Send an e-mail to: Amanda TaylorSend an e-mail to: Amanda TaylorA Story of an Early Pioneer Family, Researched and written by present-day members of the Family, themselves.
The following article was written and researched by Grace Douglass & Laurel Legge and published in their book 'Along the Windsor Richmond Road' 1985 (ISBN 0 9589831 0 0 and ISBN 0 9589831 3 5) and is subject to copyright. Written permission is held from the late author Grace Douglass for the writer to publish contents via the Internet. However, although this book is in the public domain, it still remains copyrighted material and may not be copied for any reason without permission. I do not have the right to give permission to others to reprint the book. I was only given permission to put it on line. All copyrights stay with Grace Douglass & Laurel Legge and whoever they appointed, for control of the book. Under no circumstances may it be reprinted for profit.
Extractions of parts of the information for personal use with references to the book as the source is encouraged.
This is a statement of fact that I am very proud to lay claim to, as we all should be, and I have researched my claim well, to prevent fear of contradiction.
The early historian, George Reeve, described Jane Ezzy, as "a freewoman, and the foundress Mother of all Ezzys in Australia", Although he was quite historically accurate in this statement, to me it brings forth an entirely incorrect image in my mind of this lady.
His description brings to my mind, an early slab-hut, set in a small bush-clearing, smoke curling from the chimney and a mother standing in the doorway at the end of the day, her children clutching at her skirts, awaiting the return of her man from his toil in the field. Now I am not suggesting that Jane Ezzy was not a good Mother, or that she avoided domesticity, I think she paid adequate attention to both, Judging by the later behaviour of the family she raised. It is just that I believe her to have been a forceful, stubborn character, a shrewd business woman and one so set in her ways and beliefs, that she demanded equality and right of possession in a man's world, at a time in our history when it was most definitely socially unacceptable. Taking this statement further, I believe that our Jane may have been this country's first 'women's libber' in making this demand upon her contemporaries. This may be the 'in' thing today, but 100 years ago it was unheard of, and 170 years ago, it was down-right scandalous!
What was she like this 'foundress Mother' of ours? Official Records remain, for the most part, to tell us the physical characteristics of most of our convict forebearers, but Jane just 'arrived' totally unrecorded, so we must draw up our own mental picture of her. We have quite a few photographs of the members of the Ezzy Family from the second and third generation, and they would appear to have been of two types -- overly tall, or overly short. Additionally from talking to present-day members of the Family, we know that many of their grandparents had reddish hair -- "just plain ginger" said Jane, daughter of Alfred Ezzy, when we talked to her when she was in her mid-eighties. She claimed she had many of these gingery-tops in her family, including herself, when she was younger. We also know it is a characteristic which repeats itself in many of the lines of the early Family, to such an extent that it most likely comes from the beginning of the Line. The convict indent for the "Royal Admiral" describes William Ezzy as a man of above average height, with black hair. I therefore see Jane Ezzy (entirely without historical proof or backing I admit), as a lady of short stature with reddish hair. If the statments made on her daughter Lucy's Death Certificate are correct, then it is possible that Jane was Irish, as her maiden name is supposed to have been Floid. Certainly her forceful, stubborn nature (and her possible reddish hair) give credence to this thought. Lucy's step-son-in-law, Johnathan Everingham, was the informant on her Death Certificate, and it is quite possible that John Roberts, Lucy's husband could have given him this piece of information. However, at the time of Lucy's death, her mother had been gone from this world for over fifty years, and as neither mother nor daughter could write and memories are short, I feel we need to examine it's authenticity with great caution.
Quite a few members of the Family have said to me that Jane must have been a good devoted wife to have followed her husband into Exile the way she did. However, I would ask you all to consider the alternative. Had William sailed without her, she would have been left alone on the streets of London, with one, possibly two children to support, as well as herself. So far as we know, 'grandmother' had no skills or training, other than an instinctive will to survive, so possibly the most readily available means of supporting the family would have been a life of prostitution. This occupation would most likely have led to a life of crime, followed by transportation herself as a convict. Far better to follow William as a 'free wife' rather than a convict in chains.
I feel I should dwell here a minute on another misconception which I consider people have about Jane Ezzy. That she was a woman of loose morals. Some members of the Family who have dabbled a little in Family Research, have read the entry in the 1814 Muster (and repeated in the Mutch Index at the time of her death), pertaining to Jane, which says -- "lives intermittently with John Boulton, Publican". Now, I have no more idea than the next person of what the personal side of Jane's life was like, but I think we need to examine the facts. Firstly the terminology 'lives with' in 1814 when the Muster was taken, was slightly different to the inference we place on that remark to-day. Had Jane been a cellar-man, a tavern wench, an apprentice to the owner, or just a plain lodger in the establishment, then she would still have been described as 'living with John Boulton, publican' --it merely implied that it was her place of residence at that time. Had she been cohabiting with our friend John Boulton, the muster would have read 'wife to John Boulton, publican'. Had Jane survived in these same circumstances until the 1828 Census was taken it would have read 'living at John Boulton's, Cambridge Street, Sydney, which we would, I suppose, have found more socially and morally acceptable.
If Jane did, intermittently cohabit with John Boulton, then there is no evidence of there having been any children born. I myself believe their associations to have been purely business ones. As you will see in the following pages Jane Ezzy and John Boulton were legal business partners, quite apart from any partnership agreement Boulton had with William Ezzy. For a good deal of the time Jane lived in Sydney prior to the 1814 Muster, she and her eldest son James William, living with her, whilst he worked for Laurence Butler as an apprentice cabinet maker. There is also, I believe, a strong possibility that Elizabeth and Sophia were with her as well. In addition, although William Ezzy was not backward in placing advertisements in the Press cautioning the Public against trading with his wife, (after 1816 when she had left him), as he would not be held responsible for her debts, at no stage did he accuse her in these same advertisements of living with another person, which was the usual course of action followed by a husband at that time, when faced with this problem. So although William felt himself cheated out of the possession of her land, to which he felt himself justifiably entitled, he obviously did not feel that she had deserted her marriage vows.
This then is
Jane Ezzy, as I see her, the first WOMAN to receive a grant of land in the Hawkesbury, or
Mulgrave Place as it was then known. A record of the granting of this land appears in Register
No. 2, page 169, and reads as follows :=
By his Excellency John Hunter, Esq., Captain General and Governor in Chief -- Whereas full power
and authority for granting lands in the Territory of New South Wales to such persons as may be
desirous of becoming settlers therein is vested in His Majesty's Captain General and Governor in
Chief and over the said Territory and it's Dependencies by his Majesty's instructions under the
Royal Sign Manual being dated respectively the 25th Day of April, one thousand seven hundred and
eighty-seven, and the 20th day of August, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine --
In pursuance of the power and authority vested in me as aforesaid I do by these presents Give and Grant to Jane Ezzy her heirs and Assigns to have and to hold for ever, thirty acres of land to be known by the name of Ezzys Farm laying and situate in the District of Mulgrave Place and bounded on the East side by Smith Farm the said thirty acre of land to be had and held by her the said Jane Ezzy and her heirs and assigns free from all fees, taxes, quit rent or other acknowledgments for the space of five years from the date of these presents provided the said Jane Ezzy her heirs or assigns shall reside within the same and proceed to the improvement and cultivation there of. Such timber as may be growing or may grow thereafter upon the said land which may be deemed fit for Naval purposes to be reserved for the use of the Crown and paying annual quit rent of one shilling after the expiration of the term of five years before mentioned.
In testimony whereof I have herunto set my hand and seal of the Territory at Government House, Sydney, in the Territory of New South Wales this first day of May in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninety-seven -- Sgd. John Hunter -- witnesses John Piper and C.Grimes.
Jane Ezzy was now, in her own right, a Woman of Possessions. Thirty of acres of land. For a person used to the Alleys of London -- that was enormous! Jane's Grant is recorded as entry No.691 on page 84 of the first land grant book and by searching back through the preceeding entries and analysing them, I found that prior to Jane receiving her grant only twenty-five woment had received a free grant of land in the Colony, compared to 737 men, both 'free' and convict. Her's was certainly the first given to a woman in Mulgrave Place, in fact, of the previous ones given to women, twenty-four had been closer into the settlements at Sydney Cove and Parramatta, and the remaining one, the farthest out was at Toongabbie.So now our Jane was a 'lady farmer', with, most likely, as it was the usual practice, her convict husband assigned to her as a 'Farm Labourer'.
William and Jane moved from Parramatta to the Hawkesbury with their two young sons, James and John, and settled in a part of Windsor, that is today known as the Cornwallis Flats. Part of the Hawkesbury Flood Plain. If you would like to take a look at this early home of your Ancestors when you visit Windsor, drive past the historic Church of St.Matthew and turn right down the Cornwallis Road. After crossing over Rickaby's Creek you will pass between Deerubbun Park on your right and a present-day poplar farm on your left, (this was to become the home of Henry Lamb and and his convict wife Elizabeth Lamb [note : nee Chambers], early the following year after Jane took possession of her grant). Continuing on down the Cornwallis Road, when you have almost reached the line of Cooley's Creek where it bisects the road, stop and look out across the farmlands on the the left-hand side of the road (away from the river), and there some little distance away from the road (Jane's grant was three in from the river, and therefore almost the space of two-and-a-half-grants from the present road), you will gaze on this early Ezzy Farm. To-day it is a beautiful block of ground on which is being grown turf for the suburban gardens of Sydney and it is backed by a beautiful stand of matched elm trees.
Of course, when the Ezzys took up residence there was no Cornwallis Road, indeed no St. Matthew's Church, for that matter, just a collection of scattered farms, watched over by a military garrison, placed there to protect the settlers from the natives, who had by this time acquired a taste for the white man's possessions, particularly his ripening corn.
The farms at this time were cultivated by hoe, of a type that the early settlers nick-named the 'long-tailed-monkey', for reasons of their own, of course, they thought it resembled one.
The land had first to be cleared, by cutting down the trees, but naturally the stumps remained as they had not the means to remove them. I often wondered how William and Jane decided those ones which might 'be deemed fit for Naval purposes', and which had, under the terms of the grant to be left for the use of the Crown! The ground was then turned over with the hoe and wheat seed scattered by hand and hoed in. The number of stumps left in the fields would have precluded the use of a plough even had they owned a horse or bullock with which to pull it, both animals still being almost unheard of in the Colony in the early years, although bullocks eventually came into use for farm work before the draught-horse became readily available, for jobs of burden. Harvest took place in December when the wheat was reaped, bound into sheaves, and then carried by the farmer to a stack or a barn. It was thrashed with a flail to remove the grain and then carried to market or the Government Store. The farms had no fences. There was no need for them as the settlers had no livestock, except the few pigs which most of them seemed to acquire. These pigs finally posed a problem to the early farmers as they trampled their struggling crops, so eventually the Governor set aside areas of land for public Commons where the settlers could graze their pigs away from their crops. Governor King later set aside 5,130 acres for Ham Common at Richmond Hill district as well as those of Pitt Town Common and Wilberforce Common.
For some reason the Hawkesbury Settlers at that time elected to grown mainly crops of wheat and maize rather than fruit and vegetables which would have relieved their diet of mainly salt-meat. Cabbages, potatoes, pumpkins and water melons were experimented with and all did well, as they still do to-day in the rich riverbank soil, and peaches, apples and figs would also have flourished, but for the most part they stuck to the grain crops.
The farm-houses of the early settlers were of a very poor standard, merely a shelter to get into out of the rain and cold. The more elaborate ones were of two rooms -- one to live in and the other for the entire family to sleep in. The walls were generally wattled and plastered with clay, the roof thatched, and most only had an earth floor. Holes were cut in the walls to admit air and light (and rain and cold), glass was an unheard of luxury, although the more inventive members of the community fashion shutters of one kind or another, after a time.
Most supplies were brought into the Hawkesbury by river at this time, as indeed they were for some time to come. By 1794 there was a track connecting the settlement at Parramatta with the Hawkesbury, which Major Francis Grose had ordered should be laid down whilst he was Acting Governor. At the time of it's construction it was merely intended as a foot-track only, as few of the settlers owned a horse, and possibly this caused him to describe it in despatches as a "very good road which I have laid down out from the settlement at Parramatta to the banks of the Hawkesbury, by which we discover the distance from this place by land is much less than expected'. He continued on to say that an officer who was by no means considered as being particularly active, had undertaken for the price of a trifling wager, to walk to the Hawkesbury from Sydney town, and had completed the journey in eight hours and two minutes! Consequently, at this time I feel William and Jane saw little or nothing of either Parramatta Town or Sydney Cove.
In March of the following year (1798) Jane gave birth to her eldest surviving daughter Lucy, to be followed two years later, by another whom she named Mary. Between the births of these two children, however, the little family experienced the first major flood, for on March 3, 1799, the river rose 50 feet and one of the settlers lost their life. There is no doubt, that the Ezzy farm would have been under water at this time, as it would have been again in 1800 before William was to receive his grant, and the family move to higher ground. Before this event took place, however, the family circle was to increase once again, with the birth of a third son whom they named Charles.
[Note (1) : Jane's original land grant of 30 acres in Mulgrave Place was never sold or sub-divided during
her lifetime and it would seem she took the ownership of this most valuable possession with her
to the grave. However, no member of her family inherited, or benefited from it, in any way after
her death either, as coinciding with the time of her death, the quit rent was not paid, so the
Crown repossessed the grant, with the Deeds not reissued to a new owner for almost 100 years.
[Note (2) :Colonial Secretary Index, 1788-1825; State Records of NSW advises :
EZZY, Jane; 1797 May 1
On list of all grants and leases of land registered in the Colonial Secretary's Office (Fiche 3267; 9/2731 p.84)].
My complete Rootsweb database can be seen at Amanda Taylor's Genealogy
Surname List of my Direct Ancestors Individual Name Index
Prepared by:
Amanda Taylor
P.O. Box 5042
Wheeler Heights NSW 2097 Australia
Send an e-mail to: Amanda Taylor