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.
It should be noted that since the book was published over twenty years ago, that a lot of the material in the books have been superseeded by later research, some of which can ben seen at my complete Rootsweb database at Amanda Taylor's Genealogy.
From the outset the years during which John Boulton associated with the Ezzy Family seem to have been ones of dissatisfaction and unrest. Not that they were not for the most part, successful years, and the Family prospered compared to many around them in the Hawkesbury, who failed for one reason or another. Although, in most cases, this was due to the failure of crops, or else recurring floods, which caused the Hawkesbury to again rise in 1809, 1816 and 1817.
With the arrival of John Boulton into their lives, they seemed to develop a sudden desire to sell up their interests and possessions and return to England. So far as William Ezzy was concerned the 'desire' would appear to have been short-lived, and he soon settled down to farming again and developing other interests, but, John Boulton, however, seemed never to be content with his enforced removal to the Colony from England, and advertised over and over again that he was 'intending to leave the Colony'. Jane seems to have been a Town Dweller by choice rather than to opt for the rural existence in the Hawkesbury. She appeared to enjoy trading in her own right, and as she died possessed of property which she left to her two youngest daughters, it would appear she prospered, and possibly had no desire to return to the land of her birth.
In 1811 a full general Muster was held of the inhabitants of the Colony, and it showed that the possessions and general wellbeing of the Ezzy Family had increased. The Family now owned a considerable number of livestock, which included, 2 male horses, 2 female horses, 2 cows, 1 oxen, 13 male sheep, 27 female sheep, 8 male hogs and 11 female hogs. So far as the cultivation of his land was concerned, William had 15 acres under wheat, 4 acres of barley, a half acre in orchard and garden, 134 & 1/2 acres pastured and 5 acres fallow, making a total acreage of 159. Somewhere 'grandfather' had 'lost' an acre -- the two grants should have totalled 160. He was also carrying 5 bushels of wheat in hand.
In March 1811 William Ezzy received a Licence to sell Beer in Sydney, which possibly implies that the Family had now acquired a huse in the Town as well as the Hawkesbury.
In April, one month later, John Boulton placed an advertisement in the Sydney Gazette, advertising that he was about to depart the Colony and all persons who had any claims or demands on him should present same for payment immediately, and that all those who stood indebted to him should step forward and settle their accounts without delay. At this time no date of departure was mention, but by October, it would seem he had persuaded William to accompany him as the following three advertisements appeared in the Sydney Gazette dated 26/10/1811--
"To be sold by Private Contract, a
capital Dwelling House and Farm
with out house and every suitable
convenience, the property and
present residence of Messrs Boulton
and Ezzey (sic) situate at Windsor
Likewise Fourteen Head of Horned
Cattle, Seven Head of Horses and
Mares, a Cart, Chaise with Harness
complete; two Harrows, and every
other utensil fit for agriculture,
a quantity of household furniture,
and a number of Pigs. Application
to be made to Messrs Boulton and
Ezzey (sic) on the premises.
To be sold by Private Contract, a
Capital Stock Farm of 130 acres,
the property of William Ezzey (sic),
50 acres of which are fenced in.
Applications to be made to the Pro-
prietor on the farm.
And still in the same issue--
All Persons having any Claims or
Demands on the abovementioned
Messrs Boulton and Ezzey (sic)are
requested to present the same for
Payment by the 25th March, 1812,
they being about to depart the
Colony; and all those who stand
indebted to the said Messrs Boul-
ton and Ezzey (sic) are requested
to settle their accounts on or
before that period."
The second farm mentioned here, the one containing 130 acres, definitely refers to the Grant given to William Ezzy in 1804. It is referred to as a stock farm and as there is no mention of a dewelling, or buildings of any kind, I am of the opinion that as late as 1811 there was still no permanent dwelling on this Grant, and that the Family were still living either of Jane's original Grant, on the Cornwallis Flats or else on another 25 acre holding which they farmed under the name of Boulton and Ezzy's Farm. This farm, I believe was a 25 acre Grand made to William Goodhall in 1796, and I also believe that this property is the one referred to in item one in the foregoing advertisements. My reasons for this assumption will become clearer as this chapter develops. As Jane's 30 acre Grant was not advertised at this time we must assume that either it was Jane Ezzy's intention to remain in the Colony, or else it was at that particular time leased to another person. The Title, however was still in the name of Ezzy, and remained so until after she died.
Within less than a month the partners had changed their minds and they signed a legal agreement on 18/11/1811 to trade and farm in partnership. It was in the names of John Boulton and William Ezzy and made no mention of Jane being involved at this time, although future developments were to show that Jane and Boulton owned the land that was to be farmed.
The following year saw the formation of Boulton and Co., a business partnership formed between John Boulton and Jane Ezzy. We have not found a record of the partnership being put in writing the same as that existing between William Ezzy and John Boulton, however Boulton and Co. purchased a property, legally, in both names, at No. 49, George Street, Sydney. The property was purchased from a Mr. John.....(name unfortunately illegible), and there was no mention of the name of William Ezzy, just John Boulton and Jane Ezzy. On the 16th May, they placed an advertisement in the Sydney Gazette, advertising their new venture --
"To the Settler of Windsor, Richmond
and Places in the District of
Hawkesbury, etc., etc. -- Boulton
and Co. have taken a house, No. 49,
George-Street, Sydney, which they
have opened for Accomodation of
their Friends, and Travellers in
general, who may depend on being
furnished with good Beds and Vic-
tuals, and the greatest Care taken
of their Horses and Cattle. N.B.
Boulton and Co. have a few Hogs-
heads of excellent Wine for Sale
by the Hogshead. And for the
Accomodation of Settlers will
receive approved Colonial Currency
or Pigs in Payment."
The mind indeed boggles at the thought of taking along a couple of pigs to pay for one's accomodation for the night!
Where was No. 49 George Street? Several years later, when it was being advertised for sale it was described as 'being on the corner of the spaceous avenue leading into Hyde Park'. Governor Macquarie had laid out the main streets of our City in the early years of his administration, and given them the names they bear to-day. He had also set aside the area known as Hyde Park, both then and now. The numbering of George Street starts at the Northern end, or Circular Quay area, so at that time No. 49 would have been on the extremities of the town, in what was more or less the markets area, an ideal place to have an over-night stopping place for travellers.
The numbering of George Street, like any other inner City Street, has changed over the years with the numbering and renumbering of the allotments as they quickly changed hands, and even in the very early years the original larger grants were quickly divided again and again. However, the first definite site-number we were able to establish in this area of George Street was in 1844 when No.51 the "St.Andrews" Hotel was a little south of Park Street. At the time Boulton and Co. established this overnight stopping place. St.Andrew's Cathederal had not been built. (The foundation stone was not laid by Governor Macquarie until 1819 and the Church itself built some time later. The Cemetery where Louisa lay buried was still on the Town Hall site). Therefore, if No.49 was a corner site, it had to be on either, one of the corners of Park and George Streets, or else on the corner of Bathurst and George Streets. However, I rather opt for the former as reading a description of Sydney Town as the Rev. James T. Hassell recalls it in his memoirs entitled "In Old Australia" he states --"I recall we travelled the road from Parramatta without seeing a house, except the half-way Inn at Homebush, and nearer Sydney, the residences of Mr. Underwood of Ashfield, Dr. Ramsay of Dobroyd, Mr. Robert Johnson of Annandale, and a few slab huts on the roadside. The old toll-bar stood in front of the Benevolent Asylum, built in 1819 and a low shanty public house and blacksmith's shop on the rise of the Brickfield Hill was all that was to be seen of Sydney, before we came to the Cemetery, adjoining the site of what is now St.Andrew's Cathedral." The journey Rev. Hassell was describing took place about 1830, and as he states that there was nothing of substance before the Cathedral site, I feel that the Accomodation House had to be North of this point. Park Street, or course does lead up to Hyde Parke, that being the reason for it's name. At that time, also, it did indeed 'lead up to the Park' id did not bisect it as it does now.
The partnership of Boulton and Jane had apparently not at that time affected the partnership of Boulton and William, as a month later the following advertisement appeared in the Gazette--
"Strayed early in the year 1808, a Bay Colt, with black main and a small star in the forehead -- the legs black: Also a Bullock named Music, which got out of an Inclosure (sic) near Windsor, with broad arrow burnt on one of the shoulders. Any stockman or other person giving information whereby they may be recovered, to Messrs Bolton (sic) and Ezzy, George-street, Sydney, will receive Five Guineas Reward for each."
One wonders why it took four years to advertise the missing bay colt? However, it does leave one with the thought that perhaps the persons of John Boulton and William Ezzy became partners long before we otherwise thought them to.
The premises at 49 George Street prospered for less than five months before John Boulton was again before the Court on a charge of violent assault. On 3rd October, John Boulton, a freeman, was charged by Edward Smith Hall of Sydney, Gentleman, with violently assaulting him in the streets of Sydney. I think it should be explained here the differences between the terms 'freeman' and 'gentleman'. Those who came to the Colony of their own free will, were very quick to adopt the term 'Gentleman' to distinguish themselves from those whose arrival hd been somewhat of an enforced nature. The term 'freeman' indicted that John was a man with record, an ex-convict who was free by servitude.
Edward Smith Hall, after having been sworn, had stated that as he had been walking at sunset from George Street to York Street with his wife, Mrs. Hall, he had heard someone calling out behind him. He heard his name called out and had seen Boulton at some yards distance. Mr. Hall stated that Boulton had beckoned to him to come over to him, and that he had refused. Boulton had then coome over close to him and asked him if he had said that certain goods that had been stolen from a place called the rookery, had been purchased by him, (Boulton). Mr. Hall had told Boulton that he had neither said or thought anything of the kind, to which Boulton had replied in an insulting kind of way, that it was just as well that he had not done so, otherwise he would have thrashed him, or words to that effect. Mr. Hall asserted that he had seen that Boulton was in liquor so had turned around abruptly and left him. Mr. Hall said, however, that Boulton had followed after him shouting more threats. He said he could not clearly remember what had happened next, as he was much agitated, but he thought he remembered Boulton catching hold of him, at which time Mr. Hall had told him that he was an insolent fellow, and that if he did not go about his business he would have him taken up (arrested). Boulton had become much enraged and had asked Mr. Hall what he meant by 'fellow' because he (Boulton) was a free man and just as good as him (Hall). He boasted that he owned more property than Mr. Hall did anyway, and that if Hall did not watch himself he would thrash him and Mrs. Hall too. Boulton again had tried to grab hold of Mr. Hall, Mrs. Hall, much alarmed, fled to the house of a Mr. Spuds, some 100 yards distant. Boulton had followed him to Mr. Spud;s house, and as he was entering the door, Boulton had pushed past him into the room, and then turning had said to him -- "just because you are in a friend's house I suppose you think I cannot thrash you?". Mr. Hall answered him that he had nothing to say, and that if he did not leave he would have him taken up, whereupon Boulton grabbed at him again and tore his shirt front. Mrs. Hall arrived on the scene at this time with some workmen and they had grabbed Boulton and held onto him whilst Mr. Hall had gone to fetch a constable. As a result a warrant was sworn out for Boulton's arrest, and he was taken to jail.
Upon the evidence presented by Mr. Hall, John Boulton was ordered to stand accused for his assault at the first Court of Criminal Jurisdiction to answere to an injunction to be filed against him by the Judge Advocte for his assault.
Although Boulton was probably fined for this drunken assault upon the person of Mr. Hall, he obviously did not go to jail for any length of time, but obviously soured with his Colonial life, once again decided to quit the Colony of New South Wales, and on 19/12/1812, he was advertising his intention in the Gazette.
Advertised for sale as 'one half of that valuable farm situate in the Township of Windsor, known by the name of Boulton and Ezzy's Farm, containing 30 acres of land, more or less with an excellent Dwelling House, Kitchen and Barn, likewise half the horned Cattle consisting of 8 milch chows of the English Breed and two young Mares -- Also half that valuable House and Premises, situate No. 49 George-street, Sydney. Payment to be made in Sterling money for which Three Months Credit will be given, for further particulars apply to Mr. John Boulton, 49 George-street, Sydney.'
Less than a month later a notice appeared in the Gazette stating that the partnership of William Ezzy and John Boulton was disolved, and each disclaiming any debts that might be incurred by the other. This may not necessarily have meant that the partners had quarrelled at that time, but may just have been the Legal way of winding up the partnership prior to Boulton leaving the Colony. On the other hand it may have been that Boulton's latest brush with the Law had soured William.
On the 5th February, 1813, John Boulton once again advertised that it was his intention to leave, and that he would be sailing on the "Minstrel" at the end of March. The sailing of the vessel was delayed until mid-July, but obviously Mr. Boulton was not amongst it's passengers, as in the July and October issues of the Gazette was an advertisement to the effect that 'John Boulton and Francis Whiting, beg leave to acquaint bakers and others, that they can have wheat ground at their Mill at Windmill Point, at One Shilling and Three-pence ber Bushel. All orders will be punctuously attended to, and discharged without Delay. No less than two Bushels can be received.
Mr. Boulton's new enterprises was situated at what we know to-day as Miller's Point. Before the convicts hacked out the Argyle Cut in the Rocks area of Sydney, the only route from Sydney Cove to Cockle Bay (Darling Hrbour), was down George Street, round Dawes Point and up Windmill Row. (later named Windmill Street). The windmills themselves were sited close to the Point, so that even the slightest breeze from the Harbour would catch the sails and turn the millstones to grind the Settlement's grain. The mill foremost on the Point was owned by a Miller, named Jack Leighton, in fact he had several Mills, and originally the Point became known as Jack the Miller's Point, later shortened to Miller's Point. Unfortunately, Jack, like our friend John Boulton, was too fond of spirituous liquors, and one Sydney Gazette in the year 1826, reported a Coronial Inquest "on the body of John Leighton, the proprietor of a flour Mill in Cockle Bay, who came to his death in consequence of a fall of upwards of 20 feet from a ladder while in a state of intoxication. Verdict, Accidental death."
Between the two advertisements relating to the Milling venture, Jane Ezzy purchased from Boulton his half-share of No. 49 George Street, for the sum of 10 pounds.
In 1814 the next full Muster was taken in the Colony, William was credited with having 15 acres of wheat, 4 acres barley, 1/2 acre orchard and garden, 136 bushels potatoes, 5 acres fallow and a total acreage of 150 (10 acres missing this time). 2 male and 2 female horses, 2 cows, 1 oxen, 27 female and 13 male goates -- Emloying one convict, and had a wife and 6 children. (James had already left the Colony, and in any case woud have been listed in his own right as an adult, had he still been there). Jane's entry reads 'free wife of William Ezzy "Royal Admiral", off stores, 6 children off stores, lives intermittently with John Boulton, Publican, Sydney. John Boulton's entry said he was a Sydney Publican, off stores, and that he had arrived on the "Hillsborough". No mention was made in any of the Muster entries of No. 49 George Street, or of Boulton and Ezzy's Farm, although the latter was possibly leased to other persons at that time, and the Musters only recorded land that was being worked by the individual, and not land that he owoned and had leased out to another person for him to work.
Somewhere about this time Jane had sold No. 49 George Street back to John Boulton, as further references to it after that period refer to him as the sole owner. John Boulton had also become the proprietor of the "Swan and Two Necks" in Cambridge Street, The Rocks, which was obviously the place of Jane's 'intermittent residence'.
In January 1815 Boulton advertised the property at No. 49 George Street for sale and the advertisement in the Gazette made it sound a quite prosperous concern--
"The valuable and extensive Premises situate No. 49 George-stree, Corner of the spacious Avenue, and leading into Hyde Parke and lately occupied by Mr. John Boulton. The Ground attached is one of the most ample allotments, with a capital well, and rich soil. It's situation for business is truly eligible, from it's neighbourhood and excellent position; The house is sufficiently roomy for business and family accomodation, and capable of very great improvement. Should a purchaser offer by Private Contract, they will be treated with on application to Mr. P. Cullen, Harrington Street, or J. Boulton, Swan and Two Necks, Cambridge St., Sydney."
The property was finally sold on 25th February 1815 to a Mr. George Chantres for the sum of 200 pounds. John Boulton also received a renewal of his beer licence at some time during this year.
From July to December, 1815 a battled raged between William and John Boulton over the ownership of Boulton and Ezzy's Farm at the Hawkesbury, and references to it appeared several times in the press.
The first advertisement inserted by John Boulton on 22nd July, cautioned the public against entering into an agreement to rent, purchase, or have anything to do with the farm and premises known as Boulton and Ezzys, as he was the sole owner of the farm and that he had a tenant living on the farm under his authority. He also warned that any person who trespassed on the property by occupying any part of it, or pulled down any buildings would be prosecuted. Also, that any person who entered into an agreement to purchase or rent the farm would be prevented from building on it, or reaping any crops that they might sow. From records held at the Registrar General's Department relating to the dealings in land we find that on 9/7/1815 John Boulton had let a farm at Windsor to Anthony Best for 50 pounds per annum, half to be paid in grain at market price and the rest in currency. The lease of the frm was to run for five years. The name of the farm was "Goodall's Farm". This is the one and only time the farm is referred to as anything other than Ezzy and Boulton's Farm. Earlier in 1815, James Darbyshire was leasing the farm but at this time the lease was said to be of Ezzy and Boulton's Farm.
On the 19th August William replied to this advertisement by inserting one of his own, claiming that a Mr. John Jones had been allowed to rent the premises and farm for a term of five years at a yearly rental of 10 pounds. He also stated that he, William Ezzy, was the sole owner of the property and premises and finished by saying that "all persons are hereby strictly cautioned against molesting or in any way disturbing my said tenant in the peacable possession of the forementioned farm and premises upon pain of being dealt with according to Law.
Two weeks later on 2/9/1815 John Boulton replied to William's claim by saying that William Ezzy had imposed upon John Jones by renting him the farm, because he had not the right to do so as he was not the oner of the farm. Boulton claimed that the sole exclusive right of ownership vested in him alone. That he had the Title Deeds and that he intended taking the case to the next sitting of the Court of Civil Jurisdiction. I, however, think John Boulton did not have the Deeds at that time, I think that it ws these Deeds that Jane took with her when she left after Mary's death, the following month.
In any case, before John Boulton's threat could be put to the test, he land back in the Courts as a prisoner. About the 20th September, John Boulton was called to the Court as a witness to the trial of one John Menslow who had been convicted of stealing a pig, the property of John Webb.
It would appear, that after John Boulton had given his evidence John Webb had approached him and accused him of giving galse testimony whilst under oath. John Boulton had immediately raised his fist and struck Webb as hard as he could in the face, causing hiim to cry out. Mr. Boulton was immediately taken into custody and himself brought before the Court on the following day.
John Boulton pleaded not guilty. The Judge Advocate indicated hat he did to some extent blame John Webb for challenging the authenticity of Boulton's testimony this way, but he also admonished Boulton for his own actions, saying that he should have adopted the normal and acceptable course of action for a dispute of this kind. An independent witness was called, a Mr. Charles Gray, who deposed that he had been present at the previous day's trial and that Mr. Webb had called Mr. Boulton, either a false swearing scoundrel, or a fales swearing rascal, he could not remember which for sure, to which Mr. Boulton had replied that he would knock him down and had proceeded to endeavour to do so. Boulton had said afterwards in front of witnesses that Webb had challenged him with perjury and he would strike the Judge, himself, or any other person that made claim like that! The witnesses said that Boulton had appeared to have been in a great passion.
Francis Whiting, Boulton's partner in the milling business, was also present in the Court as a witness and he indicated that he had herd Webb call Boulton a false swearing rascal or scoundrel and that he had been moving his head from side to side at the same time as if to aggravate him.
The Jury retired and the members returned to their seats in about twenty minutes and pronounced the prisoner guilty of the charge that had ben preferred against him. The Judge Advocate now informed the prisoner that with a view of impressing on the Public mind the strict necessity that existed of mainting order in the Courts of Justice, it had been thought necessary, before hw as removed from the Bar, to prouounce such a sentence upon him, as might be hoped to operate upon his own future conduct and be at the same time a warning to others against similar acts of outrage and irreverance. He criticised Boulton for giving way to his unruly passions, which were in contempt of Court in the immediate exercise of it's most serious founctions. By the rule of Common Law the offence of striking in a Court of Justice was a captal-felony, which could lead to himi being imprisoned, for the full term of his natural life. The Judge Advocate felt that his actions demaned a severe penalty and it was therefore adjudged that he should be imprisoned in the gaol at Parramatta for a space of twelve caldendar months, pay a fine of 50 pounds, and remain in prison for a further period until the fine was paid should it still be outstanding at the end of the twelve caldendar months.
On the same day as this action was taking place in the Court, the Provost Mashal, William Gore, inserted a notice in the Gazette, stating that he would cause to be put up for Public Auction a half share of the property known as Ezzy and Boulton's Farm at the Hawkesbury unless a debt was paid to a Mr. Edward Eager. He further stated that the farm contained about 25 acres of arable land and had a dwelling on it. Mr. Boulton had until 7th October to finalise the debt and thus prevent the auction taking place.
It is obvious from this last advertisement, that he Provst Marshal thought John Boulton was at least part-owner of the farm.
On the 17th October Jane Ezzy was summoned to Windsor to attend the funeral of her second surviving daughter, Mary, who had been struck and killed by lightning whilst ironing her dress for her wedding which was to have taken place on the 21st. Details of the tragic death of this sixteen-year-old daughter of William and Jane, are described in Mary's own particular chapter.
On the 26th October, two notices appeared in the Gazette, one inserted by William Ezzy and the other by his son, John. William cautioned the public against giving credit to his wife, Jane Ezzy who had absented herself from his home and saying that he would not be responsible for her debts. The wording of William's advertisement makes it quite clear that he believes himself to be the rightful owner of Ezzy and Boulton's farm now that the partnership with Boulton had ben dissolved. He obviously feels that as Jane, his wife owned the land, itself, then he as her husband, should now be the rightful owner. Jane, on the other hand, from the wording of her advertisement, makes it likewise, quite clear, that she purchased the land in her own right without any assistance from her husband, and that she intended to keep it. Had this been Jane's original grant of 30 acres that was under dispute, I do not feel it would have been argued by her in this way, as the 30 acres was a free Grant, she did not purchase it as the advertisement states. The three Advertisements were as follows--
The public are cautioned against purchasing, taking any manner of security on, or entering into any agreement with my Mother Jane Ezzey (sic) for a Moiety or Half that Farm and Premises situate at Windsor known by the name of Bolton (sic) and Essey's farm (sic), she having possessed herself of the Deeds thereof contrary to the wish of me the Undersigned, and my Father, William Ezzey (sic) of Windsor who has duly conveyed to me by a written dndorsement, a due Right and Title to the said Land and Premises; therefore I will not acknowledge nor accede to any Contract or Agreement she may make regarding. it. - John Ezzey, Windsor, October 23rd, 1816.
And -
Whereas my wife, Jane Ezzey (sic) has absented herself from my House at Mulgrave Place; The Inhabitants are hereby cautioned against giving credit to the said Jane Ezzey (sic) on any Account, after this Notice, and I will not be responsible for any Debts she may contract -- William Ezzey (sic), Mulgrave Place, October 24th, 1816.
And -
I the Undersigned, in Reply to a Notice that appeared in the Gazette of last week signed "William Ezzy" wherein the said William Ezzy had wontonly and maliciously attempted to injure my Credit in the Colony. I hereby call to the Rememberance of all with whom I have had Dealings in Trade, that I always received, paid and contracted as a 'feme sole' note as the wife of the aforesaid William Ezzy; who has in consequence no claim upon me whatsoever, and no right whatsoever with any Part of my Business; and in Answere to another Advertisement in the same Gazette signed "John Ezzy" cautioning Persons against convenanting with me for the Purchase of a Moiety of a Farm near Windsor, called Bolton (sic) and Ezzy's Farm, I the undersigned do hereby positively aver, that the Purchase of the Whole of the said Farm was originally made by me, and it is my Intention more fully to make appear at the Opening of the Supreme Court -- Jane Ezzy
This third notice appeared in the Sydney Gazette dated the 2nd November, 1818, and was a far more stylishly displayed advertisement.
No further mention was made of the farm, either by the members of the Family placing advertisements in the Gazette, or by the matter coming before the Court, so far as the ownership was concerned. However, the Ezzy and Boulton Farm was again mentioned when the matter of John Boulton's unpaid debts came before the Court during the month of Novemember. The Provost Marshal did issue an order at this time causing the goods and chattels of John Boulton to be sold to pay his debts and as a result a half-share of the said farm was sold to one, John Jones. At that time it was stated before the Court that the farm was the property of John Boulton late of Sydney (he was residing in Parramatta, a guest of the Governor) and William Ezzy of Windsor. So once again we see that irrespective of what Jane Ezzy's opinion was as to her rights, the Law, at that time had other ideas. Whilst she was the wife of William Ezzy, she and everything she possessed belonged to him. One can imagine that this state of affairs must have infuriated her.
However, the very fact that half this Farm was sold to John Jones, thus dividing the holding into two portions, makes me quite sure that it was a separate portion, and not the Grant given to Jane Ezzy in 1797 by Governor Hunter, as the records held by the Registrar show that this Grant was intact and undivided at the time of Jane Ezzy's death.
Nothing further was heard of either John Boulton or Jane Ezzy for a period of twelve months, but of course, Boulton was in Parramatta Jail. Some weeks after his release, on the 1st November, 1817, John Boulton inserted an advertisement in the Gazette, making a claim on the Estate of the late James William Ezzy, saying that he was a Creditor of the said Estate and that if members of the Family did not Administer the Estate, then he would apply for Letters of Administration himself to do so. As James William did noto appear in the 1814 Muster we knew he had left the Colony, as he had stated it had been his intention to in 1814, and now here in John Boulton's advertisement is the first and only indication we have of his decease. No further mention was made of the Estate of the late James William Ezzy, and there is no record at the Probate Office, of it having been administered.
In the 1814 Muster the only John Boulton or J. Boulton in the Colony (irrespective of whether it was spelt Bolton or Boulton) was the one who came no the "Hillsborough" and therefore any references to a person of this name could be attributed to him with certainty. From 1814 onwards, however, several other persons of the same initial, came into the Colony and we could no longer be as certain. However, the following notice appeared in the Gazette in September 1818, and possibly still be 'our' Mr. John Boulton --
[Note : The New South Wales Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages Index shows a John Bolton fathering a daughter Jemima, christened in 1805 :V1805129 4A/1805 BOLTON JEMIMA JOHN HANNAH
"By Mr. Lord, at his Warehouse in Macquarie Place, on Thursday the 8th October, next at one o'clock -- That pleasantly situated HOUSE AND PREMISES in Charlotte Square, on a free Grant and known by the name of Boulton's House; the building is 80 feet in Front, and two Stories comprising several spacious lofty Rooms and a Hall, with a Verandah supported by eight columns. Also a quantity of Stone in a prepared state for finishing the stable, Coach-house, etc. -- Further particulars will be made known on Application to Mr. Lord, Macquarie Place or Mr. While, O'Connell Street."
As to whether or not this was John Boulton's home or not we shall never be totally certain, but it was in that part of the Town where he carried on his business of a Publican under the sign of "The Swan and Two Necks", and also close-by where he owned the Mill. Chrlotte Square was more-or-less where Grosvenor Street is to-day. St.Phillip's Church was on a site on the opposite side of York Street, to that on which it stands to-day. This site now forms Lang Park. Charlotte Square led up to it from George Street. Cambridge Street where "The Swan and Two Necks" carried on it's trade and where Jane Ezzy is later knowon to have owned to houses, was only a very short distance away.
On the 7th August 1819 two notices appeared in the Gazette which again may or may not have been 'our' John Boulton. Had the second one appeared on it's own, we would have said definitely it was, however, as they must both have been referring to one and the same person, I am somewhat cautious, as there was never any indication that John Boulton was a 'grower of meat'. However, his choice of occupations since his arrival in the Colony, had been varied -- painter, glazier, farmer, publican, miller, convict -- so why not grazier?
The first advertisement was placed there by the Government listing the persons who had tendered supplies of fresh meat for use of his Majesty's Stores and it was sated that on September 4th, Mr. John Boulton had supplied a quantity of 3,000lbs from his residence at Parramatta. It must also be considered that he need not necessarily have 'grown' it, he could have been acting as an agent or go-between, and have purchased the animals from favious farmers and then sold them to the Government Stores at a profit. That would sound more like 'our' Mr. Boulton!.
The second notice was an all to familiar one that w had seen so often in the past -- Mr. John Boulton of Parramatta intended to leave the Colony in December and requested all Claims and Demands to be immediately presented for payment.
The question is "did he go?" and if not, "what happened to him?" The 1828 Census lists one possibility for him still being in the Colony. This one is listed as 'Bolton' and not 'Boulton'. He was aged 53 and working as a labourer to Edward Field at Evan. No ship, or status was unfortunately mentioned. Whilst the age of 53 is reasonably near enough to be the John Boulton who came on the "Hillsborough" (he should have been 50 based on his age at arrival), somehow the thought of John Boulton being a labourer in the employ of another does not quite ring true. Except for the times when he was 'a guest of the Government', he had always been self-employed since arrival in the Colony. I feel more inclined to say he left the Colony in 1819 - FINALLY!
Had he remained in the Colony there should have been some record of his subsequent death. There is no record of a John Bolton or Boulton being buried in the Colony pre-1856, of anywhere near the correct age, they are either much too young or much to old to ve be considered as being compatible. I will admit that there are many 'unknowns' buried in this period. Some drowned in the Harbour or the rivers, some were killed by the natives or died from expsure and were unidentifiable when discovered. Certainly a man of known violent leanings, as was 'our' Mr. Boulton, could have ended up a 'John Doe'. Unfortunately it is something we shall never know for sure, however, I feel myself that he did finally leave the Colony, leaving the Founder Members of the Ezzy Family estranged, possibly for the remainder of their lives -- William farming in the Hawkesbury and Jane trading as a Publican in the Town of Sydney.
So it would appear that the Ezzy Family became divided over the ownership of this twenty-five acre Grant known formerly as Goodhall's Farm. This irregularly shoped holding, following the line of Rickaby Creek, is situated, more-or-less, at the half-way point between the two original Ezzy Grants made to William and Jane Ezzy, and on the opposite bank of the Creek to the Grant made to Henry Lamb. It is portion No. 82. Thse for Grants, can all be seen, on the section of the Parish Map of Windsor, reproduced on page No.32.
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