GENIRE-L ArchivesArchiver > GENIRE > 1999-05 > 0925844241
From: "Jonathan Smith " <>
Subject: Migratory flow trends
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 13:57:21 -0500
Barney Tyrwhitt Drake wrote:
<<However, from 5-10% of the population of these areas were ethnically
Irish in the 1851 census. One result of this is that very many more
people today who think of themselves as 'English' or 'Scots' have more
than a little Irish ancestry. My wife's Lancastrian grandmother was very
surprised when I discovered that her grandmother had emigrated from
Co.Antrim. That side of their family history had not been passed on.
Mind you, she didn't know where her grandfather came from either!>>
Barney, nice sketch of what was going on in labor migrations trends at the
time. Thanks for such an informative piece.
The paragraph above which you wrote caught my eye, particularly the
line..."many more people today who think of themselves as English or Scots
have more than a little Irish ancestry".
On my grandfathers US naturalization certificate of 1875, the King´s county
of the State of New York confers US citizenship on my grandfather with the
QUOTE : "I do absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance
and fidelity to any foreigh Prince, Potentate, State or Sovereignty
whattever; and particularly to the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great
Britian and Ireland of whom I was before a subject". ENDQUOTE
My grandfather SAID on his marriage certificate he was from England (not
that he was English...that he was FROM ENGLAND). This is different from all
the family saying he and his ancesters were Irish (he was John James
Molloy, born of John Molloy and Katherine Harnet...seems that the Irish was
certainly in the names, to be sure!).
Why does a document such as a US naturalization document lump the Queen of
the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland all together? (this is my
ignorance of history asking you). If one was of Irish blood and ancestry
and coming from a geographic area considered as Ireland, speaking in the
stricter geographic terms you have more or less discussed in your
explanations, was one considered still and all to be a British (English)
subject as though to say one possessed or had the right ot possess an
What was the likelihood of an Irish person, who may have migrated first to
England before moving on to North America, to have been documented
(passport or other personal but legal document of the times when the Irish
migrated) as an Irish "citizen" or as a British "citizen"...I´ll not use
the word subject here, although it may have a bearing, I do not know?
Perhaps this is all a bit hypothetical. Well, it certainly is in my case
for the moment, since I have not been able to trace my grandfather back to
times earlier that this 1875 naturalization document. I am convinced I
will eventually find he was born of Irish blood and geographical origins,
so I wanted to get a feel for the times: "all the same but separate and
unequal" or "all the same and all equal" aspects, for example, either
legally or however.
Hope I have not been too confusing? I´m somewhat confused myself, so excuse
me if my questions are not the right ones to ask.
Thanks for trying to shed some light for me.. Regards. Jonathan Smith
SENDER´S NAME: Jonathan E. Smith
|Migratory flow trends by "Jonathan Smith " <>|