WWII: Japanese Anti-American Propaganda in New Guinea

Mister Doughboy, Mister Doughboy,
Gee, what a guy! You sure look pie to me.

–Jack Davey

This may seem like a tangent before the post has really even started, but I am a big fan of the old TV show M*A*S*H, and watch the reruns broadcast on MeTV almost every weeknight. Several weeks ago an episode aired in which the characters of Hawkeye and Trapper John had to defuse an unexploded bomb that had fallen into the compound. There were some tense minutes, followed by the revelation that it was a propaganda bomb, and it showered the camp with leaflets advising surrender.

Although this television show depicts a different war than the one I am thinking of, the scene reminded me I needed to finish a blog post that I began long ago.

During the course of WWII, almost a million U.S. service personnel passed through Australia and New Zealand. Initially, the American allies were welcomed almost as saviors. The British, Australia’s traditional allies, had announced their intention to focus on protecting England, leaving Australians feeling defenseless against what seemed at the time a real possibility of Japanese invasion. The arrival of the American troops, therefore, promised much needed support for the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps (ANZAC). In addition to this, they represented an idea of glamour as epitomized by Hollywood.

“In some ways, these soldiers matched the Hollywood image: their manners impressed Australian women (calling women ‘Ma’am’ and men ‘sir’) and their uniforms were better looking than the baggy uniforms of the Australian soldiers.” (“Americans”)

In addition to impressing women with their manners and uniforms, the American soldiers were also better paid than their ANZAC counterparts, and had little to spend it on besides a search for a good time. Many of the Australian and Kiwi women began to prefer Americans socially for these reasons. It was not long before the sense of relief felt by the ANZAC soldiers changed into jealousy.

This was of great concern to the ANZAC troops stationed in New Guinea, far away from their wives and sweethearts. And this concern was seized upon by the enemy, who hoped to use it to destroy morale in the ANZAC camps. Now, as far as I have discovered, none of my near relatives served in the South Pacific; they all seem to have been in the European Theater, and certainly none of them were ANZAC; but soldiers in both theaters had a tendency to pick up souvenirs to take home. These souvenirs were often traded around. So, through some channel or another, my great-uncle Lowell Brosius ended up with a stack of gloriously illustrated and colored anti-American leaflets.

This first one portrays a languorous embrace leaning in to a kiss, worthy of a turn-of-the-century romantic picture postcard. The man in the picture is obviously an American soldier, with superfluous American flags scattered over his uniform. The dreamy colors and style of the main image are juxtaposed against a gory rendition of dead ANZAC soldiers under a ragged and broken flag. The words are equally jarring:

Hey! You diggers!
He came, he saw, he conquered!
Thinking you “diggers” will never come back
alive, tha BLACKS and tha YANKS are
raping your wives, your daughters, your
sweethearts—they’re helpless without your
protection. Your future happiness is at stake!
One less Aussie simply means one more Yank
“safely” in the home. Surely you’ll not give up
your lives to make this possible.

It is an unsubtle appeal to the fears and prejudices of soldiers far from home.

The second flyer is in an entirely different style, with bright colors and a sequential layout.

The first panel reads, “We were the happiest of couples,” and shows a well-dressed man and woman arm-in-arm and smiling at each other. The background is a bright, sunny yellow. The second panel reads, “Until our tearful parting, Oh! how she wept!” It shows what is apparently meant to be the same couple, but the man is now wearing an Army uniform. The woman is crying and they are tenderly embracing. Her fur stole, which she had been wearing in the first pane, is hanging on the man’s arm, and the background is a somber bluish green, with the edge of a curtain indicating that they are now indoors. The third and final panel reads, “But, no sooner had I left, my wife was told that I’d never come back.” The woman, whose bust size seems to have increased exponentially, is now dressed in a tight tank top and short, shiny skirt. She is smiling lasciviously as a man, obviously a different man than in the first two panels, sets her onto a very soft-looking bed. A death’s head in an Army helmet and the suggestion of a uniform watches grimly from the head of the bed. The implication is, of course, that as soon as she thought her man was not returning, she went right out and found herself someone new. This time there is no hint in the picture (or none that I can recognize) that the other man is an American. But the fear of cuckoldry remains.

The third flyer, headlined “Australia Screams,” sneaks in some titillation for its recipients. It is also my personal favorite (but not for that reason).

On the left, somewhat to the background, an Australian soldier stands, bandaged and with bent bayonet, on a blood-soaked New Guinea. The words above him read:

The Aussie: “What was that scream. Something up?”

He is looking toward Australia, whereon an American soldier has planted the Stars and Stripes and is holding a woman in his arms. The woman, quite unlike the women in the first two flyers, is trying to fight him off, and is (perhaps as a result of the struggle?) in a state of dishabille. Her skirt is draped down, exposing her undergarment, and her blouse is unbuttoned, exposing her... lack of an undergarment. One of her hands is pushing against her captor’s smirking face, and the other one is drawn back in a fist. The words above read:

The Yank: “Sh..sh.. Quiet, girlie. Calm yourself He’ll be on the next casualty list. No worry”

The finial from the American flag’s pole is sharper than the bayonet’s blade and pointed directly at the Australian soldier’s heart.

The fourth flyer again visits the idea of Americans as the assailants of Australia, but this time without the violation of women. Instead, it is more of a deathly violation of Australia itself.

“The Spectre Commands,” proclaims the title in red letters reminiscent of those used in the titles of eerie horror movies. The titular Spectre appears as a waxy greenish-faced President Roosevelt in the robes of the Grim Reaper. The text reads:

   Roosevelt
Thou shalt go, Americans,
and eat the Australians
out of their homes
if necessary......
   The Americans
will fight to the last
Australian.

This Grim Reaper/Roosevelt towers over a gruesome Australian soldier, blue with death, eyes unclosed and bulging. He has been stabbed in the abdomen by the staff of an American flag, and his blood has poured out profusely, dripping off the edges of the continent of Australia. His hand lifelessly dangles into the ocean, the butt of his rifle floating up enough to show that he still holds it, useless as it now is. In my opinion, this image is the most disturbing of all the flyers. The earlier ones, despite the racist and/or misogynistic overtones, at least provided some cheesecake or romance for the men to enjoy. But this one is downright repulsive, though oddly compelling.

Not all of the flyers attacked the relationship between the Australians and the Americans. Some worked instead on the frustration of soldiers with their current situation.

This one represents New Guinea as an “Island of Deceit.” It is a bit harder for me to describe, as so many uniforms are depicted, and I am not sure if I accurately recognize them all. But perhaps specificity is not vital in this case. The three cartoonish, frightened figures in the middle are certainly representative of the soldiers intended to receive this propaganda, shown to be surrounded by large, imposing enemies. The enemies are wearing Japanese uniforms and carrying what appear to be Samurai swords. There is no escape for the Allied soldiers, as their retreat is cut off in front and back by the giant Japanese soldiers, and to the sides by the ends of the minuscule island. The text reads:

They were a “pushover”--were they?
Supplies were coming--did they?
Enforcement were on the way--are they?
NOW, where are you?
You stand between horrible DEATH--
and--reasonable surrender!

Obviously, the only option for the unfortunate tiny soldiers in the picture is to surrender to the giant enemies. Or die.

The final flyer, although still grim in intention, is much lighter in tone. It is entitled “Jilted, Re-Jilted.” I presume the first jilting must have been by his sweetheart for some interloping American, since I cannot identify any double jilting within the strip. The re-jilting seems to have been by the Army, which marooned him on a miniature island in the Pacific.

The first panel is labeled “Elation,” where the soldier dances in delight at the sight of an American ship on the horizon, which could be his salvation. This is quickly followed by “Deflation” in panel two. The soldier reels in shock as the ship is hit by either a bomb or a torpedo and sinks. But hope has returned in panel three with “Anticipation.” The soldier shades his eyes to make out the identity of the four ships now on the horizon. Panel four is titled “Perdition.” The soldier flings back his entire body in dismay, losing his rifle in the process, as he sees that the four ships bear Japanese flags. Finally, he reaches “Exasperation” in panel five, as three Japanese cannons aim at him. In his exasperation, he raises his fists Popeye-fashion at some distant power, disregarding the cannons at his back. “That blankety-blank President and his two-cent Promises---” he rages.

These six examples of Japanese propaganda aimed at Allied soldiers during WWII provide a vivid glimpse of what sorts of concerns soldiers stationed in the South Pacific might have suffered, and how their enemies tried to exploit them. The brilliant artwork and occasionally awkward language was engaging enough for some soldier to save, and to catch the eye of Uncle Lowell. I would be curious to learn what item he had collected in Europe to trade for these gems.

Sources:

State Library of Victoria / Ergo, Ergo (http://ergo.slv.vic.gov.au : accessed 15 Jun 2018), “Americans in Australia.”

Australian Government Department of Veterans' Affairs, Anzac Portal (https://anzacportal.dva.gov.au : accessed 15 Jun 2018), Australia and the Second World War: “Yanks down under - ‘Over-sexed, over-paid and over here.’”

Military Monday: WWI Veteran Ormond Brosius

 

By US government related, H.R. Hopps 1917 http://www.dhm.de/lemo/objekte/pict/pl003967/index.html [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Halfway through the year, it finally dawns on me that this year is the one hundredth anniversary of the end of World War I. And so, rather belatedly, but fortunately not too late, I have decided to do a series of short posts on members of my family who served in that war. Some posts will be much shorter than others due to lack of information, but I feel I ought to share what I can.

This week I thought I would start with my great-uncle Ormond Brosius, because he seems the least distant from me, being the only WWI veteran in my family who I actually met. Granted, I don’t recall the meetings, having been a newborn at the time, and then again when I was about a year old, but I do recall his cabin up in the Grand Tetons. We visited there when I was seven or eight years old, years after his death. And my whole life my dad has delighted in sharing the wild second- and third-hand stories he remembered about his uncle. But today the focus is on his service in WWI.

In April of 1917, just a couple weeks after the United States declared war on Germany, Ormond enlisted in the U.S. Army. In 1979, he recounted the experience in a conversation with his brother Lowell. Oh, and I better warn you that there is some profanity in this transcription.
 

Ormond: Yes. I had to lie.

Lowell: Stay young, that’s the way.

Ormond: There was three of us. When war was declared there was three of us.

Lowell: Yeah, I know. Ma told me.

Ormond: Frank Geller and myself and Burt Sheridan. We got on the Missouri-Pacific and went up to Wichita to enlist. Well, they told their right age. I was 16, see, and they was 18. So we got in this line. They didn’t ask…

Lowell: That’s where the old bullshit started flying, huh?

Ormond: These boys was in the league of the [infantry?]. Ol’ Burt says, “I’m 18.” This old boy wrote it down. “Go on.” And Frank Geller was a-next. And they told him—

Lowell: Was this Mrs. Geller’s—

Ormond: Yes, Mrs. Geller that you was reading about. She just lived across the street. When they come to me, I told the truth. I said, “16.” And he said, “Young man, you come back in a couple of years.” So, the next morning I got right in this line, and when I got there I told them, “18.” “Go right ahead.” See? That’s how that happened. See. Boy, it pays to be a liar sometimes.

Lowell: Yeah, sometimes it does.

Ormond, in his mother's handwriting, "the day he inlisted."

His enlistment date was 24 Apr 1917. Presumably, the most part of the following year was spent in training. He was initially assigned to the 18th Field Artillery, and was already a sergeant by the time he sailed aboard the Aeolus from the port of Hoboken, New Jersey on 23 Apr 1918. He is said to have served in five major campaigns. Based on the units in which he is known to have served, these campaigns seem to have been the Second Battle of the Marne (15 July-6 Aug 1918), for which the 18th Field Artillery received the Croix de Guerre. This battle seems to have been broken up into three separate campaigns in which Ormond might have been engaged: the Champagne-Marne Offensive (15-18 July 1918), the Battle of Champagne (15 July 1918), and the Aisne-Marne Offensive (18 July-6 Aug 1918). He was also likely at the Battle of St. Mihiel (12-15 Sept 1918) and the Meuse-Argonne Offensive (26 Sept-11 Nov 1918).

The war ended on 11 Nov 1918. Ormond recalled his experiences following the armistice in his continuing 1979 conversation with his brother Lowell. My mom, Sugar, also got in on this part of the conversation a little.

Ormond: They put us, you know, we was regular army. And after November the eleventh, they quit fighting, you know. And they took us, we went in there, and all them little towns, Bulge, Kottenheim, [Main?] and all of them. They were only about three or four kilometers from one town to the other, see. And I was a sergeant. And I had twenty-six men. And they told me to put one man in a village, you know, a house, and I stayed in a house. And if I told you how many children or kids that old lady had, you wouldn’t believe me, so I won’t tell you. But I lived with them. And I didn’t know no more German than that horse that’s over there.

Sugar: Ha ha! What horse?

Ormond: So when I sit down to the table, all them kids. Now, she had [zweif swanson?]. Can you tell me what that was?

Lowell: I’ll tell you something, you know something. I can understand German now, and I can talk. I can eins, zwei, drei, vier, fünf, sechs, sieben. But to talk it anymore, I can’t… ’Cause I used to have to, you know, when I was young. Oh yeah, that’s Swiss, it’s the same thing. There’s high and low German.

Ormond: Well, that’s the way… And we’d sit down at this table, you know, with all these kids around. This is a big old lady. They didn’t have nothing to eat over there but kartoffeln, or potatoes, see.

Lowell: Rutabagas is another one that they...

Ormond: Yeah, and carrots, and stuff like that. And I’d point at something. We had a schoolteacher there, that stayed with them, old lady and them kids. And I’d point at something, and the kids would all tell me, you know. It didn’t take me long and I was talking—

Lowell: You can pick that up. It’s not that hard.

Sugar: If you wanted your food, you said it.

Ormond: Yeah. So one day they sent an orderly down from headquarters after me, for me to come to headquarters and I didn’t know that there was anybody there that understood English. And it made me mad, and I got to cussing and this schoolteacher, she was a German woman, but she’d been in Chicago one year teaching school. And she was there on a vacation. And they kept her, see. And she could talk English as good as I could. But I didn’t know it. And she could tell what I was saying. And she told me I ought to be ashamed of myself.

Eventually Ormond was sent back to the U.S. He traveled from Brest, France aboard the U.S.S. Madawaska to Brooklyn, New York, on 12 Aug 1919, arriving on 23 Aug 1919. His recorded release from service date is 22 Aug 1919, which seems curious given his date of arrival. I am not yet proficient enough in WWI research to know whether that is a regular procedure or a likely error.

Ormond, age 18, in Army uniform

Sources:

Find A Grave, “Find A Grave,” database and images, Find A Grave (www.findagrave.com : accessed 9 Nov 2009); Ormond John Brosius (Memorial #39305605); record added 10 July 2009 by Lovell Cemetery.

Ormond Brosius (Portland, Oregon), recording of conversation with family and friends by Sugar Brosius, Aug 1979; audio cassette, digitized to mp3 format privately held by Amber Brosius.

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, “U.S., Department of Veterans Affairs BIRLS [Beneficiary Identification Records Locator Subsystem] Death File, 1850-2010,” database, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 13 Apr 2015), entry for Ormond Brosius; citing Beneficiary Identification Records Locator Subsystem (BIRLS) Death File. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

“U.S., Army Transport Service, Passenger Lists, 1910-1939,” online images, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 9 Jun 2018), manifest, Aeolus, 23 Apr 1918, entry no. 40, for Ormond J. Brosius, service no. 1,042,684.

“U.S., Army Transport Service, Passenger Lists, 1910-1939,” online images, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 9 Jun 2018), manifest, U.S.S. Madawaska, 12 Aug 1919, entry no. 1, for Ormond J. Brosius, service no. 1042684.

Isabella Cock’s parents

Now that I have explained my reasons for believing the parents of George Amos to be Abraham Amos and Isabella Cock, and have explored the paternal side, it is time to look to the maternal side. Against all odds, the maternal side has proved the easier to research in many respects.

Isabella Cock’s parents were Simon Cock and Mary Gurney. Their marriage was a bit tricky to prove without access to original records, but I am pretty satisfied with the conclusion. They were married on 24 Dec 1812 in Sturry, Kent, England. Mary’s birth location in later census records is given as Sturry, so the location, being the bride’s parish makes sense. The Tyler Index to Parish Records, one of my sources for the marriage, records that Simon is “of Tilmanstone.” Since Tilmanstone was where their family was raised, the groom also makes sense. 

Church of St. Nicholas, the parish church of Sturry, where Simon Cock and Mary Gurney were married.
pam fray [CC BY-SA 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Their first child, a son, William, was baptized on 13 Feb 1814 in Tilmanstone, Kent. My 3great-grandmother Isabella herself was next, baptized on 24 Apr 1815. Then came John on 17 June 1816, who must have died quite young, as another John was baptized the following year on 20 June 1817. (I have not, however, located a death or burial record for the first John.) Next came Simon on 27 Jan 1819, but he also passed away very young, and was buried on 3 June 1819.

There is a strange duplication of records for a baptism which took place on 26 Jan 1820; FamilySearch has records for both a Simon Edward and an Edward Simon on that date. It is possible that two sons were born twins and given identical names in reverse order, but I think it far more likely that it is an error introduced during transcription. Since I have not yet been able to examine the original records, I can state nothing with certainty. However, I am proceeding on the assumption that it is one child. 

The interior of St. Andrew’s, the parish church of Tilmanstone, where the children of Simon Cock and Mary Gurney were baptized.
John Salmon [CC BY-SA 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

The next baptism for a child of Simon and Mary Cock appearing in the Tilmanstone records is for Frederic, on 26 Oct 1827. Last is Elizabeth Dorothy on 30 June 1829. There is, of course, a gap of nearly eight years between Simon Edward and Frederic. That is enough time for a few more children to have been born, but no records have been found. Perhaps there were miscarriages; Mary was by this time nearing the age of forty, and perhaps childbearing was becoming increasingly difficult for her. Perhaps Simon and Mary were separated from one another for some reason—Simon traveling elsewhere for work, maybe—and they quite simply had no opportunity to conceive any children during this time. Perhaps they moved to another parish during that period and I simply haven’t discovered the records.

In 1841, census records begin. The family is still living in Tilmanstone, and the census finds Simon and Mary with their children Edward (Edward Simon or Simon Edward of 1820), Frederick, Eliza (Elizabeth Dorothy). Also in the household are two younger children: Mary, age 6, and William, age 1. William is the illegitimate son of Isabella, and thus Simon and Mary’s grandson. Mary is likely also a grandchild, but her exact relationship has yet to be determined.

They are still residing in Tilmanstone at the time of the 1851 census. This is one of the censuses which helped in deciding that the marriage record in Sturry was the correct one, as Mary’s birthplace is recorded as Sturry. Simon’s is Ringwould, Kent. This census also brings the somewhat startling news that Simon is a pauper. That is, he is probably receiving “outdoor relief,” or money, from the local poor law union. He is in his late 60s at this point, so quite possibly he was unable to work. Simon and Mary’s children Edward and Elizabeth are still living with them, as is a granddaughter named Mary Ann (who is ineligible to be the mystery Mary of the 1841 census, as she is only four months old). Edward is working as an agricultural laborer, so perhaps he helped supplement the family’s small income. 

The former Eastry Union Workhouse and its attendant chapel.
Nick Smith [CC BY-SA 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

By 1861, times seem to have gotten even harder. Simon and Mary have relocated to the Eastry Union Workhouse. Their birth places are again recorded, and Simon’s occupation is listed as an agricultural laborer. Only two months after the census enumeration, on 15 June 1861, Simon passed away in the workhouse. His death certificate pdf arrived just yesterday. His cause of death was old age and bronchitis. Mary seems to have lived a while longer.

Death certificate of Simon Cock, who died in 1861.

Sources:

“England Marriages, 1538–1973,” database, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org : accessed 3 Dec 2017), entry for Simon Cook and Mary Gurney’s 1812 marriage; citing Sturry, Kent, England, reference item 4 p 180, index based upon data collected by the Genealogical Society of Utah, Salt Lake City; FHL microfilm 1,737,093.

St. Nicholas’ church (Sturry, Kent, England), Kent, England, Tyler Index to Parish Registers, 1538-1874, entry for Simon Cook and Mary Gurney’s 1812 marriage; digital images, Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 3 Dec 2017).

“England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org : accessed 8 Oct 2017), entries for William Cock’s 1814 baptism, Isabella Cock’s 1815 baptism, John Cock’s 1816 baptism, John Cock’s 1817 baptism, Simon Cock’s 1819 baptism, Edward Simon Cock’s 1820 baptism, Simon Edward Cock’s 1820 baptism, Frederic Cock’s 1827 baptism, and Elizabeth Dorothy Cock’s 1829 baptism; citing Tilmanstone, Kent, England, index based upon data collected by the Genealogical Society of Utah, Salt Lake City; FHL microfilm 1,835,794.

“England Deaths and Burials, 1538-1991,” database, FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org : accessed 9 Oct 2017), entry for Simon Cock’s 1819 burial; citing Tilmanstone, Kent, England, index based upon data collected by the Genealogical Society of Utah, Salt Lake City; FHL microfilm 1,835,794.

1841 census of England, Kent, Tilmanstone parish, District 5, Eythorn, Thanington civil parish, folio 10, page 16-17, household of Simon Cock; digital images, Ancestry.com Operations, Inc, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 9 Oct 2017); citing PRO HO 107/470/14.

1851 census of England, Kent, village and parish of Tilmanstone, folio 474, page 16, household of Simon Cock (No. 60 of householder's schedule); digital images, Ancestry.com Operations Inc, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 11 Oct 2017); citing PRO HO 107/1631.

1861 census of England, Kent, Eastry Union Workhouse, Eastry civil parish, folio 113, page 8, Simon Cock; digital images, Ancestry.com Operations Inc, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 11 Oct 2017); citing PRO RG 9/539.

England and Wales, death certificate for Simon Cock, died 15 June 1861; citing 2a/416/451, Apr/May/Jun quarter 1861, Eastry registration district, Sandwich sub-district; General Register Office, Southport.

Abraham Amos’ death certificate

Not long ago, I was listening to one of the many genealogy podcasts to which I subscribe (so many that I don’t recall which one brought me this welcome news!) when I learned that the General Register Office of the U.K. was running a pilot where one could order certificates to be delivered digitally in pdf form at a reduced price. That is, instead of the regular price of £9.25, a pdf costs only £6. Taking into account exchange rates, that is a difference of more than $4. So naturally I rushed to take advantage of this potentially limited time offer.

Having once before ordered a certificate through the GRO, which came through the mail, the time in which this pdf arrived seemed exceedingly short. I had ordered the death certificate of my 3great-grandfather Abraham Amos.



I must admit that at first glance I was a bit disappointed at the appearance of the certificate, which was missing the attractive pastel background and official seals of the paper certificate I had received in the past. But soon I remembered that I had ordered the certificate for information, not aesthetics. And information it did provide.

I learned that Abraham Amos had died on 2 April 1881 in Martin, East Langdon, Dover, Kent, of hemiplegia (from which he had suffered 14 years) and exhaustion. Not being much of a medical aficionado, I had to look up the word hemiplegia, which it turns out means paralysis of one side of the body, often as a result of a stroke. The certificate also records that he was a farm labourer, which must have been rather difficult without the use of one side of his body. No wonder he died of exhaustion!

His son Thomas was the informant.

Source:

England and Wales, death certificate for Abraham Amos, died 2 Apr 1881; citing 2a/515/434, Apr/May/Jun quarter 1881, Dover registration district, St. James sub-district; General Register Office, Southport.

Abraham Amos’ parents

All that I wrote in the previous post about George Amos’ parents and siblings had actually been researched some time ago, definitely before this summer, and quite probably even earlier than that. However, since there is some confusion online about his parents, it seemed a necessary prelude to the presentation of my new research. That is, having already determined the parents of George Amos, it was time to determine his grandparents. Fortunately, his parents’ marriage record provided a good starting place.

George Amos’ parents, Abraham Amos and Isabella Cock, were married 25 May 1847 in Eythorne, Kent. The marriage record revealed that the groom’s father was Thomas Amos and the bride’s father was Simon Cock. I first turned to the paternal side, to find the childhood family of Abraham Amos. Census records indicated that Abraham had been born about 1820 or 1821 in East Langdon, Kent. So the first step was easy: search East Langdon christening records for an Abraham Amos whose father was Thomas, and who was baptized around 1821. The results of this search left little question that I had located the correct individual; an Abraham Amos was baptized on 7 Apr 1821 in East Langdon. His parents were Thomas and Amy Amos.

Finding his siblings—for during this time frame I felt reasonably certain he would have some—proved more difficult. A search for other children of Thomas and Amy Amos in the East Langdon parish records yielded nothing, nor could I find there a marriage record for the couple. Widening the search to the entire county of Kent produced one possible sister of Abraham: Sarah Amos, baptized 1 May 1808 in Eythorne, but the relationship was by no means certain.

Since I didn’t seem to be getting very far at either FamilySearch or Ancestry, I decided to try my luck at Find My Past. They have many British parish records in their collection, and although I don’t have a subscription to their site, and therefore would be unable to view the transcriptions or original records, hoped the search results could lead me in the right direction. So I went to their “Kent, Canterbury Archdeaconry Baptisms 1538-1912” database and entered the search terms to find a child of Thomas and Amy Amos. Suffice it to say, using Find My Past in conjunction with FamilySearch (Ancestry was no help in this case), I believe I have identified a large part, if not all, of Thomas and Amy’s family. 

The Church of St Mary and St Ethelburga in Lyminge, Kent
Photographs by Gnangarra...commons.wikimedia.org [CC BY 2.5 au (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/au/deed.en)], via Wikimedia Commons

Their eldest child seems to have been a daughter, christened Mary Amis on 11 Nov 1798 in the parish of Lyminge. This parish, dedicated to Saints Mary and Ethelburga, also houses a marriage record for Thomas Amos and Amy Dunn on 17 June 1797. In just the year before the birth of their first daughter, and in the same parish, it is quite likely the right couple. The record notes (or at least one of the transcriptions of the record does; I have not yet had the opportunity to view the original document) that the bride is “of this parish” and the groom “of Hastingleigh.” Given this valuable information, it ought to be relatively simple to trace the next generation back; however, thus far I have been unable to find a baptismal record for either party.

It seems that by 1805 the small family has relocated to the parish of St. Mary the Virgin in Dover, about fourteen miles to the east. A son, Thomas Ames, was baptized there on 24 May of that year. By 1 May 1808, they were about seven or eight miles from there, in the village of Eythorne. This was, indeed, the possible child I had wondered about before. Sarah Amos, it turns out, does fit into this family.

Once the family made it to Northbourne, another six miles, they seem to have stayed put for a while. A son, John Amis, was baptized there in 1810, and then a daughter, Susanna Amis, on 20 Feb 1814.

Google Map of the approximate route of the Amos family, from about 1797 to 1821.

Lastly, after a gap of seven years, came my great-great-great-grandfather Abraham Amos. He was baptized in East Langdon, about five miles from Northbourne. The entire route, from Lyminge to East Langdon, along modern roads, is a distance of about 33 miles. It appears an entirely reasonable route for a family during a period of a couple decades. Especially if the father was an agricultural labourer as his son Abraham later became.

I suspect that a child or two... or three... is missing somewhere in that seven-year gap between Susanna and Abraham. But for a basic investigation, nowhere near being a reasonably exhaustive search, it’s a pretty fair reconstruction of a family.

Sources:

Ancestry, “England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 24 Mar 2016), entry for Abraham Amos’ 1821 baptism; citing England, Births and Christenings, 1538-1975. Salt Lake City, Utah: FamilySearch, 2013.

“England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org : accessed 7 Oct 2017), entry for Mary Amis’ 1798 christening; citing Lyminge, Kent, England, index based upon data collected by the Genealogical Society of Utah, Salt Lake City; FHL microfilm 1,736,875.

“England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org : accessed 7 Oct 2017), entry for Thomas Ames’ 1805 christening; citing SAINT MARY THE VIRGIN,DOVER,KENT,ENGLAND, index based upon data collected by the Genealogical Society of Utah, Salt Lake City; FHL microfilm 355,633.

“England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org : accessed 7 Oct 2017), entry for Sarah Amos’ 1808 christening; citing Eythorn, Kent, England, index based upon data collected by the Genealogical Society of Utah, Salt Lake City; FHL microfilm 1,736,696.

“England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org : accessed 7 Oct 2017), entry for Susanna Amis’ 1814 christening; citing Northbourne, Kent, England, index based upon data collected by the Genealogical Society of Utah, Salt Lake City; FHL microfilm 1,835,535.

“England Marriages, 1538–1973,” database, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org : accessed 24 Sep 2017), entry for Thomas Amis and Amy Dunn’s 1797 marriage; citing Lyminge, Kent, England, reference Item 2, index based upon data collected by the Genealogical Society of Utah, Salt Lake City; FHL microfilm 1,736,875.

Ronnie Cobb, “Marriages 1665 to 1841, Lyminge,” database, Kent Online Parish Clerks, Kent Online Parish Clerks (http://www.kent-opc.org/index.html : accessed 7 Oct 2017), entry for Thomas Amis’ and Amy Dunn’s 1797 marriage; citing Lyminge parish register, entry no. 379.

George Amos’ parents

Ordinarily I wouldn’t describe myself as someone who has trouble focusing, but lately—since the end of summer, in fact—I have felt like I have genealogical attention deficit disorder (ADD). My approach has been remarkably scattered. I might spend a few hours on the Howard branch, and then hop over to the Robinaults. After a few hours with them, I might return to the Howards, but get distracted by the allied Filby family. Then, for no apparent reason, I might turn to the Brosius and Wade lines, followed by a leap to the Stroesser family.

At length, the second annual WikiTree Source-a-Thon arrived, and I volunteered. For those of you who don’t know, the Source-a-Thon was a weekend-long event in which volunteers sought sources for unsourced profiles on the WikiTree site. This was tailor-made for my temporary genealogical ADD, as I researched unrelated individuals from many and varied locales. After three days of arbitrary source-finding, I was finally ready to settle down.

George Amos

The branch of my family which finally engaged me, for whatever reason, was that of George Amos. Yes, George Amos of the Creeksea Ferry, the subject of my very first blog post. There has been some question about his parentage for a while: namely, whether his parents are Edward Amos and Sarah Constable or Abraham Amos and Isabella Cock. Both couples have a son named George Amos born in Kent during the correct time frame, but after some deliberation I have fallen firmly in the Abraham and Isabella camp.

(Unfortunately, I have some fears that I may have inadvertently begun the Edward and Sarah fallacy by tentatively placing them on my Ancestry tree without publicly stating that the placement was only tentative.)

The argument for Edward Amos and Sarah Constable is based entirely on census records, for which Abraham Amos and Isabella Cock have an equal claim. But the marriage record of George Amos and Elizabeth Filby bears some pretty strong evidence, in that it specifically states that Abraham Amos is the groom’s father. If that is not enough, the 1911 census records our George Amos’ birthplace as “Martin, Kent.” The son of Edward Amos and Sarah Constable was baptized in Buckland, Kent, but the son of Abraham Amos and Isabella Cock was baptized at St. Martin, Guston, Kent.

St. Martin of Tours church, Guston, Kent
By John Vigar (http://www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Guston) [CC BY-SA 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

(Incidentally, you will sometimes see our George Amos recorded on online trees as George Hammond Amos. That was the baptismal name of the son of Edward Amos and Sarah Constable. There is no evidence to support a middle name of Hammond for this George Amos.)

Accepting that Abraham Amos and Isabella Cock are George Amos’ parents, George had at least three siblings. The eldest, likely a half-sibling, was born illegitimately to Isabella Cock in about 1840. He was baptized William Cock on 15 March 1840 at Tilmanstone, Kent, his mother’s home parish.

Abraham and Isabella married seven years later, on 25 May 1847 at Eythorne, Kent. Their first child as a married couple (and quite possibly as a couple at all, depending on the paternity of William) was Thomas, who was born on 31 October 1947. Note that he was born only five months after his parents’ marriage. He was baptized a few months later, on 23 January 1848, at Eythorne. Next came John Abraham, baptized 14 September 1851 at St. Martin, Guston, Kent; and last of their known children was George himself, baptized 22 May 1853, also at St. Martin, Guston, Kent.

Sources:

1911 census of England, Essex, 27 St. Thomas Road, South Fambridge, Essex, household of George Amos; digital images, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 16 Sep 2012); citing RG 78, RG 14 PN 10108, enumeration district (ED) 14, schedule number (SN) 91.

Christ Church (Southwark, Surrey, England), London, England, Marriages and Banns, 1754-1921, “1875 (Register of marriages, P92/CTC, Item 037),” George Amos and Elizabeth Filby marriage record, p. 106; digital images, Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 1 Feb 2016).

“England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org : accessed 24 Sep 2012), entry for George Amos' 1853 christening; citing Guston, Kent, England, reference p35 rn279; FHL microfilm 1,886,151.

“England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org : accessed 30 Dec 2014, George Hammond Amos, ), entry for George Hammond Amos’ 1852 christening; citing Buckland (near Dover), Kent, England, index based upon data collected by the Genealogical Society of Utah, Salt Lake City; FHL microfilm 1,886,085.

“England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org : accessed 23 Sep 2017), entry for John Abraham Amos' 1851 christening; citing St. Martin, Guston, Kent, England, index based upon data collected by the Genealogical Society of Utah, Salt Lake City; FHL microfilm 1,886,151.

“England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org : accessed 24 Sep 2012), entry for Thomas Amos' 1847 birth; citing reference item 9-12, FHL microfilm 1866545.

“England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org : accessed 22 Sep 2017), entry for William Cock's 1840 baptism; citing Tilmanstone, Kent, England, index based upon data collected by the Genealogical Society of Utah, Salt Lake City; FHL microfilm 1,835,794.

“England Marriages, 1538–1973,” database, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org : accessed 22 Sep 2017), entry for Abraham Amos and Isabella Cook's 25 May 1847 marriage; citing Eythorn, Kent, England, reference p22, index based upon data collected by the Genealogical Society of Utah, Salt Lake City; FHL microfilm 1,866,546.

Wordless Wednesday: The Boulevard Room

Okay, I know, I know. This is supposed to be Wordless Wednesday, but I really can’t do a post without words. One of the goals of this blog is to make things searchable online, and words are a necessary ingredient toward meeting that goal. Still, the main focus of this post is on a picture, so it’s about as wordless as I’m going to get!

This is another item from my small collection of antique post cards. It depicts a night club scene, the most obvious element of which is a figure skater in a red dress executing a leap. In the foreground are numerous tables with people sitting at them, and to the left one couple is evidently being shown to a table by a waiter. Behind the figure skater, a moderately-sized band performs on an elevated part of the stage. (The remainder of the stage is ice.) The décor and architecture of the room complete the picture with some white, apparently marble, busts; an elegantly designed drop feature in the ceiling; and some rather grandiose doors adorned by blue curtains. At the bottom, typed words identify the location as “Boulevard Room” at “The Stevens * Chicago,” “A Hilton Hotel.”

The reverse side of the post card identifies the front:

ICE SHOWS at The BOULEVARD ROOM!

The outstanding night spot in Chicago...fea-
turing lavish Ice Shows on the largest hotel ice
rink in the country...big cast of skating stars.
Finest cuisine and famous orchestras for dancing. 
THE STEVENS * Chicago * A Hilton Hotel

There is no traditional stick-on postage stamp, but rather a rubber stamp bearing the words “U.S. Postage Paid” and a date in February of 1949. The card is addressed to T.S. Duthie, 460 Pittock Blk, Portland 5, Oregon, and the only message is, “Hello Tom.”

A Google search quickly revealed an article from 1968, on the event of the closing of the Boulevard Room. With palpable bitterness toward “the men in the home office” who “couldn’t care less about the prestige of an institution like the Boulevard room, or what it means to Chicago,” the columnist briefly relates that the room had once hosted regular floor shows, until the ice rink opened in March of 1948. Therefore, the ice performances had been underway for less than a year when this post card was sent.

Citation:

Will Leonard, “On the Town: After 20 Years, Boulevard Room Ice Revues End,” Chicago Tribune, 1 Dec 1968, p. 18 (section 5), col. 1; digital images, Chicago Tribune Archives (http://archives.chicagotribune.com/ : accessed 30 Aug 2017).