A massive thanks to Cipher Mysteries reader Cheryl Bearden for passing along to me some breaking news on the Somerton Man case: a story by Emily Watkins in Adelaide’s Sunday Mail dated 20th November 2011, already inserted in the Taman Shud Wikipedia page by retired Southern Australian WLRoss.

So, what’s the big news, Nick? Well, an unnamed Adelaide woman found a US identification card in her (late?) father’s collection of documents & photos, showing a fresh-faced 18-year British seaman called “H. C. Reynolds”.

The general resemblance between this person and the Unknown Man is extremely strong, but specific similarities between their ears (again) and a mole on their faces was enough to convince Adelaide University’s “internationally renowned anatomist and biological anthropologist Professor Maciej Henneberg” that the two were a perfect match. Personally, I’m not 100% convinced yet, but the parallels between this and what I concluded here a few days ago are pretty impressive.

The only downside is that searches carried out for the Adelaide Sunday Mail for H. C. Reynolds at the “US National Archives, UK National Archives and Australian War Memorial Research Centre” all drew a blank. So… what was the secret history of H. C. Reynolds?

Firstly, the date stamped on his id card is intriguing: 28th February 1918 was towards the end of the First World War, not too long after the US had joined in. A US draft of 21 year olds was already running, and would be extended later in 1918 to a draft of 18 year olds. Conscription in the UK had already been put in place in 1916 for single men aged 18 to 41, so if Reynolds (apparently aged 18) had just come from the UK, then he was apparently dodging the UK draft. Hence, I have to caution that this might possibly be a false name… just so you know!

It also struck me that Reynolds might possibly have been a British merchant seaman somehow shipwrecked or otherwise forcibly landed in a US port. One of the most notable WWI sea incidents connected to the US was the sinking just off Nantucket of three or four British merchant ships (and some Dutch ships) by the German submarine SM U-53 on 8th October 1916. This caused widespread consternation, and may well have been a prime thing that helped persuade the American people that the US should enter the war.

It’s a fascinating story, and I eventually tracked down the list of survivors and passengers of the Strathdene, the Stephano, and the West Point (it’s in the New York Times archive for 10th October 1916, if you’re interested). However, there was apparently no “Reynolds” on board any of them. I also managed to find the passenger & crew list for the Florizel which sank on February 24th 1918 (though from hitting a reef, not from another U-Boat action) off Newfoundland, but there was no Reynolds there either. (Just so you know, it was named after Prince Florizel in Shakespeare’s The Winter’s Tale).

Having said that, I wasn’t able to fully determine whether or not U-53 sank the British freighter “Kingston” / “Kingstonian” (the newspapers of the day ran numerous conflicting reports on this, probably the most reliable source would be Hans Rose’s reports), so it is just about possible Reynolds could have been on one of the Kingston’s lifeboats allegedly seen “30 miles SE of Nantucket”. Alternatively, if you happen to know of other British ships that sank just off the US coast between 1916 and 28th February 1918, please let me know!

To be honest, though, I find the date of the sinking of the Florizel (a mere four days before the id card was issued) more than just a touch coincidental: I do wonder whether (for example) the Florizel’s waiter “Henry Snow” (whose age we don’t know) might possibly have changed his name to “H C Reynolds” in order to somehow stay on the USA.

Right now, Reynolds’ id card would seem to have triggered far more questions than answers: but that is, at least, a better place to be in than having no questions at all, right?

58 thoughts on “Amazing news on The Unknown Man…

  1. Interesting developments … a quick google search turned up this forum in NZ where a family are looking for details on Horace Charles Reynolds, no doubt spurred on by the ID card find

  2. The unknown man was fifty years of age?!

  3. Diane: yup, pretty much. Of course, his being dead didn’t help his photogenicity, and the extra few days’ delay probably didn’t make him look any younger. 🙁

  4. Nev: now that is what I call a proper length thread. 🙂 What’s most interesting is the observation that the card itself might be a fake – fake US overseas seamen’s identification cards were apparently so rife in 1918 that additional legislation was brought in to try to respond. I’ll have another think about this, and post some more Unknown Man thoughts in a few days’ time… Thanks!

  5. Well, there goes my theory. It really only suited a person twenty-thirty years younger.

  6. Diane: but not everybody in the US Navy was n-n-n-n-nineteen?

  7. Nick: I think the immigration card may be misleading. These were also given to foreign seamen while they were in port, even if they had no intention to stay. See US immigration laws (1917) p49 rule 10 where it says:

    No seaman shall be allowed by an immigrant inspector to land
    from a vessel, either temporarily or permanently, without being
    registered in the foregoing manner and furnished with an identifica-
    tion card [form 685], unless he presents such a card showing that he already has
    been registered.

    So he could simply have been working on any naval or civil ship visiting the USA. Of course, this doesn’t rule out your theory…

    It would be good to find the corresponding official record (if it wasn’t a forged card) as this should give the port, vessel, etc.

  8. cjbearden on December 11, 2011 at 3:36 am said:

    Did a bit more digging on Ancestry.com for H.C. Reynolds, born 28 Feb 1900. Though not conclusive, here’s what I found:
    New South Wales, Australia, Unassisted Immigrant Passenger List for the ship “Manuka”, departed Wellington, South Australia, Australia, arrived Sydney, NSW, Australia, 19 Nov 1917, and listed among the crew is an H. Reynolds, asst. Purser, age 17 years, nationality, British, place of birth, Tasmania.
    Ditto for this manifest except: departed Hobart, Tasmania, Australia, arrived Sydney, NSW, Australia, 19 Dec 1917. Next, Manuka departed Hobart, arrived Sydney, 6 Jan 1918, but on this manifest our 17 year old Tasman asst. Purser is listed as H. C. Reynolds…exciting, but still inconclusive. The next manifest for the Manuka, dated 12 Feb 1918, did not list Reynolds, however the ship had a new Master/Captain and a (mostly) new crew.

    I found another manifest from a Pan-Am flight, dated 1948, flying New York City, New York, USA to Sydney, NSW, AUS, however I cannot put my hands on it right this moment and do not want to misquote. I will post this info ASAP.

    Like you, Nick, I am not 100% convinced about the photographic comparisons…though I could be swayed if I knew what Unidentified Woman knew. Seriously, who finds a nearly 100 year old picture of some random dude and thinks “Gee, this young man sure looks a lot like SM…I think I’ll scoot on up to Adelaide and have world-renowned Prof. Henneberg…” Unless…?

    Oh well, maybe I just don’t think big.

  9. Hi Nick! Sorry I don’t have a lot to add. I believe there were a lot more U-boat sinkings off the American coast during WWi; the book ‘When the U-Boats Came to America’ by William Bell Clark treats this, I believe.

    PS – When I read about the Desaturated St. Nick, I thought about you.

  10. Dennis: I think you’ll find that after U-53’s sinking spree in October 1916, no U-Boats came back to America until later in 1918, after the date on the ID card. So I’m pretty sure that “When the U-Boats Came to America” deals mainly with the events of 1918. But the desaturated Santa was right up my street. Go, Brody S, go! 🙂

  11. cj: I’m pretty sure the date on the ID card is meant to be the card’s issuance date, so “H. C. Reynolds” birth date could just as well be 1899 or 1900. All the same, I’m fascinated to see that Reynolds was both British and born in Tasmania: it could well be that the US id card was issued on the West Coast to that same H. C. Reynolds who had just been laid off from the Manuka’s crew and been (hypothetically) taken on board a ship headed for San Francisco or Long Beach. Was there much cross-Pacific traffic back then? For example, was oil being shipped? It’s not something I know about!

  12. cjbearden on December 11, 2011 at 10:14 pm said:

    Hey Nick, Australia, including Tasmania, is a self governing dominion, a Sovereign State, and part of the Commonwealth realm. Queen Elizabeth II is their monarch and she is referred to as the Queen of Australia. I am unsure when Australia’s government became an independent Sovereign State but, prior to that event, Australians were British subjects.
    As to the date on the ID card, I believe it should be read “on, or as of this date of issuance” 28 Feb 1918, H.C. Reynolds was 18 years old. Assuming 17 year old asst. Purser Reynolds, and 18 year old photo ID Reynolds are one and the same, H.C. Reynolds 18th birthday fell between 7 Jan 1918 and 28 Feb 1918. I suspect, mainly because it was war time, foreign born unaccompanied minors were not allowed entry into the US. Last, H.C. Reynolds need not have traveled quite so far as the American mainland to require a photo ID, as the American Samoa’s and the state of Hawaii are also US territories.

    Hope this helps : )

  13. cj: of course, thanks very much for pointing out what should have been the bleedin’ obvious to me. 🙂 So if Reynolds was indeed a British Imperial subject born in Tasmania, he would not have been forcibly conscripted in WWI (because the two Australian referenda on the issue were rejected, joining the army remained a matter of personal choice), so his age given on the card may well be genuine (i.e. he would have had no obvious political need to fake his age).

    As for why the lady in Adelaide may have wondered, Reynolds could possibly have been someone who disappeared from her family tree around 1948. Blame ancestry.com! 🙂

    Perhaps Reynolds would be best traceable through birth or baptism records? The Tasmanian records post-1896 seem pretty good, all things considered: http://www.justice.tas.gov.au/bdm/family_history/researching_family_trees … but Tasmania does have a lot of churches! http://www.linc.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/333253/Church_Register_List.pdf

  14. cjbearden on December 12, 2011 at 1:58 am said:

    Okay, but following your theory on how and where Somerton Man died, doesn’t it occur to you that Unidentified Woman might be Jestyn’s daughter?

  15. cj: of course: but it was the nurse’s phone number in the book, the nurse who gave the other Tamam Shud to Alf Boxall, the nurse who lived in Glenelg, and the nurse who had just moved and given birth to a baby boy. The nurse’s mother lived in Melbourne throughout this period, and (according to Gerry Feltus) “There is no evidence that her mother was ever interviewed”. (p.177)

  16. cjbearden on December 12, 2011 at 9:36 pm said:

    Help! I’m confused…wasn’t Jestyn both the nurse who gave Al Boxall a copy of the rubaiyet and the woman whose unlisted telephone number was found in the 2nd rubaiyet, the copy that was chucked into the Doc’s backseat?

    P.S. Loved the Xmas article : )

  17. cj: Jestyn = nurse, yes, almost certainly. Having said that, it’s entirely possible – though nobody seems to suggest it – that the Unknown Man was secretly nurse/Jestyn’s wayward father. If he was born in (say) 1900, and she was born in 1921, the timeline isn’t inconsistent: and if he was an absentee dad, then that might perhaps lie behind part of her attraction to older men. Something to think about! 🙂

  18. cjbearden on December 13, 2011 at 12:37 am said:

    Ohhhh…I get it! I thought everyone was implying Somerton Man was Jestyn’s baby-daddy!

    Thanks bunches : )

  19. cj: they are! UM was roughly as old as Alf Boxall and Jestyn’s eventual husband.

  20. cjbearden on December 13, 2011 at 8:20 am said:

    Good Morning, Nick : )
    I’m still up…two hours ago, our sweet cat had two beautiful kittens…my daughter and I are in love : )

    Okay, NOW that I’m in the loop, why in the world do you think Jestyn would leave her father’s body propped up against the sea shore wall? Even a pookie old daddy deserves a proper burial.

    Happy Day : )

  21. cj: I don’t, it’s just that nobody seemed to have suggested it. Maybe she really, really hated him? 🙁

  22. cj: PS: why on earth are you reading emails when you have newborn kittens to coo over? 🙂

  23. cjbearden has already been where I went last night.
    This might be the ship H.C. Reynolds was on when the ID was made.
    Ship’s officer on a large liner, hence the necktie.
    17 Feb 1918
    H Reynolds
    Age: 18
    Port of Departure: Vancouver, British Columbia
    Port of Arrival: Sydney, New South Wales
    Voyage Arrival Date: 17 Feb 1918
    Vessel Name: Niagara
    RMS Niagara
    Tonnage: 13,415 gross tons
    Length: 165.5 m
    Beam: 20.2 m
    Propulsion: triple screw
    Speed: 17 knots
    Capacity: 290 first, 223 second, and 191 third class passengers

    1918 flu epidemic.
    Most victims were healthy young adults. There is a fair chance HCR was stricken but survived.
    12 October 1918. Twenty-nine Niagara crew members and several passengers were hospitalised in Auckland.

    Interestingly, on 19 June 1940, the Niagara went down with 590 (I think) desperately needed gold bars that few people knew was in the cargo.

  24. cjbearden on December 13, 2011 at 5:52 pm said:

    Desperately trying to stay awake : ) So, while tending Mommy and babes, I was perusing your Voynich theory pages and reading new posts. Eventually though, The Sandman Cometh : )

    Hey, figured out a couple of the Voynich plants aren’t plants at all, they’re Sea Lilies (cronids)…I’ll post this info on your Voynich thread.

    Last, Australian authorities instigated a massive info hunt…instead of dragging this mystery along for 63 years, why not ‘fess up then? Unless she had something to hide…

  25. Nick, where did you find Jestyn’s age? If SM was related to Jestyn that would be another explanation for the (probable) similar ears and hands of Jestyn’s son.

    CJ, you have: “Next, Manuka departed Hobart, arrived Sydney, 6 Jan 1918,…”. The odd symbol to the left of “6” is a “2”. So it was 26 Jan 1918. H Reynolds, age 17, born in Tasmania, Assistant Purser. Vessel Name: Manuka; Hobart to Sydney, arriving 26 Jan 1918. Too bad we cannot eliminate January as month of birth. I think he is our Somerton Man* (unless he became Alf Boxall) and that there is a broad paper trail already known that will come to light as soon as people have time to sort it out.

    I assume he always wore dress shoes, which might have squeezed his toes. Also that he was habitually meticulous in caring for his appearance because of the occupation.

    I have already been hasty. I’ll give references and more tenuous evidence for speculation
    after I get it together.

    *- I read an account in PDF of comparing photographs of people at different times in their lives and was impressed. An old photo of a potential young Sidney Reilly (the notorious spy and one-time companion of EL Voynich) probably was a near relation.

  26. Knox: curiously enough, I’ve just been reading a book on WWII raiders & the Niagara was sunk by a German raider. It looks like you’re closing in on the early life of the elusive H. C. Reynolds, well done to both you and Cheryl, keep going! Incidentally, how long would the Niagara have taken to get back from Vancouver, and what intermediate stops did it have planned en route?

  27. Knox: Jestyn’s age was given (indirectly) in Gerry Feltus’ book: but because her life only appeared in fragmentary form there, I funnelled all the dates into a single diagram & posted it here: http://ciphermysteries.com/2011/11/19/nicks-thoughts-on-the-somerton-man-part-two Similarly, perhaps UM’s well-toned calves were from marching around on ship all day long? Looking forward to seeing the evidence! 🙂

  28. cjbearden on December 13, 2011 at 9:50 pm said:

    Hey Knox, right you are! This will narrow down HCR’s birth date by nearly three weeks. Once again, assuming 17 year old asst. purser Reynolds and 18 year old photo ID Reynolds are one and the same, HCR’s 18th birthday fell between 27 Jan 1918 and 28 Feb 1918. Nick’s right…we’re getting warmer : )

    Egad! I forgot about the 1918 flu epidemic. You know, that epidemic began in the US at Fort Riley, Kansas. On 7 Mar 1918, the soldiers at Ft. Riley burned over 4,000 lbs. of manure…I’ve never been able to find out what kind they burned, but assume it was cattle and horse dung. Anyway, the smoke was so thick and black it blocked out the sun. Three days later, 10 Mar 1918, the first 2 or 3 flu cases reported to the infirmary. By the end of that 1st week, the sick numbered in the double digits. Have ya’ll ever thought that burning the manure released a contagious form of Anthrax? Anthrax poisoning and the 1918 flu have many similarities…
    Oh well, sorry I got off topic.

  29. Michael on February 22, 2012 at 6:54 am said:

    I have done considerable study on this matter and am wondering where Nick discovered that H.C Reynolds the purser on the Manuka was born in Tasmania. Yes the one Nick mentions from ancestry.com. The family of H.C. Reynolds that was born in Tasmania do not believe he was ever a sailor, and that he was a farmer with his brother in NSW. Both he and his brother are listed on ancestry on election records in a farming area. So is it possible there was another H. Reynolds that was the purser you are referring to? There is an H.C. Reynolds listed 3 times on ancestry.com as crew member on immigration ships from New Zealand to Sydney in Jan 21, 1918, Dec 31, 1917 and Apr 20 1918. It is possible that ship then went to Tasmania and is the same ship Nick is mentioning. Do you have the records of this crew from New Zealand? Are they the same H.C. Reynolds?
    if anyone is better than me, there is an H.C Reynolds listed on the electoral roll in Chatswood at the very relevant date. This is a very significant address in relation to the nurse who the unknown man went to adelaide to visit. She worked at North sydney hospital which is a few suburbs from Chatswood. We need to find out who the H.C. reynolds on the electoral roll was. The electoral people can not help. he is listed on the roll up to 1963, but this could be due to no one informing them he had left the area.

  30. Michael: you have to be careful about what you infer here. The H. C. (Charles) Reynolds born in Hobart, Tasmania in Feb 1900 who was an assistant purser and then purser during 1917-1919 was very probably the same person that appeared on the ID card that started this whole research thread: Cheryl Bearden and I have managed to build up a fairly comprehensive timeline for this period, all documented on this website. And yes, there was also a Horace Charles Reynolds born not far away in Triabunna, Tasmania also in Feb 1900, who (I’m told) was a lifelong poultry farmer who never went to Adelaide, never mind to sea. However, it is as yet an open question whether the two can be proven to be the same person or two different people, so best not to don’t jump either way as yet. 🙂

    Australia had, in fact, a fair number of people called “H C Reynolds” all born around 1900, so it would probably be an unhelpful exercise to try to track them all down. Far better to pursue and extend the solid evidence we have and to see where that leads. Patience!

  31. Michael on February 23, 2012 at 3:00 am said:

    I am not sure what you mean by being careful “what you infer”.
    You have already cleared up one of my questions. i.e. Was the purser the same man as the farmer?. It would seem that at least 2 H.C. Reynolds were born in Tasmania, and one of them, the sailor, may be the unknown man. But how an Australian got a U.S. Immigration card adds some question as to whether he is the man in the card. One very important question is have you been able to source a photo of the sailor? I am in contact with Maciej Henneberg who could compare the photos to see if it is the same man as the one in the ID. If a picture exists this is most important.
    The next question is, do you have any evidence that the sailor is buried somewhere? Or some access to his ancestors who may have some relevant information about him?
    And I repeat that the H.C. Reynolds listed as living in Chatswood around 1948 would also be a good line of investigation. It may well be the same as the sailor. Or it may be someone else. But he lived near the nurse “Jestyn” at the time.
    We need to remember that Maciej henneberg has said that the man in the ID and the Somerton man are most likely the same man. So an H.C. Reynolds that is know to be buried somewhere is probably not the man we are looking for.

  32. Michael: Cheryl Bearden and I have unearthed a long chain of maritime documentation from multiple countries that seems to leave little doubt that the seaman on the ID card did indeed work on a succession of ships between 1917-1919. However, we are still trying to find ways of linking Purser H. Charles Reynolds to other (hopefully land-based) databases of any kind, whether censuses, electoral rolls, addresses, birth certificates, etc. Until we can do that, Professor Henneberg’s identification remains only part of the story, not the whole story by a long way – Gerry Feltus, for instance, is not yet persuaded, and he knows the whole case better than anyone.

  33. While I respect Gerry Feltus and the effort he put into identifying the Somerton Man, I also know how much of an expert Maciej Henneberg is in anatomical matters and how important he has been to assisting police in many cases of identifying people. So I think the work being done to find some relevant evidence about the man in the ID is very worthwhile. Do you know what H stood for in the case of the purser?

  34. I might mention in relation to Nev’s comment, at beginning of this thread, about the NZ family search for Horace Charles Reynolds. I did a lot of work with that family and it is not the H.C. Reynolds we are looking for. It was a pity because he fit a lot of the criteria of the ID card.

  35. Michael: no, not yet, but I hope to know soon. 🙂

  36. Michael on February 24, 2012 at 9:44 pm said:

    Another very important matter is whether the crew manifests you have access to have a signature of H. Reynolds.
    If so, a simple comparison to the ID card might be reasonably conclusive.
    If you don’t have such material, is it possible to get access to it somewhere?

  37. Michael: if only! Unfortunately, we’re in a situation where we get what (scanty) evidence we get, we don’t choose it… but we keep on trying. Patience!

  38. The three records relating to his being a crew member on the Manuka, on ancestry.com, have his initial on 2 records as just H, and on the 3rd a scribbled middle initial, which the record says is R. I would have thought based on the other writing of the person as more like a B. But certainly not a C.
    Nick how do you know his middle name is Charles?

  39. Michael: I’ve posted a great deal of research to the blog, and given you links to relevant posts in previous comments: it takes a while to get the hang of the handwriting used in the crew manifests, and many of the volunteer transcribers who have input them into have made mistakes which you can only really get around by carefully going over the scans yourself. Here’s the specific post that describes how Cheryl Bearden found out that his middle name was Charles, and that also lists the 25 crew manifests we have found containing his name:-

    I have more to post about this, but I’m just waiting for a follow-on response from an amiable Antipodean archivist…

  40. Sorry. I have just worked out what you have been doing with links.

  41. Michael on February 25, 2012 at 6:37 am said:

    I have had a short look at the various crew manifests on ancestry.com, and the writing does seem similar on each one. But not similar to the ID card. Of course it is possible that the person who wrote the details on the ID card was someone who handed out such cards and not by H.C. Reynolds himself. The writing on the card looks like it is left handed and the writing on the manifests seems to be right handed.

  42. Michael on February 26, 2012 at 4:24 am said:

    Nick, I think you said previously that there are definitely two H.C. Reynolds born in Hobart at around the same year of 1900.
    But I can’t find two such births on ancestry’s records.
    Have you been able to confirm that there are two H.C. Reynolds yet?

  43. Michael: the ID card is just a single instance, so it’s terrifically hard to draw inferences from its handwriting. However, as Reynolds was a Purser on the Koonya for a whole year, I find it extremely likely that he was the person who wrote “Chas Reynolds”.

  44. That seems like a fair inference. Especially as almost all of the manifests only have first initial on all names.

  45. Michael on March 4, 2012 at 10:36 pm said:

    This has been a fascinating thread but it seems things have gone into slow motion or some unfortunate brick walls.
    Just checking that people are still looking for more information about this H.C. reynolds.

  46. Michael: there’s lots going on behind the scenes here… just slowly, that’s all. 😐

  47. Misty on April 6, 2012 at 1:51 pm said:

    Doesn t it take 5 yrs to declare a missing
    Person dead? Maybe HC went missing in
    1948 and they had him declared dead in 1953.
    I think that Jestyn was afraid of Boxall or
    her husband- and tried to cover up- him being babies daddy. I’d be interested if she had kids b4
    the boy- maybe they r his too and still living
    Y don t they just get Jestyns sons DNA from his kids and compare it?also I think Al holds a big key here. He should b pursed more. Also the guy- who had book in car is also important- maybe connected- how could SM have gotten book in his car- he was visiting and probably didn t have access to a personal vehicle- did this Dr know Nurse Jenstyn?- just a few ideas.

  48. Misty on April 6, 2012 at 2:59 pm said:

    RI thought about this too- what about Jestyns husband? Has he been questioned- he had to read about this in the paper at the time- wife is nurse lived close by. Book is rare- she probably- has another
    copy in her home. He must have connected the dots.
    She lived close to where he was. How did this man(SM) get Keane suitcase ? Maybe that was to throw people off. Maybe she was some kind of Serial killer- and did away with Tom Keane too and planted suitcase. All of these men seem to have a military connection and show up close to her home. Whee does she get all these rare books- the police can tveven get? What about seeing if the authors family can decode the cipher. The Tom Keane thing really intrests me- maybe they r the same person- or maybe this guy is somehow connected 2 Al- do we know sons name? Could b clue? I think the poison had to have been obtained by Someone in med. Profession. He probably didn t commit suicide- or he wouldn t have all these cigerettes. They would ve been smoked also wouldn t have died
    On beach- but in a hotel- where people weren’t walking around. Maybe someone knew about baby and killed him 2 scare Jetsyn- y were death pants not sandy and sandy pants in suitcase? Lots of clothes packed for a suicide.

  49. Misty on April 6, 2012 at 3:01 pm said:

    Also lady who turned over id defenitly has
    some connection to Jetsyn. Sorry to post so much
    will wait for others to respond.

  50. I’m going to leave this here for you:

    Document from the Attorney General
    3 pages total


    don’t stop looking

  51. MPV on May 6, 2012 at 5:10 pm said:

    Can we please locate a scan of the other side of the seamens id card? There should be two sides to this.

    The first should look like this: http://i.imgur.com/ICy7j.jpg

    The second side should look like this: http://i.imgur.com/SBGQy.jpg

  52. Examining this story for personal reasons, and this may shed (or shut off) some light on the whole seaman’s card and NZ angle. Seems that there is a track record of this seaman having traveled between NZ and AUS, and then a death notice in Calgary, Canada in 1974.


  53. Sorry if that was known, over half the posts were hidden until I posted that! 🙁

  54. Todd: ah, yes, I should probably have mentioned that particular H C Reynolds as well. Our HCR was born in Hobart in 1900 and wasn’t him! 🙂

  55. Dianelle on August 17, 2013 at 9:45 am said:

    Jessica Ellen Harkness was Jestyn. Her brother married Jim Beaumont’s first cousin. Her husband was Prosper McTaggart Thomson, local car dealer and petty crim. Her son was Robin Thomson, Australian ballet dancer.

  56. Tricia on August 18, 2013 at 4:07 am said:

    In 1950, Adelaide had a population of 500,000.

    About 30% were newly arrived migrants, with whom the local population had scarcely mixed…

    Of the remaining 350,000, the elderly, the already married and the underage constituted about 63%

    So that leaves about 19 -20,000 people.

    Because of the war, only one in three was male.

    So that’s about 6,000 marriageable males, including all the walking wounded and those in various hospitals.

    It seems to me that in those circumstances, what you’d have is a generation of people separated by only two or three degrees.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post navigation