1

Notes on the possible origins of John Smith of Marchington, Tasmania

Introduction

John Smith of Marchington, Tasmania was my father Robert (Bob) Mitchell’s great-great-grandfather
through his mother, Effie Anderson, her father Stuart Anderson, and his mother Jane Smith, John’s
daughter. John Smith arrived in Tasmania in 1821 with his family and was given a 500 acre land grant
at Breadalbane near Launceston, which he named Marchington.

(Photo courtesy of Lyn Jessup, a descendant of John Smith)

The potential difficulty in tracing the origins of someone with the name John Smith is self-evident.
Making it even more difficult is the fact that people sometimes changed their name to Smith to hide
their true identity. However, that applied predominantly to convicts rather than to free settlers. I am
unlucky enough to have had two ancestors by the name of John Smith who arrived in Tasmania in
the 1800s – the other was actually a convict! A story persists that John Smith was the son of King
George IV of England. My intention is to document the known facts and family folklore regarding
 2

John Smith in the hope that someone may one day be able to trace his ancestry, at least with
reasonable confidence.

Genetic evidence confirms our descent from John Smith and Frances Jackson. My late uncle Frank
Mitchell and I both undertook DNA tests. Between us our DNA matches with at least eleven other
descendants of John and Frances through their children George, Isabella, Maria, Richard, Margaret,
and Jane. Details of the matches are listed in another document. 1

When referring to women in this document I have generally used their maiden surnames rather than
their married surnames.

My father Robert (Bob) Mitchell’s descent from John Smith and Frances Jackson is shown in Chart M
at the end of this document. Frances Jackson’s ancestry is shown in Chart M12.

All place names are in Tasmania unless otherwise stated.

Acknowledgements

I am indebted to my grandmother Effie Anderson who proudly displayed John Smith’s image on her
mantelpiece, and in so doing encouraged the curiosity of her descendants. My father Bob Mitchell
assembled a few bits and pieces on John Smith from various sources, including newspaper clippings,
which he passed on to me. These sparked my interest, and I decided to produce a summary of the
information on John Smith, as no-one else seemed to have done it. My cousin Lyn Jessup kindly sent
me the depiction of “John Smith young and old” shown above. I am particularly indebted to BS and
VL/S, who have both done wonderful research on the “Smith myth”, and kindly passed on a lot of
vital material to me regarding John Smith.

Abbreviations

Linctas = Linctas, Tasmanian Names Index

1. John Smith – the known facts

Little is known with certainty regarding John Smith before his marriage to Frances Jackson on 21
October 1816, at St. James, Piccadilly2, in London. Frances Jackson was born on 6 February 1792 at
Southwell, Nottinghamshire to Reverend Magnus Jackson and Frances Lowe.3 Magnus Jackson was a
graduate of Cambridge University, being awarded a Bachelor of Divinity in 1798.4 Frances Lowe’s
father Thomas was a maltster (a maker of malt). He was evidently reasonably wealthy, as when his
eldest daughter married she was described as “a very amiable young Lady, with a handsome

1
See Mitchell, Chris, 2019, Mitchell family ancestry confirmed through DNA testing (unpubl.)
2
ancestry.com, London, England, Church of England Marriages and Banns, 1754-1921
3
Family records
4
ancestry.com, Cambridge University Alumni, 1261-1900
 3

fortune.”5 Both of Frances’ parents were dead by the time she married John Smith. At the marriage
ceremony she gave her parish as St. James Piccadilly, and it is likely that at the time she was living
with her brother Magnus, who resided at Piccadilly South in 1816. 6 Frances’ father Magnus
bequeathed her the equivalent of £1000 in his will, but left it at the discretion of the executors as to
when she would receive her inheritance.7 Frances is also said to have known the poet Lord Byron.8
This is plausible as they were about the same age, and Byron used to often stay with his mother at
Southwell between 1803 and 1807. 9 Southwell was a town of a little over 2000 people in 1803 10, and
Byron and Frances would have both mixed in the small upper class circle in the town.

In early 1800s England it was normal to marry someone of the same social class. So, Frances Jackson
probably wouldn’t have married John Smith unless he had a relatively upper-class background. He
was certainly educated, which is consistent with a middle or upper class background. Upper class
marriages were often reported in newspapers, and family members usually acted as witnesses at
marriages, as now. The fathers of the bride and groom were also sometimes recorded. As Frances
had a relatively upper-class background it would be expected that her marriage record would
provide some useful information. Unfortunately, it doesn’t!

Reverend Magnus Jackson John Smith and Frances Jackson’s marriage record
(Source: ancestry.com) (Source: ancestry.com)

According to family records John Smith married Frances Jackson on 21 October 1815, exactly a year
earlier than the actual date. Errors like this can easily creep in, but was this an error? John and
Frances’ son George had been born on 5 March 1816.11 It is likely that once in Tasmania John and
Frances stated that they had been married in 1815 to avoid the embarrassment associated with
having an illegitimate child. Not surprisingly their marriage was “a runaway Gretna Green wedding,

5
Derby Mercury 8 January 1779
6
ancestry.com, London, England, Land Tax Records, 1692-1932
7
ancestry.com, London, England, Wills and Probate, 1507-1858
8
Typewritten document held by the author headed “Copied from a document in possession of Mrs.
Marguerite Abey”
9
Moore, Thomas, 1830, Letters and Journals of Lord Byron: with notes of his life, A. and W. Galignani, Paris
publ.
10
en.wikipedia.org, Southwell, Nottinghamshire
11
Family records
 4

according to tradition.”12 This also explains why there was no marriage notice placed in the
newspapers, and why there were no family witnesses at their marriage. It may also have had some
influence on the couple’s decision to migrate to Australia. No-one in Australia would know that their
first child was born out of wedlock.

John and Frances Smith, with their infant son George, departed England on the Shipley bound for
Australia on 18 December 1816, just eight weeks after their marriage. The Shipley was a transport
carrying 125 male convicts and a number of paying passengers. The Shipley arrived in Sydney on 24
April 1817, after a voyage of four months.13 In her account of the voyage Frances states “we
(through the influence of some high officials in the Transport Office) with another gentleman were
allowed what is termed a free passage, that is, we were to pay freight on all goods taken out by us to
the colony and to find our own provisions.”14 We are left wondering who the high officials were and
who might perhaps have influenced them?

John Smith was said to have been listed in the ship’s records as a linen draper.15 A letter from the
Assistant Librarian of the United Grand Lodge of England confirms that their records show a John
Smith, linen draper of High Bridge, was made a mason in the Atholl Lodge at Newcastle-upon-Tyne
on 6 May 1811.16

In January 1818 John Smith received a land grant of 500 acres at Bringelly, about 50km west of
Sydney. He named it Close House17, the significance of which will be discussed later. The Smiths
settled at Richmond, west of Sydney, where they had three additions to their family - Frances born
in 1818, Magnus in 1819, and Isabella in 1820. John and Frances had intended to stay in New South
Wales, but owing to the effect of the heat on Frances’ health, they decided to remove to Tasmania. 18
Frances was almost constantly pregnant, which would have made it harder for her to bare the
summer heat. At the end of 1820 John placed a newspaper advertisement: “Mr. John Smith, Mrs.
Smith, and family, being about to proceed to Port Dalrymple [George Town] in the brig Queen
Charlotte, request claims to be presented.” 19 The passenger list for the Queen Charlotte shows John
Smith, free settler, his wife Frances, and children George, Magnus and Frances. Accompanying the
Smiths were three convicts, John Warne, James Cole, and Mary Usher, who were “specially
permitted to proceed as servants to Mr. Smith”.20 Supposing for a moment that John Smith really
was the son of King George IV, he would have thought it ironic that he was now boarding a ship
named after his grandmother, George IV’s mother! He may even have whispered a comment to that
effect to Frances, with a wry smile on his face.

12
von Stieglitz, K. R., 1967, A History of Evandale, Birchalls, Launceston
13
The Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser 26 April 1817
14
Typewritten transcription entitled Reminiscences of a voyage from England to New South Wales in 1816,
Written by Mrs. John Smith, of Marchington
15
Examiner Express 28 March 1970
16
Typewritten letter dated 1 January 1969 from the Assistant Librarian, United Grand Lodge of England Library
and Museum, London
17
The title document was registered in the Secretary’s Office, Sydney on 26 April 1819. On the top of the
document it states Application No. 14597. Supplied to the author by Viginia Ling.
18
Examiner 26 November 1929
19
The Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser 30 December 1820
20
ancestry.com, New South Wales, Australia, Departing Crew and Passenger Lists, 1816-1825, 1898-1911
 5

Soon after arrival in Tasmania John applied for and received a location order for 500 acres at
Breadalbane on the Hobart Town Road, about seven miles south of Launceston. 21 He and Frances
named the property Marchington, after property inherited by Frances from her father Magnus
Jackson.22 The means by which this property was acquired by Magnus are discussed in Appendix 1.
John and Frances later made additional purchases of land.

The family continued to grow almost annually at Marchington, up to a total of sixteen children,
though several died in infancy. The following details of John and Frances’ children are mostly taken
from family records:
 George Jackson born 5 March 1816 England, died 26 May 1876 Horton23
 Frances born 5 March 1818, died 5 May 1851 Horton24
 Magnus born 6 April 1819, died 6 January 1846 at sea off the Cape of Good Hope in the
wreck of the Francis Spaight25
 Isabella born 4 September 1820, died 10 October 1820
 Isabella born 15 August 1821, died 22 July 1857 Horton26
 John born 24 July 1822, died 2 September 1822
 John Lowe born 26 July 1823, died 13 June 1897 St. Leonards 27
 Unnamed girl born and died August 1824
 Henry born 12 August 1825, died July 1826
 Richard born 20 October 1826, died 20 August 1919 Launceston28
 Margaret Ann born 23 June 1828, died 8 December 1915 Auburn, New South Wales 29
 Jane born 8 June 1829, died 23 October 1912 Stanley 30
 Unnamed girl born and died 7 June 1830
 Charles Thomas born 9 September 1831, died 10 February 1920 Stanley31
 Maria Evelyn born 5 March 1833, died 30 June 1924 Glebe32
 William Edmund born 15 June 1834, died 6 April 190433

In 1826 the Land Commissioners “passed along the high road ….through Smith’s farm, a very fine
one also…”.34 By 1842 the Marchington estate had grown to 800 acres, much of it cultivated. It
included “a large and convenient family residence, containing eight rooms, cellars &c., with
detached kitchens, stables, coachhouse, piggery, barn, &c., also an extensive garden, well stocked

21
von Stieglitz, op. cit.
22
Magnus Jackson refers to estates at Stramshall and Marchington in his will which was probated in 1813.
(ancestry.com, London, England, Wills and Probate, 1507-1858)
23
Linctas, RGD35/1/45, no. 317
24
Linctas, RGD35/1/20, no. 23
25
Launceston Examiner 27 May 1846
26
Linctas, RGD35/1/26, no. 199
27
Linctas, RGD35/1/66, no. 212
28
Examiner 21 August 1919
29
Sydney Morning Herald 9 December 1915
30
Examiner 24 October 1912
31
Advocate 11 February 1920
32
The Mercury 1 July 1924
33
Examiner 6 April 1906
34
McKay, Ann, ed., 1962, Journals of the Land Commissioners for Van Diemens Land 1826-28
 6

with choice fruit trees….There is also one of the best vineyards in the colony on this estate. It has
produced upwards of five tons of grapes this year.” 35

According to historian K.R. von Stieglitz “In later life John Smith seems to have been living in
straightened circumstances under the control of a notorious money-lender in Launceston.”36 It is not
clear why or for how long the family’s financial position remained tenuous. Frances Smith managed
to leave a significant estate to her descendants in her will37, so it is possible that she had always kept
her finances separate from her husband’s. Stieglitz also says that the Marchington property
consisted of 3000 acres by 1832.38 This contradicts the claim above that it grew to 800 acres by
1842, though it is possible that some of the estate was sold between 1832 and 1842.

John Smith died of “decay of nature” on 15 June 185339 at Marchington, aged 64.40 This places his
birth in 1788 or 1789. However, according to family records he was born on 21 January 1787. John
was buried in the St. James’ Church cemetery at Franklin Village, Launceston. After John’s death his
wife Frances moved to Stanley with her three youngest daughters, Margaret, Jane, and Maria.41
Frances died on 9 August 1881 at Stanley. 42

2. The family folklore

According to family folklore John Smith was actually the son of Prince George and Maria Fitzherbert.
Prince George subsequently became King George IV. He died without a legitimate heir, and was
succeeded on the throne by his brother William IV. William was succeeded by Queen Victoria, the
daughter of another brother, Prince Edward. 43

Where could the family story about John Smith have possibly originated? From the family anecdotes
discussed below the source seems to have been John himself. My own experience in conducting
family history research has been consistent with the following quote: “It is a well-known
phenomenon of local history writing that narratives are recorded, repeated and embellished over
time owing more to local tradition, family legend and the love of a good story than to verifiable
historical evidence. These stories, however, almost always have some basis in fact and contain
elements such as names, dates, events and places that can be tested through research.” 44 An
example of this is the recollection by my grandmother Effie Anderson that her great-grandparents
Rev. Joseph Mayson and Elizabeth Hickson left England for Tasmania two days after their marriage. 45
They actually left two weeks (fifteen days) after their marriage. The point that was being made was

35
The Cornwall Chronicle 7 May 1842
36
von Stieglitz, op. cit.
37
Linctas, A960/1/13
38
von Stieglitz, op. cit.
39
Linctas, RGD35/1/22, no. 931
40
Colonial Times 23 June 1853
41
Circular Head Chronicle 8 April 1953
42
Linctas, RGD35/1/50, no. 306
43
en.wikipedia.org, George III of the United Kingdom
44
utas.edu.au, Colonialism and its aftermath, Mythbusting in Local History
45
Typed document held by the author headed Reminiscences of Effie Doris Mitchell dated about 1973 “THE
MAYSONS”
 7

that, like John and Frances Smith, they left England straight after they were married, it’s just that
someone in passing the story down exaggerated a little. The gist of the story was correct.

Effie Anderson said that John Smith was the legitimate son of George IV and Maria Fitzherbert,
whose marriage had later been annulled. John had come out to Australia with the promise not to
reveal any details for 100 years. 46 That is all that was preserved of the legend on our side of the
family as far as I know. All the following information was preserved by other Smith descendants, and
some subsequently appeared in newspapers articles.

A daughter of John Smith was said to sit in the window of her home at Stanley with a light behind
her, so that passers-by could see the likeness to King George.47 The daughter would have been either
Margaret, Jane or Maria, who accompanied their mother Frances to Stanley after their father’s
death. In 1970 Mrs. O. C. Jacobs (who died in 1992, aged 8748, but was not connected by birth with
the Smiths) said that she first heard the story when she was a child, as it was whispered around
Stanley by other children. Even then the story was ‘hot’, as descendants of the son settled at Stanley
and it was never mentioned openly.49 I presume that these stories originated with Frances Jackson.
After her husband’s death she may have let slip a few snippets on his background.

Legend has it that John Smith had received a gift of £20000 on condition that he never returned to
England.50 Another story was that the amount of money he received would be doubled if he
migrated to Australia. 51 John must have had some capital as he received a 500 acre land grant upon
arrival in Tasmania. Under the system applying in 1821 a settler could receive the maximum
allotment of 2000 acres for bringing with him capital (including goods) of £3000.52 The fact that John
did not receive the maximum land allocation permitted would seem to imply that he may have been
relying mainly on the funds his wife had inherited rather than any money of his own.

Is it plausible that John Smith was paid a large sum of money on the provision that he disappear to
the other side of the globe and undertake never to make his links with George IV public? If he was
the son of George IV and Maria Fitzherbert he would arguably have had some claim to the throne. A
few hundred years earlier the circumstances applying at the time of George IV’s death would likely
have resulted in both George’s brother William and John Smith making strong claims on the throne
based on the normal rules of primogeniture. William would have argued that an Act of Parliament
prevented John Smith from becoming king. John Smith would have argued that under God’s laws
and the laws of the church he was the legitimate claimant. He would have lobbied nobles and
Parliament to change the law that prevented him from taking the crown, and also sought popular
support. He may have even raised an army and threatened to use force, blackmailing Parliament into
changing the law. However, by the time of George IV’s death the king was no longer virtually
omnipotent, and there was no real chance of this happening. But John Smith could still have been
more than just an embarrassment if he had made a public claim to the throne. Some degree of
political instability would probably have resulted, at the very least. In my view if John Smith really

46
Handwritten note held by the author of recollections dictated by Effie Mitchell (nee Anderson) to Judy Boon
47
Examiner Express 28 March 1870
48
Sunday Examiner 8 February 1998
49
Examiner Express 28 March 1970
50
Sunday Examiner 8 February 1998
51
Family records
52
Quoted in vdldocuments.wordpress.com, Vdldocument’s Blog
 8

was who he said he was, both the Parliament and Royal Family would have wanted to quietly
remove him from the scene rather than have him lingering in the United Kingdom as a potential time
bomb. The traditional way of doing this was to pay the person a large amount of money to keep
their mouth shut, and exile them to a place as far away from England as possible where they would
not be able to garner support for a claim on the crown should they change their mind. This is exactly
what is claimed to have happened in the case of John Smith.

As might be expected, there are supposedly some family heirlooms which strongly hint at a royal
connection. “There is a secret family signet ring which one member of the family used to identify
himself as a descendant of royalty when he went to England some years ago.” 53 The ring is said to
bare the royal coat of arms, and to have been kept in a locked drawer by John when not warn. It
bears the inscription “honi soit qui mal y pense”54, a French maxim used as the motto of the British
chivalric Order of the Garter. The maxim translates roughly as “Shame be to him who thinks evil of
it”.55 According to a newspaper article the signet ring is said to have the initials G.R. (George Rex).
There is also said to be a sword in the possession of descendants with a crown on it. Both the signet
ring and sword are said to have been given to John Smith by his ‘father’. 56 Apparently Frances
Smith’s wedding ring bears a small engraving of Buckingham Palace and a mark said to be used as a
Royal insignia.57

There is also a convenient explanation as to why more irrefutable proof of a royal connection has
not survived. “The family believes that the Smith’s youngest child, who became estranged, may have
destroyed important records that could have proved the link. It is also said that the Marchington
family would not have revealed its royalty publicly because of the stigma of illegitimacy.” 58

In another story “family legend records that once he [John Smith] broke off in the midst of singing
the hymn ‘King of Kings’, turned to his family and said ‘You’ll never know we had a king for a relative;
you’ll never know.”59 This seems to contradict the previous statement claiming that there had been
knowledge of the royal connection within the family. If the secret was known within the family, why
would John have said to his family “You’ll never know.…”? There is a possible explanation. He may
have only disclosed it to his wife Frances, who then passed it on to her children sometime after his
death.

Several other anecdotes relating gossip within the Smith household were passed down by
descendant Frances Sophia Reed. According to one story “At Marchington one day annually (date
unknown) there was a celebration and a silent toast was drunk. On one such occasion, after being
sent to bed, two little daughters of John crept down the stairs and listened at the dining room door,
then came running up into little Maria’s room, she heard them say to one another ‘just fancy

53
Examiner Express 28 March 1970
54
Typewritten note headed Notes on the Smith family made by my mother Mrs. Frances Sophia Reed dated
1950
55
en.wikipedia.org, Honi soit qui mal y pense
56
The Sunday Tasmanian 8 February 1998
57
Examiner Express 28 March 1970
58
The Sunday Tasmanian 8 February 1998
59
Examiner Express 28 March 1970
 9

Isabella, we are Queen Victoria’s cousins, isn’t that wonderful?’ Then Maria, who they had
unsuspectingly woke asked what they meant, but they told her to go to sleep and forget it.”60

It is believed that a letter written by Frances Jackson stating that her (by then probably deceased)
husband John was the cousin of Queen Victoria was in the possession of a descendant, but the letter
seems to have long since been lost.61

John Smith’s daughter Jane is said to have embroidered a sampler bearing the year 1839, and the
initials of her parents “F.S.” and “J.S.”. Above each of the initials a crown was embroidered. The
sampler is apparently still in the possession of Jane’s descendants.62 These stories are not convincing
evidence for John being the son of King George IV, but certainly point to both he and Frances
believing that he was.

The church clock and bell at Christ Church, Longford, about 15km from Marchington, are said to
have been gifts of King George IV. 63 As five other churches in Tasmania received the same gift from
the king64, it may be just by chance that a church located near Marchington was one of the
beneficieries.

3. Prince George and Maria Fitzherbert

Is it historically possible for John Smith to have been the son of Prince George and Maria
Fitzherbert? The answer in my view is that it can’t be ruled out. Maria Fitzherbert was born Maria
Anne Smythe in 1756, the eldest child of Walter Smythe. It is immediately apparent that if John
Smith was Maria’s son he could have adopted the name Smith from Smythe. By 1781 Maria had
been married twice and become a widow twice over after the death of her second husband Thomas
Fitzherbert. In about 1784 she met Prince George, the heir to the British throne, who immediately
fell in love with her. Being a good Roman Catholic, Maria refused to become George’s mistress.
George pursued Maria relentlessly until she eventually agreed to marry him. They were secretly
married by a Roman Catholic priest on 15 December 1785. 65 Under the Act of Settlement 1701, a
Roman Catholic could not sit on the throne. Also, under the Royal Marriage Act 1772, all members of
the Royal Family were required to ask the Sovereign’s permission before marrying. Prince George
knew that his father King George III would never have approved his marriage to a Roman Catholic.
So, George and Maria’s marriage, though recognised by the Roman Catholic Church and all other
denominations including the Anglican Church, was illegal. George and Maria lived together until
George was pushed into marrying his first cousin Princess Caroline of Brunswick on 8 April 1795.
Upon the death in 1820 of his father, King George III, Prince George became King George IV. George

60
Typewritten note headed Notes on the Smith family made by my mother Mrs. Frances Sophia Reed dated
1950
61
Reference to this letter is contained within a typewritten letter from Eric L. Reed to Brian Smith dated 4
March 1962
62
Typewritten document headed John Smith’s Ancestors, and dated December 1975, author unknown
63
en.wikipeida.org, Longford, Tasmania
64
ontheconvicttrail.blogspot.com, Christ Church, Longford
65
newadvent.org, Maria anne Fitzherbert
 10

IV died in 1830 without a legal heir, and was succeeded by his brother, King William IV, whose niece
Victoria succeeded him.66

Prince George was a notorious womaniser, and is known to have had illegitimate children with
several women. There were rumours in the period after George and Maria’s marriage that she had
borne one or two children. “In 1833, after the King’s death, one of [his] executors, Lord Stourton,
asked her [Maria] to sign a declaration he had written on the back of her marriage certificate. It read
‘I Mary Fitzherbert …. [confirm] that my union with George P. of Wales was without issue.’ According
to Stourton, she, smiling, objected, on the score of delicacy.”67 George’s uncle, the Duke of
Gloucester, and other friends believed that Maria was pregnant when she and George first lived at
Brighton in the year after their marriage. 68 There were also other occasions on which Maria was
thought to be pregnant. For example, on 18 July 1786 the Earl of Mornington wrote “…. Mrs.
Fitzherbert is here [Brighton], and they say with child.”69 An internet site that appears to be well
researched claims that Marianne Smythe, who was brought up by Maria Fitzherbert, but was said to
be the daughter of her brother Jack, “is now accepted as having been her own child, fathered by her
third husband, George, Prince of Wales….”. 70

Maria Fitzherbert and Prince George (Source: abc.net.au)

During 1786 George and Maria divided their time between Brighton and London, so you’d think it
would have been hard to hide a pregnancy from the public. However, there were references on

66
royalcentral.co.uk, The Wives of the Georgian Kings: Maria Fitzherbert & Caroline of Brunswick
67
Saul, David, 2000, The Prince of Pleasure: The Prince of Wales and the making of the Regency, Grove Press
68
Carrol, Leslie, A problem like Maria
69
Leslie, Anita, 1960, Mrs. Fitzherbert A Biography, Hutchinson & Co. Ltd., London
70
zipworld.com.au, The Smythe Family of Eshe Hall, Durham and Acton Burnell in Shropshire
 11

occasions to Maria being overweight, which could have hidden a pregnancy. Women were also
known to have used billowing dresses and bulky coats to hide pregnancies in those days.

So, if George and Maria did have a son, the most likely time for his birth would have been in the first
few years of their marriage, from late 1786 to 1789. He would have been legitimate, but not heir to
the throne. According to the family records that have been preserved John Smith of Marchington
was born on 21 January 1787, which fits neatly within this time frame. John Smith’s inferred year of
birth from his death record is 1788 or 1789, which also fits within this time frame.

Anita Leslie, a descendant of Maria’s adopted daughter Minney Seymour, wrote a biography of
Maria Fitzherbert. In it she states “Minney Seymour preserved the miniatures of two children sans
nom who, she whispered, were Mrs. Fitzherbert’s. A boy and a girl whose fate cannot definitely be
proved. Many papers containing circumstantial evidence were, alas, destroyed by my great-
grandmother, Lady Constance Leslie.…” Others were destroyed by Maria herself, knowing that they
would cause embarrassment if ever made public. Apparently, Queen Victoria hated the Fitzherbert
story, and called the papers regarding it those ‘which no loyal subject should wish to possess’71, so
she also no doubt arranged for many documents to be destroyed. It seems strange that the
Fitzherbert story would have really bothered Victoria, unless she knew or suspected that Maria
actually had borne children to Prince George.

In a codicil to her will Maria Fitzherbert referred to “my two dear children …. I have loved them both
with the tenderest affection any mother could do…”. 72 It is clear that she was referring to Mary
Georgina Emma Dawson Damer and Mary Ann Stafford Jenningham. The former was her adoptive
daughter Minney Seymour referred to above, and the latter another adoptive daughter.

Not surprisingly, the story of supposed descent from George and Maria is not exclusive to our family.
The recognised claimants include James Ord, who was raised as a Catholic in Norfolk, Virginia73, a
boy raised by the Wyatt family in Scotland 74, and another boy adopted by Sir James Harris.75

4. John Smith’s ancestry

According to the family records that have been preserved John Smith was born on 21 January 1787.
Generally speaking, when such dates are preserved within a family, they are correct. Sometimes
they can be exactly one year out, such as with John and Frances’ marriage, or they can be the date of
baptism rather than the birthdate. Family records copied from a document in the possession of Mrs.
Marguerite Abey include births, marriages and deaths for John and Frances Smith and the following
two generations of their family.76 I have checked most of the dates in the document against official
records, and have only found one in error, that of John and Frances’ marriage. This was probably an

71
Leslie, Anita, op. cit.
72
ancestry.com, England & Wales Prerogative Court of Canterbury Wills, 1384-1858, will of Maria Fitzherbert
probate 20 April 1837
73
lesliecarroll.com, A Problem like Maria?
74
en.wikipedia.org, Maria Fitzherbert
75
zipworld.com.au, op. cit.
76
Typewritten document held by the author headed “Copied from a document in possession of Mrs.
Marguerite Abey”
 12

intentional error, as already discussed. Based on this I would say that there is a better than even
chance that John Smith was actually born on 21 January 1787. Other evidence also supports the
1787 birthdate. His cemetery record states that he was born in 1787. 77 In a 1929 newspaper article
John Smith was said to have been 65½ when he died78, and in a book published in 1967 it is stated
that John Smith was born on 21 January 1787.79

In the early 1800s use of family names was still very common. Frances Jackson’s parents were
Magnus Jackson and Frances Lowe, and her siblings Magnus, Henry and Isabella. John and Frances
used all these names for their own children, including the surnames Jackson (for George Jackson
Smith), and Lowe (for John Lowe Smith). The names they used which didn’t come from John Smith
himself or Frances’ immediate family were, in order, George, Richard, Margaret Ann, Jane, Charles
Thomas, Maria Evelyn and William Edmund. Except for George, these names were used after all of
the names in Frances’ family had already been used. In fact, of their first eight surviving children, the
only ones with names that didn’t come from Frances’ family were George and John. It was certainly
unusual for couples to give their children names predominantly from the maternal side. There is a
strong likelihood that John’s father’s name was George, given that he and Frances named their first
child George. It will be noted that they also named a daughter Maria. The naming of the children
certainly doesn’t discourage me from thinking that John might have been the son of George IV and
Maria Fitzherbert! An alternative explanation might be that John Smith himself believed erroneously
that he was their son, and so named his first son George, and a later child Maria.

The next question is - where was John Smith born and brought up? The fact that he may have been
born to Maria Fitzherbert at Brighton has already been discussed. In the document originally held by
Mrs. Marguerite Abey it states that John Smith was born at Newcastle-upon-Tyne,
Northumberland.80 Von Stieglitz states that he was brought up near Newcastle-upon-Tyne.81 I don’t
know what the original source for this information was, but it clearly goes back a long way, and is
most likely accurate. A couple named George and Isabella Smith had a son John baptised on 22
February 1789 at Heddon-on-the-Wall, about 10km west of Newcastle-upon-Tyne. They appear to
have had at least four other children, Margaret born about 1782, Jane baptised in 1784, George in
1786, and Ann in 1792. All the children were baptised at Heddon-on-the-Wall.82 John’s baptism falls
neatly in a gap between his siblings George, baptised a little over two years before him, and Ann,
baptised three years after him. This gives no hint that this particular John might have been adopted.

Margaret Smith had a memorial stone made, which is in the Heddon-on-the-Wall Cemetery. The
inscription on the stone reads “Sacred to the memory of Isabella Smith wife of George Smith of
Close House who died on the 12th day of November 1822 aged 71 years. Also to the memory of
George Smith husband to the above Isabella Smith who died the 5th of June 1836 aged 82 years.
Margaret Smith daughter of the above died at Close House 25th July 1858 aged 75 years”.83 Close

77
Examiner 26 November 1929
78
ancestry.com, Australia Cemetery Index, 1808-2007
79
von Stieglitz, op. cit.
80
Typewritten document held by the author headed “Copied from a document in possession of Mrs.
Marguerite Abey”
81
Ibid.
82
Ibid.
83
Heddonhistory.weebly.com, Monumental Inscriptions of the Church and Churchyard of St. Andrews, Heddon-
on-the-Wall
 13

House is located 1km south-west of Heddon-on-the-Wall. It will be remembered that John Smith
named his land grant in New South Wales Close House. The above Margaret Smith is undoubtedly
the Margaret Smith of Close House whose will was probated on 7 September 1858, a few weeks
after her death. In her will, which she wrote in 1845, Margaret stated that she was a spinster and
proceeded to name family members and the bequests she made to them. She referred to the seven
children of her deceased brother George Smith, to her sister Jane Gibson and her three children, to
her sister Isabella, wife of Richard Cowell, and their children, and to her sister Ann, wife of Watson
Charlton, and their children. She referred to her brother John Smith, a resident in Van Diemens Land,
whom she believed had eleven children. John was bequeathed £19 19/-, which was to be distributed
equally to his surviving children if he had already died. The probate statement at the end of the will
states that Margaret had died on or about 25 July 1858, the same date written on her gravestone.
This makes it almost certain that John Smith of Marchington was the John Smith baptised at
Heddon-on-the-Wall to parents George and Isabella Smith on 22 February 1789.84 The Smiths may
not have lived in Close House itself, as in 1832 George Smith of High Farm on Close House Estate was
listed as one of only three eligible electors in “Houghton and Close House Township”. 85 High Farm
apparently became known as High Close House.86

This would seem to settle the matter of John’s parentage once and for all. But before making this
absolute we should consider the admittedly improbable possibility that John had been fostered out
to George and Isabella Smith to raise, and was not their biological son.

Bastard children of royalty were sometimes farmed out to connected families to raise. So, if John
was the son of Prince George and Maria Fitzherbert, it is plausible that he was sent to a family living
near Newcastle to be brought up. Newcastle is in the north of England, a long way from London, and
so would have been considered a safe place to keep John hidden from public view. The branch of the
Smythe family to which Maria Fitzherbert belonged owned Eshe Hall, Durham, about 30km south of
Newcastle. Maria’s cousin Sir Edward Smythe had possession of Eshe Hall87 until his death in 1811.88

Maria Fitzherbert had another family connection in the Newcastle area. Her mother Mary Smythe
(nee Errington) referred in her will to her daughter Mrs. Fitzherbert and her brothers John and Henry
Errington.89 Henry Errington was one of the witnesses to Prince George and Maria Fitzherbert’s
marriage.90 Their branch of the Errington family had been in possession of Beaufront Castle since
1587.91 Maria’s uncle Henry Errington died in possession of Beaufront Castle in 1819 92, and her uncle
John Errington died at Beaufront in 1827.93 Beaufront Castle is about 15km west of the Close House
estate, where George and Isabella Smith lived. Could the Erringtons and Smiths have been on

84
National Archives, IR27/327
85
The Poll Book of the Contested Election for the Southern Division of Northumberland on the 20th and 21st
December 1832, 1833, Hernaman and Perring publ.
86
Heddonhistory.weebly.com, Houghton and Close House township, Heddon-on-the-Wall Local History Society
87
eshparishcouncil.gov.uk, Esh Parish Walk
88
en.wikipedia.org, Smythe Baronets
89
ancestry.com, England & Wales Prerogative Court of Canterbury Wills, 1384-1858, will of Mary Smythe,
probate 1807
90
en.wikipedia.org, Maria Fitzherbert
91
gatehouse-gazetteer.info, Beaufront Castle
92
ancestry.com, England & Wales Prerogative Court of Canterbury Wills, 1384-1858, will of Henry Errington,
probate 1820; en.wikipedia.org, Sandhoe Hall
93
Urban, Sylvanus, 1832, The Gentleman’s Magazine, Volume 151, page 581
 14

friendly terms, with George and Isabella Smith agreeing to bring up Maria Fitzherbert’s son John? It
seems highly improbable, but not impossible.

It is possible that George Smith was somehow related to the Smythe family which Maria Fitzherbert
was born into. Henry Errington referred in his will to his nephews (Maria’s brothers) Charles and
Henry Smith. This indicates that Smythe was pronounced “Smith”. The name George was used in the
Smythe family – Maria Fitzherbert had a cousin George Smythe who was born in 1767. 94 So, George
Smith may have been a distant cousin of Maria Fitzherbert.

5. Family likenesses

Too much should not be made of family likenesses, but with so little to go on, comparing faces does
have some value, and it is fun to do. My grandmother Effie Anderson gave pride of place on her
mantelpiece to a copy of a miniature painting of a distinguished looking gentleman. As a child I had
no idea who this man was, but now I know that he was John Smith of Marchington. That is, we
believe that it is John Smith of Marchington, but as we do not know its source, we perhaps cannot
be certain. The copy of the miniature painting of John Smith is shown below beside one of Prince
George. One word of caution – as these are paintings, we don’t know whether they are faithful
representations of the two men. However, in the era before photography was invented artists
generally endeavoured to make the best possible likeness they could. I think that we can reasonably
assume that these men actually looked very much as they are depicted.

I might be biased, but to me these two men have a lot more similarities than differences. The main
similarities in their appearance to me are:
 their noses are long and prominent, George’s is fairly straight in profile, John’s less so
 both have dark, curly hair
 Prince George had blue eyes, and John Smith’s eyes appear to have been blue or grey from
the portrait of him in older age
 from the appearance of his sideburn Prince George had sparse facial hair; it is less clear with
John, but his sideburn also appears fairly sparse
 their mouths are small and similar in shape, particularly the curve of the upper lip, both
having a distinct cupid’s bow
 their chins are very similar – small, narrow, rounded to almost pointed, and prominent
 their ears are very similar in size and shape, both also being angled back at the top
 they both appear to have longer than average necks (George IV does in all his portraits),
though that may partly be an impression created by the style of collar, or it could have been
a creation of the artists, who may have thought that longer necks were more elegant.
There are no significant dissimilarities, though John’s eyebrows are thicker than Prince George’s, and
the difference between their noses has already been mentioned. Overall, they look much more alike
than many father-son combinations.

94
Betham, William, 1802, The Baronetage of England, or The History of the English Baronets, Vol. 2, p. 227
 15

John Smith of Marchington Prince George, the future King George IV

This idea that John Smith bore a likeness to George IV is not new. In 1970 it was reported: “Many of
the descendants of the [John Smith] clan bear striking resemblances to the Hanoverian kings. I have
compared the photo of a now deceased descendant with a contemporary painting of George IV. The
likeness is unmistakeable. They had the same clean jaw, smallish mouth, wide, open forehead and
most similar, the noses of twins: straight, long and slightly pointed. They could have been
brothers…..”95

Comparisons between the two men’s appearances in later life are more problematic. Their faces
were certainly not as recognisably similar, though this could be expected due to the different lives
they had led. In particular, George IV became very corpulent as he grew older. John Smith may have
lost all his teeth by the time the later portrait of him was taken, dramatically altering his appearance,
whereas George IV would certainly have had false teeth, assuming he had lost his. There is sadness
in the face of the older John Smith. This may have just been the way his face aged, but perhaps it
reflected the burden he had to carry his whole life of believing he was a royal personage, but having
(or trying) to keep it secret?

95
Examiner Express 28 March 1870
 16

Jane Smith Queen Victoria

The likeness of Jane Smith, daughter of John, to Queen Victoria was commented on by family
members. Jane’s niece, Frances Sophia Reed nee Smith, said “Jane was very like Queen Victoria in
face and figure. She attended a fancy dress ball as Queen Victoria and looked so like her it created
quite a stir.”96 Above are photos of Jane Smith and Queen Victoria. It may be co-incidental that Jane
Smith is wearing similar headgear to Queen Victoria, though it is tempting to think that she had seen
this photo of Queen Victoria and deliberately copied her headgear, hoping that people would notice
a likeness. She may have been the daughter of John Smith that sat in the window at her Stanley
house with a light behind her, hoping that passers-by would notice a likeness to Queen Victoria.
Queen Victoria’s father, Edward, Duke of Kent, was King George IV’s brother. If John Smith was the
son of King George IV, then Jane Smith and Queen Victoria were first cousins. Cousins aren’t
necessarily similar looking, but these two women have several facial similarities. Both have:
 round faces
 few facial wrinkles for their age
 fairly indistinct eyebrows
 small blue eyes that are not deeply set (Victoria’s eyes were known to be blue and Jane’s
eyes appear pale in the photo, indicating that they were blue or grey)
 small, downturned mouths
 rounded chins and a distinct double chin (not unusual at their age)
 ears that are quite long and of similar shape

96
Typewritten note headed Notes on the Smith family made by my mother Mrs. Frances Sophia Reed dated
1950
 17

 fine (thin) straight hair

In looking for family likenesses I have tried to be objective. The miniatures of John Smith (young and
old) are the only ones I have ever seen, and, I presume, the only ones of him in existence. The photo
of Jane Smith is one of only two I have ever seen of her. The other is a group photo of very poor
quality. To my knowledge no-one in the wider family prior to me has ever commented on Jane’s
likeness to Queen Victoria. I chose the pictures of George IV and Victoria as being the ones showing
them closest in age to John and Jane Smith in their respective pictures, and with similar profiles to
enable ready comparison.

6. Genetic evidence
According to ancestry.com my DNA matches with that of eight people with claimed descent from
King George III, George IV’s father. 97 All these people allegedly descend from royal mistresses of King
George III, or one of his sons. It is not disputed that these royals had mistresses, but proving that a
particular child born to a royal mistress had a royal father is difficult. The eight people claiming
descent from George III are all six or seven generations removed from him. Typically, such
descendants would share only about 3cM (centiMorgans) of autosomal DNA with each other98,
though in some instances they will share significantly more, and in others none at all.

Matching DNA can arise through random recombination as well as through inheritance. If two
people share a segment of DNA 8cM long there is about a 50% chance this will have occurred
randomly, that is, they are not related. The segment of DNA I share with the other people who claim
descent from George III ranges from 7cM to 10cM long. Sharing a 10cM segment of DNA equates
with about a 99% chance of having common ancestors.99 I made contact with V.L. and D.H., who
both share a 10cM segment of DNA with me. They have a common ancestor Henry Bankes, who is
believed to be the great-grandson of King George III. The fact that I have a DNA match with both of
them means that the common ancestor of the three of us is very likely to be an ancestor of this
Henry Bankes. Henry’s mother, Georgina Nugent, was “reputedly the illegitimate daughter of Ernest,
Duke of Cumberland, by Lady Nugent.” 100 Ernest Augustus was George IV’s brother. The possible
lines of descent of V.L., S.H., D.H. and me from King George III are shown below.

S.H., D.H., my uncle the late Frank Edwin Mitchell and I also have our DNA data on another site,
Gedmatch. According to this site Frank and I share a segment of DNA 13-15cM long with S.H. and
D.H.101 (The companies undertaking DNA analysis give differing results, indicating that calculation of
the amount of matching DNA is not precise.) This confirms that the DNA match with the people
discussed here is on the Mitchell side.

97
ancestry.com, ThruLines matches for Christopher Mitchell -George von Wales
98
isogg.org, Autosomal DNA Statistics
99
lianejensenresearch.com, How to tell when DNA matches might be false positives
100
regencyhistory.net, October 2013
101
Gedmatch.com, comparison between kit numbers T007464, T125103, A495368 and A195577
 18

Possible lines of descent from King George III

King George III = Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz

King George IV = Maria Fitzherbert Prince Ernest Augustus = Deborah Charlotte Dee

Frances Jackson = John Smith George Bankes = Georgina Charlotte Nugent

Jane Smith Henry Hyde Nugent Bankes = Lalage Letitia Caroline Vivian

Stuart James Anderson Daughter Daughter

Effie Doris Anderson Daughter Daughter

Robert George Mitchell V.L. (10cM) S.H. (8cM)

Christopher Robert Mitchell D.H. (10cM)

I have a DNA match with a second group of three people, D.T., D.R., and L.T., who claim descent
from King George III and his mistress Hannah Lightfoot, as shown below. The DNA match I have with
these people is weak, so the shared DNA could have arisen through a chance recombination,
meaning we don’t share a common ancestor. As with the DNA matches already discussed, it points
to a possibility that we are all descended from an ancestor of John Taylor.

Other possible lines of descent from King George III

King George III = Hannah Lightfoot

John Taylor

Hannah Taylor Abraham Taylor

Daughter Daughter
 19

Son Daughter

Son Son Son

Son Daughter Daughter

D.T. (8cM) D.R. (7cM) L.T. (7cM)

I also checked all my DNA matches on Ancestry for anyone with a published family tree showing
descent from George and Isabella Smith from Heddon-on-the-Wall, that is, from the Smith, Gibson,
Cowell or Charlton families mentioned in Margaret Smith’s will. I similarly checked Frank Mitchell’s
DNA matches (except for USA residents) on MyHeritage and FamilytreeDNA for anyone descended
from those families. Neither of us had a DNA match with anyone known to be descended from
George and Isabella Smith’s children other than John. Of course, if there had been several matches
that would prove that John Smith was the biological son of George and Isabella Smith, and not of
King George IV and Maria Fitzherbert.

I am not a geneticist, but I believe that the DNA evidence at present points to a possibility that we
are descended from King George IV. Eventually, the genetic evidence may be overwhelming one way
or the other. I will keep watching out for anyone with a name like Betty or Will Windsor amongst my
DNA matches!

7. Conclusion

The evidence for our ancestor John Smith being the boy baptised at Heddon-on-the-Wall on 22
February 1789 with parents George and Isabella Smith is compelling. There is no doubt that he was
brought up in that family. His baptism falls neatly between that of his siblings George in 1786 and
Ann in 1792. His age was given as 64 at his death on 15 June 1853, which is consistent with him
being born in 1789. Normally, this combined with the information contained in Margaret Smith’s
will, would be enough to conclude that the matter of John’s origins has been resolved.

Given this background, how he and his wife Frances came to believe that he was really the son of
King George IV and Maria Fitzherbert is a mystery. Perhaps he was convinced by a story that had
been going about that fitted his circumstances, or perhaps he was delusional or craved fame, though
the latter seems unlikely given that did not make his claim public.

Based upon the current evidence available, I don’t think that the possibility that he was the son of
George IV and Maria Fitzherbert can be completely ruled out. To my knowledge there is as yet no
proven genetic link between descendants of John Smith and descendants of his siblings. If there was,
I would consider it proven beyond reasonable doubt that he was the son of George and Isabella
Smith. Conversely, there is genetic evidence which points to John possibly being the son of King
George IV and Maria Fitzherbert, but it is far from conclusive. There may never be certainty unless
 20

genetic testing of royal personages, both living and dead, is done and the results made public. This
seems unlikely.

King George IV has been described as Britain’s worst ever monarch 102, and at the time of his death
The Times commented “There never was an individual less regretted by his fellow-creatures than
this deceased King.”103 Perhaps it is better not to know whether George IV was our ancestor!

Appendix 1 – Inheritance of property at Marchington, Staffordshire

Magnus Jackson bequeathed his daughter Frances a share of estates at Marchington and Stramshall
in Staffordshire.104 Stramshall and Marchington are villages lying about 10km apart. I think that
Magnus received these estates from his wife Frances Lowe, who lived at Derby, about 30km east of
Marchington. Frances’ father Thomas Lowe does not specifically refer to any property at
Marchington or Stramshall in his will.105 His wife Anne Wilde predeceased him and does not appear
to have written a will. Although there is no direct evidence, I believe that the estates at Marchington
and Stramshall were passed down from Frances Jackson’s grandmother Anne Wilde.

Anne Wilde and Thomas Lowe signed their marriage licence on 22 July 1742 at Derby. Anne gave her
age as 24.106 There is no record of an Anne Wilde (with various spellings) being born at Derby around
1718. I believe that Anne was baptised at Checkley, Staffordshire on 29 July 1717 to parents John
and Mary.107 Her father John was a yeoman residing at Stramshall, near Checkley. In his will of 1721
John refers to his wife Mary and his children Mary, Ann and John. He bequeathed his properties at
Stramshall, Marchington, Hornington and Burton in Staffordshire to his wife Mary.108 Those at
Marchington and Stramshall were then presumably passed from Mary to her daughter Anne.

Appendix 2 – Other possible leads

A possible link with Newcastle-on-Tyne exists in the person of William Davidson, who was born in
Northumberland in 1805, and had been head gardener on the estate of Robert Walker of Benwell,
near Newcastle-on-Tyne. He arrived in Hobart per the Albion 31 December 1827. He first lodged
with John Smith of Marchington, which may indicate that they had a prior connection. In August
following a disagreement with Smith he left Marchington. 109

There is another possible, though unlikely, Walker link. Frances Jackson’s paternal grandmother was
Isabella Barker. She may have been the “Isabella daughter of Mary Walker spinster and Mr. Richard

102
financialexpress.com, George IV Britains worst king
103
The History of the Times. “The Thunderer” in the making: 1785-1841, 1935, p. 267
104
ancestry.com, London, England, Wills and probate, 1507-1858
105
findmypast.com.au, Staffordshire, Diocese of Lichfield and Coventry wills and probate, 1521-1860
106
familysearch.org, England, Staffordshire, Church Records, 1538-1944
107
findmypast.com.au, England, Births and Baptisms, 1538-1975
108
findmypast.com.au, Staffordshire, Diocese of Lichfield and Coventry wills and probate, 1521-1860
109
davidsonfamilyarchives.blogspot.com.au
 21

Barker of Bedale a base begot child” baptised on 19 April 1737 at Bedale, Yorkshire. 110 Admittedly
this is a long shot.

In a note recording her reminiscences my grandmother Effie Anderson stated “John Smith
m[married] Lady Frances Jackson”, and “Lady Eleanor(?) Jackson, daughter of Rev. Jackson lived with
Bakers(?) from Scotland, only child, an orphan, lady in waiting to Queen”.111 The reference to the
Bakers possibly relates to Frances grandmother, Isabella Barker. Frances Jackson lost her mother
when she was eleven, and her father when she was twenty. She was not an only child though, as at
the time of her marriage she had a brother Magnus, and a sister Isabella. The list of persons
employed by the Royal Household for the period 1780 to 1820 does not include either a Frances or
an Eleanor Jackson112, so Frances was not a lady in waiting to the Queen. A Charles Barker was
chaplain to the Prince Regent113, the future King George IV, up to his death in 1812. 114 He may have
been related to Frances’ mother Isabella Barker. He was the same age as Magnus Jackson, and they
may have known each other, both being clerics. If so, this could have given Frances an introduction
into the royal circle. Effie Anderson’s recollection was clearly vague, but some part of it is probably
true. Which part though? It hints at the type of connection that may have led to the family myth.

110
findmypast.com.au, Yorkshire Baptisms
111
Family papers held by the author
112
findmypast.com.au, Royal Household Staff, 1526-1924
113
Urban, Sylvanus, 1812, The Gentleman’s Magazine, Volume 82
114
findmypast.com.au, Royal Household Staff, 1526-1924
 22

16 James Mitchell
Pedigree Chart M 8 John Mitchell Gt. Gt. Grandfather
Great Grandfather 17 Elizabeth Drew
12/10/2017 BORN 1/9/1812 Gt. Gt. Grandmother
4 Edwin Harry John Mitchell WHERE St. Germans, England
Paternal Grandfather DIED 16/11/1880
BORN 20/10/1848 WHERE Lisdillon, Tas. 18 William Keast
WHERE Point Puer, Tas. 9 Catherine Augusta Keast Gt. Gt. Grandfather
MARRIED 21/6/1882 Great Grandmother 19 Catherine N. Penwarne
WHERE Hobart. Tas. BORN 2/10/1812 Gt. Gt. Grandmother
2 Rupert Penwarne Mitchell DIED 20/1/1929 WHERE Bake, Cornw all, England
Father WHERE Hobart, Tas. DIED 10/11/1899
BORN 18/4/1886 WHERE Lisdillon, Tas. 20 Thomas Solly
WHERE Sw ansea, Tasmania 10 Benjamin Travers Solly Gt. Gt. Grandfather
WHEN MARRIED 5/7/1921 Great Grandfather 21 Mary Bridges Travers
WHERE Black River, Tas. BORN 24/8/1820 Gt. Gt. Grandmother
DIED 30/1/1969 5 Annie Margaret Solly WHERE Walthamstow , England
WHERE Devonport, Tas. Paternal Grandmother DIED 14/8/1902
BORN 28/10/1859 WHERE Hobart, Tas. 22 John Cliffe Watts
WHERE Hobart, Tas, 11 Jane Henry Watts Gt. Gt. Grandfather
DIED 6/10/1926 Great Grandmother 23 Jane Campbell
1 Robert George Mitchell WHERE Sw ansea, Tas. BORN 17/5/1832 Gt. Gt. Grandmother
BORN 10/4/1922 WHERE Campbelltow n, Scotland
WHERE Stanley, Tas. DIED 23/9/1912
WHEN MARRIED 25/3/1950 WHERE Hobart. Tas. 24 James Anderson
WHO Jessie Kilpatrick 12 George Anderson Gt. Gt. Grandfather
WHERE Devonport, Tas. Great Grandfather 25 Elizabeth Marr
DIED 22/4/2006 BORN 16/1/1824 Gt. Gt. Grandmother
WHERE Hobart, Tas. 6 Stuart James Anderson WHERE New Byth, Scotland
Maternal Grandfather DIED 5/9/1895
BORN 10/9/1857 WHERE Stanley, Tas. 26 John Smith
WHERE Black River, Tas. 13 Jane Smith Gt. Gt. Grandfather
MARRIED 2/11/1888 Great Grandmother 27 Frances Jackson
WHERE Glamorgan, Tas. BORN 8/6/1829 Gt. Gt. Grandmother
3 Effie Doris Anderson DIED 26/6/1930 WHERE Breadalbane, Tas.
Mother WHERE Black River, Tas. DIED 23/10/1912
BORN 6/6/1897 WHERE Stanley, Tas. 28 Rev. Joseph Mayson
WHERE Black River, Tas. 14 Alfred Threlkeld Mayson Gt. Gt. Grandfather
DIED 9/7/1991 Great Grandfather 29 Elizabeth Hickson
WHERE Devonport, Tas. BORN 13/9/1839 Gt. Gt. Grandmother
7 Marion May Mayson WHERE Sw ansea, Tas.
Abbreviations Maternal Grandmother DIED 4/4/1907
Tas. = Tasmania BORN 11/12/1869 WHERE New Norfolk, Tas. 30 John Amos
WHERE Sw ansea, Tas. 15 Elizabeth Amos Gt. Gt. Grandfather
DIED 9/3/1936 Great Grandmother 31 Elizabeth Hepburn
WHERE Auckland, New Zealand BORN 14/4/1845 Gt. Gt. Grandmother
WHERE Cranbrook, Tas.
DIED 10/8/1907
Family tree of Robert George Mitchell of Hobart, Tasmania WHERE Parkville, Vic.
 23

16 John? Jackson
Pedigree Chart M12 8 Magnus Jackson Gt. Gt. Grandfather
Great Grandfather 17
Prepared by: Chris Mitchell 6/03/2018 BORN (bap.) 10/4/1712? Gt. Gt. Grandmother
4 Magnus Jackson WHERE Lancaster, Lanc.
Paternal Grandfather DIED
No. 1 on this chart is the same person as no. 27 on Chart M BORN 24/3/1733 WHERE Windemere, Westmor. 18
WHERE Kendall, Westmoreland 9 Margaret Gt. Gt. Grandfather
MARRIED 26/12/1756 Great Grandmother 19
WHERE Richmond, Yorkshire BORN Gt. Gt. Grandmother
2 Rev. Magnus Jackson DIED 29/10/1760 WHERE
Father WHERE Richmond, Yorkshire DIED
BORN 28/11/1759 WHERE 20
WHERE Richmond, Yorkshire 10 John? Barker Gt. Gt. Grandfather
WHEN MARRIED 20/2/1787 Great Grandfather 21
WHERE Derby, Derbyshire BORN Gt. Gt. Grandmother
DIED 1/2/1813 5 Isabella Barker WHERE
WHERE Southw ell, Nott. Paternal Grandmother DIED (bur.) 13/2/1742
BORN (bap.) 28/12/1726? WHERE Richmond, Yorkshire 22 Thomas Arthur
WHERE Richmond, Yorkshire? 11 Grace Arthur? Gt. Gt. Grandfather
DIED (bur.) 13/11/1801? Great Grandmother 23 Catherine Bincke
1 Frances Jackson WHERE Richmond, Yorkshire? BORN (bap.) 26/3/1693 Gt. Gt. Grandmother
BORN 6/2/1792 WHERE Richmond, Yorkshire
WHERE Southw ell, Nott. DIED (bur.) 20/1/1751
WHEN MARRIED 21/10/1816 WHERE Richmond, Yorkshire 24
WHO John Smith 12 Thomas Lowe Gt. Gt. Grandfather
WHERE London, England Great Grandfather 25
DIED 9/8/1881 BORN Gt. Gt. Grandmother
WHERE Smithton, Tasmania 6 Thomas Lowe WHERE
Maternal Grandfather DIED (bur.) 17/11/1725
BORN (bap.) 10/9/1718 WHERE Derby, Derbyshire 26 Thomas Johnson
WHERE Derby, Derbyshire 13 Mary Johnson Gt. Gt. Grandfather
MARRIED 24/7/1742 Great Grandmother 27
WHERE Derby, Derbyshire BORN (bap.) 1/9/1689 Gt. Gt. Grandmother
3 Frances Lowe DIED 28/7/1791 WHERE Derby, Derbyshire
Mother WHERE Derby, Derbyshire DIED
BORN (bap.) 8/9/1760 WHERE 28 John Wild
WHERE Derby, Derbyshire 14 John? Wild Gt. Gt. Grandfather
DIED (bur.) 30/4/1803 Great Grandfather 29 Ann Whittorance
WHERE Southw ell, Nott. BORN about 1681 Gt. Gt. Grandmother
7 Anne Wilde WHERE
Abbreviations Maternal Grandmother DIED (bur.) 10/2/1721
Nott. = Nottinghamshire, England BORN (bap.) 29/7/1717? WHERE Checkley. Staff. 30
Lanc. = Lancashire, England WHERE Checkley, Staff. 15 Mary? Gt. Gt. Grandfather
Westmor. = Westmoreland, England DIED (bur.) 20/1/1791 Great Grandmother 31
Staff. = Staffordshire, England WHERE Derby, Derbyshire BORN Gt. Gt. Grandmother
WHERE
DIED
Family tree of Robert George Mitchell of Hobart, Tasmania WHERE