in 1862.

For those keeping track, that’s three illegitimate children in the span of six years: Emma (1856), William (1858), Agnes (1862).  All three taking their mother’s surname.

My first step in discovering any potential father for these three is to check birth, baptism, marriage and death records for mention of a father.  With three children in question, this yields twelve possible sources for a name.

In the case of Emma, no paternal information is offered in birth, baptism or death certificates.  In her 1880 marriage certificate for the section of father she offers the name of “Thomas Crane,” her grandfather.  Hmm.

Moving to William, I again find blanks in birth, baptism and death records.  However, in his 1883 marriage, he lists Joseph Crane, “blacksmith” as his father.  I take note that “Joseph” happens to be the name of an uncle.

As for the youngest, Agnes, again I find nothing in records of birth or baptism.  In her marriage certificate, she lists “William Perry,” the man who would eventually marry Matilda and become stepfather to the three.  In Agnes’s death certificate the name “Richard Crane” is offered, the Christian name of her grandfather.  Maybe the man she considers her father.

My fantastical mind considers a “Crane” relative may just be father to these three.  I am certainly not privy to reproduction guidelines amongst distant cousins in the 1800s.  I also ponder that William Perry may have been the father all along, even though he was married to his first wife when all three Crane children were conceived.  Theories to be sure, but certainly unproven.

I admit that nothing definitive has been yielded from these documents, and I soon find myself ready to turn to DNA.  But where to begin?  I know next to nothing about DNA and the prospect of rolling up my sleeves and jumping in is just…daunting.

(Stay tuned for Part II coming soon.)

In my last entry, I shared details of my grandfather’s short, rather sad marriage to one Bertha Erhardt.  I ended on a sympathetic note towards my one-time, “sort-of,” step-grandmother.

Documents show Bertha, born in 1889, was wife to my grandfather from 1915 to 1922.  However, despite being separated for well over a decade, it was not until 1938 when she was almost fifty that she made the divorce final, relying on legal aid to assist with costs.  I suppose she lacked the desire and/or financial means to officially end the union sooner.  This final detail seemed to paint a picture of a middle-aged woman struggling to make ends meet without the joy or satisfaction of family.  Such is life.

With my grandfather’s track record of courting somewhat vulnerable women, I reasoned that Bertha’s early life was more than likely also lacking in some regard.  My goal was to learn more about this woman, partly out of curiosity and partly to ease my mildly troubled mind.

Early digs into United States Federal Census reports for both before and after Bertha’s time with my grandfather proved fruitless.  Yes, I found several “Bertha Erhardt’s” prior to the 1915 marriage.  Yes, I found several “Bertha Hammond’s” in the years after the marriage.  No, I couldn’t substantiate any of them as “my Bertha.”  Such is life for an amateur genealogist. 

And then finally a breakthrough.  It was an easily ignored obituary on page 12 of the August 29th, 1927, issue of the Deseret News, out of Salt Lake City, Utah.  “Mrs. Louise Williams died Saturday…surviving are the following brothers and sisters, William and Frank Erhardt, Mrs. Fred Deuscher and Mrs. Bertha Hammond.”  Obituaries can often be a goldmine of information, and this one proved just that!  With a list of Bertha’s siblings, it was simple to determine which Bertha from the 1890, 1900 and 1910 United States Federal Census reports was my Bertha.

As happens with online genealogical research, one finding led to another and before long – likely fewer than a couple hours – I was able to create a full sketch of my mysterious Erhardt’s early years.

I learned that Bertha hailed from St. Louis, Missouri.   The family mourned the death of a son in 1890, only one year after Bertha’s own arrival.  Further tragedy struck in 1898, when a ten-year-old Bertha was forced to accept her father’s untimely death.  Sadly, the newspaper report suggested suicide.

From there, mother and two daughters made their way to Salt Lake City, possibly a temporary stall on their way to the golden promise of California.  Classified ads, as well as city directories, show a nomadic existence characterized by ads seeking housework and offering massage, coupled with frequent moves from rentals to rooming houses and back again.  This pattern continued until 1915 when Bertha would marry my grandfather. 

While I described their unhappy union in the prior post, I have yet to share any details of Bertha’s life once she was free of my grandfather, which seemed to be the case by 1922.

One year removed, Bertha was renting a room in the Kenyon Hotel when her sixty-seven-year-old mother would expire, the details of which were reported to creditors in the local newspaper.  As reported above, Bertha’s only other close family, her sister Louise, died in 1927 at age forty-six.  In that same year, under the title of “Notice of Sale to Foreclose” the Salt Lake Tribune would publish a list of household items and necessities previously under the ownership of one Bertha Hammond. 

The sad list contains no fewer than forty-items including a laundry hamper, two beds, and a bundle of pictures.  Sad memories of a home that once was.  Or possibly with no permanent residence of her own, Bertha was discarding her recently deceased sister’s possessions, unable to pay for storage and possibly not able to use the possessions herself due to having no permanent residence. 

This leads us to the next milestone in Bertha’s life, the 1938 divorce and my theory that she may have been pursuing a potential husband to share in both her miseries and joys.

As usual, the details won’t disappoint.  Check back again soon.

Many of us are privy to the long-standing mystery of Amelia Erhardt and her final flight.  In an earlier blog entry here I shared that the story of the pioneering female pilot was one of the tales that sparked my life-long interest in the mysterious and unexplained. 

While I cannot boast any personal connection to the iconic but tragic figure, I do have my very own Erhardt mystery that I’m keen to share.

Soon after discovering my grandfather’s strange alias – Gordon Roy Hammond – I became privy to a number of documents and newspaper announcements outlining the details of his sad union with a woman named Bertha Erhardt.  Specifically, I discovered a 1915, Salt Lake City, Utah marriage certificate showing the union between a twenty-five-year-old Bertha and my twenty-six-year-old grandfather.  From there my search turned to newspapers.com where I found a series of distressing details.

A 1916 article titled, Six Wives Beaten, Weather is Blamed outlined charges of domestic abuse against my grandfather.  An announcement in 1918 shared that Bertha was initiating divorce proceedings against my grandfather.

A visit to the Utah State records website and I was in touch with an excellent clerk, keen to help me fill in the details.  In no less than two days, I was emailed divorce docs from 1919, 1922 and finally, 1938.  My interest was piqued at the multiple proceedings.

Diving into the documents, I soon discovered that Bertha withdrew her 1919 complaint, as the young couple had triumphantly reunited…at least for a time.  In 1922, it was actually my grandfather who initiated charges, only to see Bertha countersue for alimony.  It seems that Bertha won a judgement and divorce seemed imminent; however, once again nothing was followed to conclusion. 

Finally, sixteen years later, in 1938, a third attempt, this time again initiated by Bertha.  In the document she shares she has been abandoned sixteen years by my grandfather and had no details of his immediate whereabouts.  The documents show that this time the divorce would be final.

Based on these details, as well as my grandfather’s unfortunate track record with women, I certainly felt a degree of sympathy for this poor, young woman.  I wanted to know what humble beginnings she appeared from and also – what I hoped would be – her improved fate after the 1938 divorce.  So, I did what all family historians do.  I attempted to dig deep. 

Check back for Part II soon.

For us long-suffering family history buffs, we take solace in the warm comfort that we can consistently rely on a few safe, user-friendly sources that placate our demonic addiction.  For me, one such source has been the wonderful, online service named appropriately as newspapers.com.

Ah yes, newspapers.com, that wonderful resource that not only offers a plethora of small market and larger market newspaper archives but seems to consistently add more and more for us desperate family historians always hungry for a new nugget of information.

An intrinsic benefit to newspapers.com is that any match contains – well – a newspaper story, often complete with background, details, and eye-witness reports that can contain information beyond what we can reasonably expect to glean from the other documents we rely on such as census reports, birth records or death records.

Yes, to be sure if you’ve ever been successful in matching a research target as the subject of a newspaper article, you’ve no doubt felt the surge of unfettered joy and pure adrenaline that comes with such a discovery. 

There are times – though – when our instant felicity is soon replaced by a type of confusion when the details offered don’t match the narrative we’ve constructed in our heads.  It can be a new type of frustration when we find two separate newspaper articles that seem to offer a conflicting account of a person’s life.

Such was the case in my pursuit for information concerning the strange, dubious life of my grandfather’s first cousin, William Edward Turley. 

Unless you have read my latest book, The Lost Fifty-Seven: A Genealogical Journey of Discovery, Deception, Secrets and Scandal, you will be unaware of the curious role William Edward Turley plays in the mysterious life of my grandfather.  (See “Origins of a Mystery,” or “Evolution of a Mystery” in earlier blog posts.)

William Edward Turley is a person of interest to me, simply because he seems to be the adult best acquainted with my grandfather during my grandfather’s early years in Canada as well as later in his life.  During my research, I learned that there was much more to this man than as a footnote in my grandfather’s timeline. 

Check back to read about the mysterious, conflicting, events in William Edward Turley’s life.

(Previously shared on http://www.family-wise.co.uk) Genealogy, as well all know, is a magical tool to discover the rich, mysterious and sometimes scandalous lives of your ancestors.  If you’re willing to dig, possibilities can be endless, the stories – sometimes – worthy of a Hollywood script.

But what about the other benefit of genealogy?  I’m talking about connecting with our long-lost relatives who are, well, living.  In my short, modest experience as a genealogical hobbyist, I’ve been fortunate to discover unknown cousins all over the place. 

In my case, “all over the place” basically means England, which is particularly enticing if for no other reason than us Canadians are wholly charmed and fantastically entranced with our neighbours across the Atlantic.  Maybe because we love the Beatles?  I think so.

Personally, much of my research focus has been on my mysterious grandfather, Alfred Victor Williams (1889-1968).  Learning he originally hailed from a small village in Worcestershire, I figured I must still have some long-lost relations in the area or close to anyway.  And, thus, I had a project!

The Way it Was

Alfred had two brothers, Charles (1886 – 1952) and Dennis (1894 – 1958), however, one time contact between the families had long expired before my dad’s time.  My goal was simple: connect with grandchildren from both my deceased granduncles.  Some quick figuring and a very helpful “cousin chart” informed me that I was actually in search of second cousins.

Not lost upon me, was the very poor job Alfred and his brothers had done of keeping in touch with one another while they were actually alive.  In possession of a handful of old letters from Charles to my grandfather, I read, “I had long given you up for dead…killed in the last war,” followed by the weak promise, “we must not again lose touch with each other.”

In a subsequent letter, Charles shares of their youngest brother Dennis, that he had “kept in touch with him and visited him regularly until about six years ago, and then we had a row.”  It was in another letter that I learned of the bombastic reason for the estrangement.

It seems that in a bid to help a struggling family, Charles had informally adopted one of Dennis’s daughters, Dorothy.  In a 1943 letter to my grandfather, Charles reports, Dorothy “had grown up and was able to earn a living.  [Dennis] wanted her back.”  In a 1966 letter, written by Dorothy herself, she shares, “my father sent two detectives to Charles’ house accusing him of kidnapping me.”

Kidnapping accusations?  Seems like reason enough for a family estrangement.  Now…how to put everyone back together?

3-2-1 Contact

In 2016, I was able to make contact with two of Charles’ granddaughters, Nicki and Sally-Ann.  I soon learned that the two made up the totality of family left to Charles’ legacy.  As luck would have it, they were in touch with a Fay Elson, grandchild to Dennis and daughter of the once kidnapped Dorothy.  That made the total three second cousins discovered.  Yes, I was chuffed!

However, I was aware that Dennis Williams had been responsible for the birth of no fewer than six children, suggesting the potential for many more second cousins.  Regrettably, Fay was in touch with none, an unfortunate byproduct of the kidnapping accusations, no doubt.

After months of fruitless efforts, I made contact with more of Dennis’s grandchildren, two lovely siblings, Mark and Maureen Purcell  Mark had a vague memory of his grandfather, Dennis.  However, with regret he informed me that he was in touch with no other of Dennis’s grandchildren, a natural byproduct of his upbringing.  Although his mother was no longer with us, he shared that “it was always her dream to reconnect with her siblings.”

Around this time, my very helpful and beautiful wife, Lana, offered her much-refined Facebook detective skills and was able to locate one, Sandra Thompson, another grandchild of Dennis Williams.

For those keeping track, I had now located four first cousins of the Dennis Williams family, all living in close proximity, and all complete strangers.

Finally in early 2017, I made what I thought would be an impossible discovery: the existence of not a grandchild, but an actual child of Dennis Williams.  Kenneth Desmond Williams was an 87-year-old former Rolls Royce engineer from Hemel Hempstead, who also connected us with his wonderful daughter, Brenda.  Sharing the monumental news with my father that I had discovered one of his first cousins would be a highlight of my modest genealogical triumphs.

Back Together Again

For those keeping track, I had located both daughters born from Charles Williams only son, as well as offspring from four of Dennis Williams’ six children.  I had to admit, however, it seemed a pity that all these cousins, so close in location, hadn’t ever met one another.

It had to change.

In reality, each time I made a discovery, I had put my new connections in communication with one another.  It wasn’t long before the natural happened.  As Mark Purcell eloquently put it in an email, “let’s put this Williams family back together again!”

Thus, it was set.  On the afternoon of Sunday, August 20th, 2017, the Dennis Williams clan finally met in person.  I could only be envious from my location across the pond, as I wondered the conversation, histories and secrets that were being shared. 

Checking my phone throughout the day, it was after midnight when I received the following from Mark Purcell.

“Hi Ron, I just wanted to congratulate you on your fine work.  We had our meetup today and it went great.  They are our family one hundred percent.” 

As I contemplated adding some Merlot to my almost-empty glass, my phone pinged once again.

“Huge thanks for everything you’ve managed to do.  All this from the other side of the pond.”

Okay, one more glass before bed, and I select “In My Life” from my iTunes library. 

(Previously shared on www.family-wise.co.uk)

In the sometimes-cruel world that is family research, records can be elusive and messy with information not always directly available or forthcoming.  For researchers such as us, the result can be frustration, despair, or even anger.

Enter, the census report.  To family historians, the census report offers a safe guidepost, a dependable edifice upon which we may reasonably expect to discover pertinent and useful information.  Well, I believed I was the fortunate recipient of such information when I turned to the United States Federal Census to learn about my grandfather’s mysterious past before he settled in Vancouver and became father to my dad.

Complicating the task was the unfortunate fact that my grandfather – Alfred Victor Williams – had strangely chosen to live under an alias for the majority of his adult years.  Thus, I searched under the alias, “Roy Hammond,” in attempts to discover my dad’s dad.

I was rewarded almost instantly for my modest efforts with two separate entries that seemed to match my elusive research target.  

From the 1930 census report:

Name: Roy Hammond

Age: 33

Estimated Birth Year:1897

Address: 6077 2nd Street, NW, Seattle

Birthplace: England

Household Members: Celia Hammond (33), Betty M. Hammond (3)

From the 1940 census report:

Name: Roy Hammond

Age: 42

Estimated Birth Year:1898

Address: 1121 Minor Avenue, Seattle

Birthplace: New York

Household Members: Vennice Hammond (34), Betty Hammond (14)

The Seattle residences, the matching names, the almost identical birth years as well as the duplicate presence of an appropriately aged daughter named Betty led me to accept that I’d found my man, twice.

Still, I wonder that his partner is identified separately as both “Celia” and “Vennice,” attempting to convince that one or both could certainly be middle names.  However, the age discrepancy was difficult to ignore, Celia’s birthdate of 1897 differing from Vennice’s 1906 earthly debut. 

Could the enumerators be off by a decade?  Of course, it’s possible my grandfather had separated from Celia at some point, opting instead for a domestic habitation with Vennice, a full decade younger.  But what of the daughter?  I assumed that in 1940 it would be unusual for the male to maintain custody in such affairs.

I determined that further research was in order.  I didn’t know much about my grandfather; however, I possessed a 1942 draft card with enough corroborating details to convince that he was living under the name “Roy Hammond” in 1940’s Seattle, so I determined to first verify the 1940 census report. 

Using online resources, I learn that “Vennice” Hammond is originally Cynthia “Vernice” Jensen born October 12, 1908 in Monroe, Utah.  In 1925, Vernice marries William John Silver and the two welcome Betty Bernice Silver one year later.  I accept that this Betty is a child of William John Silver, leaving that possibility that if this is my grandfather, he is likely stepfather only to young Betty. 

Shifting targets, I learn that Celia Hammond in the 1930 census is originally Celia Theresa Fleury born March 27, 1897 in Green Bay, Wisconsin.  By 1916 she is in Seattle, Washington, where in 1923, she marries her husband, listed as Roy Hammond.  Their daughter, Sylvia “Betty” Mae Hammond, is born in Seattle three years prior to the 1930 census.

Confirming that Vernice and Celia are not one in the same, as well as accepting that the two “Bettys” are separate beings, convinces me that the females involved – all four – are not two in the same.

My next task?  Determine if both, one or none match my grandfather. 

On Ancestry.com, “cupidcarol” is owner of a member tree listing Celia Theresa Fleury.  Exploring further, it appears that “cupidcarol” may be Betty’s daughter.  I decide to cease my hypothesizing and contact directly. 

“Hello: I am very interested in Sylvia ‘Betty’ Mae Hammond, born 1927.  In the 1930 census, her father is Roy Hammond.  I believe that Roy Hammond is my grandfather.  Sincerely, Ron Williams”

Within the hour, I receive a succession of brief replies.

“Roy Hammond is my grandfather as he was my mom’s dad.  Who was your dad?”

I congratulate myself that I was correct in guessing “cupidcarol” was Betty’s daughter.  The responses soon continued.

“Roy Hammond was the name he used in the United States, but he was born in England as Leslie Thomas Watkins.”

I was floored.  The admission that “Roy Hammond” is an alias, leaves me both one hundred percent convinced this was my grandfather and at the same time one hundred percent confused at the name Leslie Thomas Watkins, my own grandfather’s legal name being Alfred Victor Williams.  While I’m contemplating, my newest electronic pen pal is typing.

“Have you taken a DNA test?”

This last comment causes pause.  If “cupidcarol” is, in fact, my grandfather’s granddaughter, she would appear as a close match in my father’s DNA connections.  While I already know the result, I check his matches to ensure.  No “cupidcarol.”  I share the news she already knows.

“You are not a DNA match with my father, so that eliminates my grandfather as the biological father of Sylvia “Betty” Mae Hammond.  However, I must share that my grandfather – born Alfred Victor Williams in 1889 in England – also adopted the alias, ‘Roy Hammond.’”

The fact that both my Alfred Victor Williams and your Leslie Thomas Watkins took on the name “Roy Hammond” leads me to believe they are one in the same and actually a stepfather to your mother.

“Cupidcarol” responds that DNA results confirm she is a product of the Watkins family, sharing she is in touch with relatives today. Simply put, the Roy Hammond married to Celia Hammond in the 1930 census is not my grandfather. 

Further scanning “cupidcarol’s” tree, I see an entry in the 1936 Vancouver City Directory:

Watkins, Thos L (Celia T) 6272 Windsor Street.

Later, perusing online copies of the Vancouver Sun newspaper, I spy the heading, “RCAF Veteran Among Four Sudden Deaths,” I read, “Thomas Leslie Watkins, 48, who suffered a heart attack in his room in the Cecil Hotel, 1336 Granville, at 6:10pm Tuesday, died before medical aid could reach him.” 

I wonder at the coincidence of a man sharing my grandfather’s “Roy Hammond” moniker dying in a Vancouver hotel, not ten minutes away from my grandfather’s Vancouver home.  Being so near in proximity, and likely both fond of drink, I find myself wondering if they ever crossed paths.  If so, I’d love to have heard their conversation.

Days later, further research would provide me the corroborating evidence I needed to determine that the Roy Hammond in the 1940 census – and only the 1940 census – was my man.

I still couldn’t help marvel at the strange coincidental circumstances concerning the alias, “Roy Hammond.”

Upon sharing some recent success in cracking a long-held family mystery, I was told that my work seemed to follow the “scattergun approach” to research.  My immediate reaction was, in this case, whole-hearted agreement.  My research path was certainly not entirely planned, organized or systematic.  While my acceptance of this descriptor was both immediate and painless, it did cause some personal consternation.

Why did I seem to favour this approach?  For those who don’t know me personally, I pride myself to be a fairly organized, focused adult.  (My wife wouldn’t necessarily call that a good thing, by the way.)  So why, then, when it comes to family research, an endeavor that would seem to rely in no small way to an organized, systematic approach, do I seem to willfully abandon the well-planned, thought-out aspect of my personality and become something of an erratic, maniacal beast? 

To begin, the scattergun approach can lend well to collaboration.  I’m blessed to have a supportive family who enjoys participating in my strange ancestral puzzles.  This mean that I am often provided suggestions for research, often with the understanding that these suggestions contain immense potential and warrant immediate follow-up.  Without the necessity of sticking to a rigid plan, I can humour these well-meaning individuals, the benefit being harmonious relationships, and – sometimes at least – research success!

Also, the scattergun approach can result in surprising, accidental findings.  Some years ago, I was focused on a comprehensive review of the 1940 United States Census, determined that the information I was searching would be revealed all in this very large collection.  Studying an entry that would turn out to be useless, I spied the mention of “Seattle,” which immediately reminded me that my research target had mentioned the emerald city on one occasion.  From there, whimsy directed me to listings for the Seattle City Directory where I immediately found information that made for a much more focused search of the 1940 census.  Had I remained trapped within the staunch parameters of my research method of the day and not allowed myself a temporary digression, I would never have identified the key information.  Score another one for the unfocused!

Lastly, what good is family research if it’s not at least a little…fun?  And what could be more fun than setting aside serious research to indulge in a fresh distraction?  I’ve found good, old Facebook to offer a welcome distraction whenever necessary.  In the midst of researching a great uncle I quickly plug in names of ancestors into the popular social media site.  The result?  Often nothing.  However, I have been able to quickly and easily connect with long-lost relations in all corners of the world. 

Newspapers.com is also another great site offering quick results and welcome distractions.  It was some months ago on a rainy Wednesday afternoon that I decided to plug my grandfather’s name into Alberta newspapers between 1940-1950.  Imagine my amusement when I discovered a headline announcing my grandfather was victim of a theft, lost items including a pair of trousers and a wallet containing cash and a government cheque.  The amusing part?  This marks not the first of second time, my grandfather would report a stolen government cheque.  Immediately, I reach for the phone to share with my own father…and the fun continues.

With full respect to those “god-like” individuals who wear the cap of “professional genealogist,” I find that for me, very much the amateur, the “scattergun approach” has served me well.  I wonder who else has similar mindset? 

Who amongst us doesn’t love a good mystery?  The correct answer, of course, is “no one.”  I do wonder, however, what your personal favourites may be.  Below are some “real-life” mysteries that have enthralled me fully over the years.

DB Cooper: Possibly my all-time fave.  The simple fact that the suspect has never been identified or caught only adds to my interest.  If you’re not familiar, this is the 1971 story of a man who boarded a “Thanksgiving Eve” commercial flight in Portland, Oregon bound for Seattle, Washington.  Soon after the very short flight began, the man handed the flight attendant a note explaining that he had dynamite on his person.  He demanded $200,000 cash, as well as four parachutes.  Sure to order, the plane landed in Seattle, where Cooper allowed the passengers to disembark but insisted members of the crew remain.  Once the money and parachutes were loaded, Cooper asked to be taken to Mexico City.  The crew informed him that they would need to refuel in Reno, Nevada.  While on route, Cooper – who was alone in the back of the plane  – opened the exit stairs and disembarked, landing somewhere in the Pacific Northwest.  Years later some of the ransom money was found near a river in Vancouver, Washington, but the fate of Cooper remains a mystery.

Amelia Earhart: I remember first hearing about Amelia while I was in grade school.  In the 1930’s Earhart made international headlines with a series of very impressive solo flights.  Of course, true to the times, most of the notoriety bestowed upon her could be credited to the simple fact that she was a female.   Wow.  Novel, right?  Her reputation grew and grew, leading to her most ambitious challenge in 1937: a solo flight across the globe.  It was reported at the time that Earhart sadly perished while crossing the Pacific. To some, that’s where the story begins.  Several theories of her survival began to surface.  The discovery of a jar of freckle cream on a deserted island in the Pacific suggested she may have survived for a time on the small patch of land.  Later, a photo was discovered purported to be Earhart and her navigator as prisoners of the Japanese military.  Is there truth to either theory?  Maybe.

The Zodiac Killer: And then, or course, there’s the darker side of my mystery obsessions, true crime.  If you follow this genre at all, you know about the Zodiac Killer.  The unknown assassin killed at least five victims in the San Francisco Bay area in the late 1960s.  In one case, following the murder of a taxicab driver, witnesses likely saw the assailant casually strolling away from the crime scene, unaware of his identify and unsuccessful in taking him into custody.  His cowardly spree was short, but he continued to taunt the public through a series of cryptic messages sent to various news media outlets.  Over the years, there have been plenty of theories of who this man could be.  However, his identity remains unsolved. 

Of the three stories, I cannot help but notice common elements.  First, in all three, the entire story was never completed.  There remains an element of the unknown and unsolved in each instance.  Second, by necessity, each case contains an element of nostalgia to times past, something that always seems to pique my interest. 

I do feel some scruples drawing attention to what amounts to two cowardly crimes as well as a human tragedy.  I suppose that in the crimes there remains some chance – although slim – that perpetrators could be brought to justice.    I cannot deny, however, that these cases have enthralled my for decades and are party responsible for my love of mystery an the unknown.

I’d be interested in hearing your favourite mysteries.  Leave a comment!

Benevolence of humankind is a controversial phenomena of much debate in various and heterogenous circles far and wide.  Well, I’m here to report that true kindness and support is alive and well.  At least in my experience these past few days.

Those who have followed will be cognizant that my long-contemplated project, The Lost Fifty-Seven: A Genealogical Journey of Discover, Deception, Secrets and Scandal was finally made available to public this week – welcomed or not!

While sales have been modest, comments and reactions have been robust.  I am fortunate to be able to count on unbridled and ever-present support from family and close friends, but I have been overcome by the comments of others. 

At this time, it’s all I can do to thank those who have been so supportive. 

Almost a month ago, my principal enthusiastically shared my upcoming book at a monthly staff meeting.  In turn, my co-workers enthusiastically congratulated me in hallway and classroom.  Thank you.

Both my own and my wife’s extended families have taken notice with comments and messages of support, but also by proudly announcing their purchase of my little book.  Thanks.

I need must also thank the family members along the way – both new and old – who played such crucial role during the research and writing stages of the book.  Thank you.

And, of course, where would I be without the help and support of my immediate family?  My wife, Lana, as well as my boys: Jack, Ben, Tom and Scott.  Without their support I hesitate to consider what may not be.  Thank you.

My goal with The Lost Fifty-Seven is to share, not only a curious family mystery that hopefully intrigues and entertains, but also to share the power of family and connection, something I experienced in abundance through this rewarding process.

Subscribe