|
a.
|
Note: Maggie Cowan's Parentage
Maggie was born in 1847, that much we know. The problem is who her parents are. In the 1851 census she is four years old. She is staying in a house in Neilston, exact location is unknown but the house or street was named Auld Muirfoot. In this house were Mary Leitch (74) daughter Sarah (40), neice Mary (36), nephew Samuel (23) and a lodger named John Grahame. With the exception of Maggie all were born in Ireland. It is odd indeed that a woman of 74 can have a niece aged 4.
Her death certificate identifies her parents as John Cowan and Mary Leitch both of whom are deceased. John Cowan in later censii is described as a shoemaker but the 1851 census has no mention of any John Cowan who is a shoemaker. Samuel Leitch was a shoemaker in 1851 as was the lodger John Grahame.
Theory 1
Here is where the intrigue starts. Also living in Neilston was another Cowan family all of whom came from Ireland. In this family, is the only John Cowan registered in the parish who could have children. Only one other John Cowan is registered and he was aged four. This John Cowan is aged 20 so it is conceivable that the child is his. The parents of this John Cowan are Robert and Mary Cowan who are in their mid forties and he might well be the nephew of Mary Leitch Snr. I wonder therefore is Maggie is the illegitimate son of John Cowan Jnr. (John and Mary's grand-nephew) and his cousins Sarah or Mary. The niece story has just been put in there to lend some respect to the poor child.
Theory 2
My father said he had a vague recollection of some Islay connection. Well, 29 Leitches were registered in the parish including a family of Leitches who came from Islay. It's not so far from Islay to Ireland so it is conceivable that old Mary Leitch has a connection although the census says she was born in Ireland. With this groundless suggestion in mind I wonder again if there has not been some jiggerypokery going on. The head and wife of the Islay Leitches are in their mid forties and could conceivably be related to Mary Leitch snr. by way of being nephews or neices. They had a 20 year old son by the name of Angus so could he have serviced one of his cousins (if they were).
Theory 3
It was Samuel. He was 23, a man of the world, Mary's nephew and they were covering up for him to the extent of telling porkies to the registrar who would be unable to check things up because records had not begun when Maggie was born.
Theory 4
Maggie's oldest daughter, Mary, was named Mary Hunter Leitch Jack. The Leitch can be explained possibly on her mother's side but what of the Hunter? It turns out that also staying at Auld Muirfoot in 1851was the Hunter family. Matthew was the head of the house, born in Ireland, whilst Catherine was his 32 year old wife who was born in Lochgilphead. They were bleachers and had three children aged 10, 5 and 1. Now then, noting the ages of Maggie Cowan (4) and James Hunter (5) did Matthew go a-wandering whilst his wife was heavily pregnant? Did he have a liaison with Sarah Leitch who later confided in her daughter than her father was Matthew Hunter? Or was it much more simple and charitable...that the Hunters gave Maggie companionship and support and that she named her oldest daughter in honour of this family?
Theory 5
There could be an even simpler explanation of Maggie's parenthood. John Cowan seems to disappear from the scene from 1847. There is no record of his death in the statutory records so even if he was omitted from the 1851 census he was certainly dead by 1855. Apparently it was not unusual for widows to revert to their maiden name after their husband's death. Mary Leitch may have done just that but reverted back again in later life. I think that Maggie Cowan was incorrectly described as the niece of Mary Leitch snr in the 1851 census. I think she was was her grand-daughter. So the whole sorry tale is down to an enumerator screwing up the details of the relationship.
In the 1871 census James Jack and Margaret (presumably Cowan, now Jack) were staying with the same William and Mary Leitch who were brother and sister. They are both now in their early 20s. Even more peculiarly James Jack is described as a nephew of the Leitches in the 1871 census. James and Maggie are noted as having a son, James aged 1.
|
