WILLIAM STANBURY AND HIS FAMILY

William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury, father of Elizabeth StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about Elizabeth Sandercock (nee Stanbury)
, is the mystery figure amongst the earliest branches of our Australian family tree. William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury had set himself up in South Australia on his 83 acres of land, "Berry Hill"Click to open a popup showing a picture of Berry Hill taken in around 1870, in Kenton Valley, south of Gumeracha, at the end of 1846. It was here that the Sandercocks came to live after their arrival in 1853. Yet no headstone has survived (if ever erected) to mark William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury's last resting place, and even the location of his place of burial has been forgotten since his death on 4 April, 1858. (Note - My father Donald SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Donald Sandercock
 had told me several years ago that he had seen an old headstone when he was a child at "Berry Hill"Click to open a popup showing a picture of Berry Hill taken in around 1870 that he believed was that of William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury. I have no idea how correct it is, but it may explain why no headstone has been found in any graeyard in the Gumeracha/Kenton Valley area.)

When biographical details of Richard and Elizabeth SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Richard and Elizabeth Sandercock
 were compiled for "A History of Gumeracha and DistrictClick to open a popup showing details about A History of Gumeracha and District" in 1939, commemorating the centenary of the area, the following was written about William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury: (pg. 139)

"Mr Stanbury (Christian name now unknown) came to Kenton Valley from Van Diemen’s Land with sheep for the South Australian Company, and reached there in 1837 or 1838. Settling outside the "special survey area" he built a wattle and daub hut with a thatch roof."

This reference to his arrival was evidently in line with a family tradition that William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury had come to South Australia by way of Tasmania (called Van Diemen’s Land until 1855) and not directly from any English port.

Several things found by the present writer during his research tend to partly support this tradition. The first is connected with the belief that William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury did come to the colony of South Australia from Van Diemen’s Land, but it appears it was not as early as believed. The “Register” newspaper in Adelaide, for 15 April, 1846, mentions that a “Wm. Stanbury" arrived on the brig "Julia" at Port Adelaide on Easter Sunday, 12 April, 1846, from Launceston in Van Diemen‘s Land. That the person concerned was our William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury is certainly possible, as it is known that Elizabeth Sandercock‘s father (William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury) was granted land at Kenton Valley on 7 December in that year. William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury must have been living in the colony for some time prior to December; if he arrived in May, 1846, he was here for almost 6 months before his land grant was approved.

The second finding partly confirms the above. The 1841 Census in South Australia does not mention the name of any William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury or otherwise, and the first arrival recorded for a William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury is the one on the “Julia” in May, 1846. (The S.A. ArchivesClick to open a popup showing S.A. Archives has a composite photograph of pioneers who arrived between 1836 - 1840. Row 22, photograph (e) is of a J. Stanbury. The pictures were taken in 1872 by Thomas Duryea. No information as to the actual year of arrival, county of origin or age of this J. Stanbury is available - except that he was living in 1872.)

To confirm that a person named William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury had lived in the colony of Van Diemen’s Land until early 1846, the writer made enquiries with theArchives Office of TasmaniaClick to open a popup showing Archives Office of Tasmania in Hobart. He was very surprised to learn that the only person with the name Stanbury to have been mentioned in the Archives records was a convict named William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury. This man had been pardoned in December of 1845, only 5 months before a person with the same name arrived in South Australia from that colony. According to the Office of the Registrar-General in Hobart, no-one named William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury died in Tasmania up to the end of 1879. (The convict Stanbury would have been 90 years old in that year, according to Archives records.)

The convict pardon granted to William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury was given on the condition that he not return to Europe under any circumstances, but he could leave Van Diemen’s Land if he wished for another colony.

In light of these findings, it would appear that the father of Elizabeth SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Elizabeth Sandercock
 was this convict William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury. He spent nearly 17 years in Van Diemen’s Land and on gaining his freedom, came over to South Australia in 1846 and was granted land here at the end of the same year. Because final proof of these various "facts" relating to our William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury may never be obtainable, the writer presented this information to Kingsley Ireland, a South Australian genealogist for his opinion. Mr Ireland examined the evidence and has agreed with the conclusion of the writer that our ancestor William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury and the convict Stanbury appear to be one and the same person.

Such a conclusion raises several questions; but it also answers some. Because the convict William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury was transported in 1829, he would have been separated from members of his family in England for many years. If Elizabeth SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Elizabeth Sandercock
 was his daughter (it is known that the convict was married with four children in England) she would not have seen her father for over 24 years until they were reunited in 1853. During this time she had grown up, married Richard SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Richard Sandercock and raised 9 of their 11 children in Cornwall. Elizabeth's father was not mentioned as a witness at her marriage to Richard SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Richard Sandercock in 1835. The eventual emigration of the Sandercocks in 1853 takes on additional meaning if her father had been in the Australian colonies for all those years before.

Members of John SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about John Sandercock
’s family, the branch of Richard SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Richard Sandercock's family which remained in the vicinity of Kenton Valley, are today those most acquainted with any information at all about William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury. If he had been a convict, if is extremely likely that Richard and Elizabeth SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Richard and Elizabeth Sandercock
 were the only ones to know this. Their 10 children would not have been told the truth and hence later generations would know little or nothing about him. John SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about John Sandercock
 himself was born in 1859, the year after his grandfather William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury died, so it would have been several years after that that he was told anything at all about a man he had never known himself.

The story of William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury‘s coming from Van Diemen’s Land with sheep is probably partly true. His connection with the South Australia Company may also be correct, as he may have worked for the Company in the Gumeracha area at one time. He was no doubt a thatcher, as many farmers from Devon and Cornwall had this skill. The possible convict origins were conveniently omitted from any stories circulated amongst the children of Richard and Elizabeth SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Richard and Elizabeth Sandercock
.

It seems unusual that none of the Sandercock sons was ever named William. The fourth son was always called Albert WilliamClick to open a popup showing details about Albert William Sandercock
; he was born in Cornwall in 1848. Would there have been any reason for this? All references to William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury in official documents in South Australia use STANBERRY as the spelling of his name. His Will, the Land Grant of 1846 and other memorials deposited in the Lands Department use this form. As William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury himself could not write, as far as we know, this spelling was obviously adopted by other people. It has been suggested that the name William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury gave his land holding in Kenton Valley - "Berry Hill"Click to open a popup showing a picture of Berry Hill taken in around 1870 - could account for the origin of this variant of his own surname.

If he was a convict, then William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury’s descendants can learn a good deal about him from the records in the convict archives in HobartClick to open a popup showing Archives Office of Tasmania; some have been reproduced in this history. Official records of the convict Stanbury’s trial in 1828 at Exeter in Devonshire, England, are still safely preserved there in the Archives of the Devon County Record OfficeClick to open a popup showing details about Archives of the Devon County Record Office and at the Public Record Office in LondonClick to open a popup showing details about Public Record Office in London. These were all consulted during the research done for our history.

The convict William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury was born about 1789, and his “native place" or place of birth was evidently at Plympton St. Mary, near Plymouth in Devon. When our William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury died in 1858 at Gumeracha, a neighbour of the Sandercocks, John MooreClick to open a popup showing details about John Moore of “Hartley Vale", had it recorded on his death certificate that he was aged 75 years. His year of birth may have been closer to 1783. In any case, it is said that convicts, for reasons of their own, often changed their ages when they arrived in the Australian colonies under sentence of transportation; for several reasons, therefore, no-one may have known exactly how old William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury was when he died.

It has already been mentioned that the convict William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury was married with four children. (This was recorded by convict authorities in Hobart in 1829 after his arrival.) Much research in England has been done to establish his wife's name and the dates of birth of his children, and in particular, whether Elizabeth Sandercock was one of them. It has been established that, from the 1851 Census for Launceston, Cornwall, Elizabeth Sandercock, nee Stanbury, was born in that town. But no baptism entry in any of the Launceston church registers has been found to confirm this.

It is possible that the couple who were married at St. Mary Magdalene’s Church, LauncestonClick to open a popup showing details about St. Mary Magdalene’s Church, Launceston
, on 25 March, 1808 – William STANDBERY and Elizabeth JULIANClick to open a popup showing details about William STANDBERY and Elizabeth JULIAN - were the parents of our Elizabeth SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Elizabeth Sandercock
. Standbery is only a variant spelling of Stanbury and may have been the way the surname was pronounced to the clergyman who registered the marriage. William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury (recorded as Standbery) was recorded in the marriage entry as living at Lawhitton, a village near Launceston and just inside the Cornish border. If a person were living in such a village close to the county of Devon, he may have originated from a place in Devon (e.g. Plympton St. Mary) but later have moved to Cornwall.

From the baptismal register at St. Mary Magdalene’s Church, LauncestonClick to open a popup showing details about St. Mary Magdalene’s Church, Launceston
, it is known that this William and Elizabeth StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William and Elizabeth Stanbury had two sons baptised there, a John StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about John Stanbury on 15 January, 1809, and a ThomasClick to open a popup showing details about Thomas Stanbury on 15 May, 1815. (Our Elizabeth SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Elizabeth Sandercock
 had sons named John SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about John Sandercock
 and Thomas SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Thomas Sandercock
, but as these were very popular boys’ names it does not necessarily confirm her parentage.) The space of some six years between these two Stanbury baptisms leaves time for other (two) children to have been born in that period, but there are no baptism entries extant in the town of Launceston.

Map of South Devon

A baptism for an Elizabeth StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about Elizabeth Sandercock (nee Stanbury)
 was found at Yealmpton ("Yamptori"), Devon, on 28 December, 1818, daughter of a William and Elizabeth StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William and Elizabeth Stanbury. Yealmpton is about 4½ miles south-east at Plympton St. Mary. The Stanburys may have moved temporarily to this place in Devon from Cornwall, and their daughter Elizabeth StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about Elizabeth Sandercock (nee Stanbury)
 baptised there. No other Stanbury children were baptised at Yealmpton, so the family may have returned to Cornwall later. It could also be a co-incidence and not be our Elizabeth SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Elizabeth Sandercock
’s baptism at all, even though it agrees with the age (37) of Elizabeth SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Elizabeth Sandercock
 in the 1851 Census.

The John StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about John Stanbury baptised in 1809 married Nancy HoneyClick to open a popup showing details about Nancy Honey at Warbstow, Cornwall on 29 March, 1838. Their wedding certificate shows both signed with an x, and the father of John StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about John Stanbury is named as William StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about William Stanbury. John and Nancy StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about John and Nancy Stanbury had two children in Cornwall, a daughter MaryClick to open a popup showing details about Mary Stanbury born about 1842, and a son Thomas ProutClick to open a popup showing details about Thomas Prout Stanbury born at Raven St. Clether on 7 May, 1847. This family came out to South Australia in 1849 on the ship “Cheapside", and settled in the vicinity of Mount Pleasant, east of Adelaide.

The use of the name Prout given to John StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about John Stanbury‘s son as a second name is especially interesting. It is believed that Elizabeth SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Elizabeth Sandercock
 had a sister who married a Mr ProutClick to open a popup showing details about Mr Prout in Cornwall. The couple were well-to-do but childless, and eventually were supposed to have gone to live in London. Somehow, though the sisters could not write, Elizabeth SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Elizabeth Sandercock
 and Mrs ProutClick to open a popup showing details about Mrs Prout kept up communication with each other after the Sandercocks left Cornwall in 1853. If John StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about John Stanbury was a brother of Elizabeth SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Elizabeth Sandercock
, it is possible that the name Prout was given to his son Thomas ProutClick to open a popup showing details about Thomas Prout Stanbury to please his other childless sister.

When the Sandercocks were living at Kenton Valley, the John StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about John Stanburys were not far away, at Tungkillo near Mount Pleasant and Birdwood. Was this a co-incidence? John StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about John Stanbury was listed in the South Australian Directory of 1868 as living "near Mount Torrens“, although he had purchased 53 acres of land in the Hundred of Tungkillo (Section 57) in 1857. Thomas ProutClick to open a popup showing details about Thomas Prout Stanbury himself owned or leased land on Sections 6550 and 6575 in the Hundred of Talunga (between the townships of Mount Torrens and Birdwood) in the 1870's.

John StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about John Stanbury died at Tungkillo on 8 February, 1875, aged 66 years. It seems possible that John StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about John Stanbury and Elizabeth SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Elizabeth Sandercock
 may have been brother and sister. (in the 1930‘s a Mr Tom Stanbury of Lobethal, a descendant of John StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about John Stanbury, mentioned this possibility to a daughter-in-law of John SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about John Sandercock
.) It seems probable that family contacts were not kept up and relationships forgotten after John StanburyClick to open a popup showing details about John Stanbury‘s death in 1875, when the Stanburys went to live in Victoria for some years.

In spite of recent research done to establish these and other details of relationships, we can be sure that Elizabeth SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Elizabeth Sandercock
's youngest son John SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about John Sandercock
, born in South Australia in 1859, did not know when his mother was born. He recorded all the known details of his parentage in a book, but only his mother's date of death was recorded for her. Why even her son John SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about John Sandercock
, who was living at Kenton Valley when Elizabeth SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Elizabeth Sandercock
 died in 1879, should not have known when she was born, is a mystery. The information about Richard SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about Richard Sandercock's date of birth is incorrect by one year; he was born in 1811, not 1812 as recorded by John SandercockClick to open a popup showing details about John Sandercock
.