Honora Falsy

Edit

Summary

Born
Jan 1806
Conviction
Arson
Departure
Feb 1836
Arrival
Jun 1836
Death
Unknown
Step 0 of 0

Personal Information

Name: Honora Falsy
Gender: Female
Born: 1st Jan 1806
Death: Unknown
Age at death: Unknown
Occupation: Dairymaid
Aliases: Fallahy

Crime

Crime: Arson
Convicted at: Ireland, Clare
Sentence term: 7 years

Voyage

Departed: 19th Feb 1836
Arrival: 9th Jun 1836
Place of Arrival: New South Wales

Transportation

Honora Falsy was transported on the Thomas Harrison, departing 19th Feb 1836 and arriving 9th Jun 1836 with 112 passengers.

Thomas HarrisonThomas Harrison (generic)

References

Primary SourceNew South Wales, Australia, Convict Indents, 1788-1842 Annotated Printed Indentures 1836

Claims

No one has claimed Honora Falsy yet.

Photos

Become a supporter to manage photos for this convict.

No photos have been added for Honora Falsy.

Convict Notes

Tony Beale avatar
116
on 16th September 2020

From Co Clare Ireland single catholic who could not read or write 4' 11" ruddy complexion Brown hair and hazel eyes. New South Wales, Australia, Registers of Convicts' Applications to Marry, 1826-1851 Granted 26/4/1837 Honora Falsy 31 band per ship Thomas Harrison she stated she received life to marry Edmond Sexton 38 per ship Boyne life TOL New South Wales, Australia, Certificates of Freedom, 27/7/1843 cert no 43/1196 The Goulburn Herald and County of Argyle Advertiser (NSW : 1848 - 1859) View title info Sat 28 Dec 1850 Page 1 SYDNEY NEWS. SYDNEY NEWS. CURIOUS CHARGE OF STEALING.--A man named " Feeney was on Saturday se'nnight given into the custody of police sergeant M'Donnell, charged by Edmuind Sexton with having stolen a quantity of wearing apparel, bed and table linen, of the. value of £10, and £18 in money. The case came on for hearing before Mr. Holden, and after several remands was on Friday (Dec. 20,) brought to a conclusion, and the prisoner was discharged from custody. It appeared that some months ago the prisoner lodged at Sexton's house, but the latter, having arrived at the conclusion that Feeney was on too intimate terms with his wife, about two months since ordered him away. About a month afterwards Mrs. Sexton left her husband, immediately after which, on an examination of the drawers, &c., he found that they had been completely emptied of their contents; and about £25 which he had some time previously delivered to her with instructions to bank it, but which he found she had not done at all events not in his name. He did not know where she had gone until a day or so before his application for a warrant for the prisoner, when he was informed that she was living with him at a Mrs.Jones's, in Windmill-street; on proceeding to the place he found his wife and the prisoner, and a large quantity of linen, &c., which he claimed as his property. Feeney admitted that nothing there belonged to him, while Mrs. Sexton claimed all as her own. From the evidence of Mrs. Jones it appeared that Mrs. Sexton took the room of her, and always paid the rent, as well as for supplies which she purchased out of the shop; she said when taking the room that her husband would not be in Sydney for some days, and four or five days afterwards Feeney came, who was introduced by Mrs. Sexton as her husband; one night Mrs. Sexton brought a large bundle of clothes to her house on her head Feeney was not there then. Mr Miller, accountant at the Saving's Bank, deposed that on the 15th July last the prisoner drew out of the bank the sum of .018is. 6d., which had been deposited in the name of Honora Fallahy, who he said was his wife; witness did not know whether the money was deposited by Mrs. Sexton in that name. A witness named Hay man deposed to having seen Mrs. Sexton come out of her husband's house about eight o'clock one night, with a large bundle of clothes, which after carrying about one hundred yards she gave the prisoner. Mr. Nichols, who with Mr. Little conducted the prosecution, submitted he had made out a clear case of larceny, and quoted a case, decided in London in the month of June last, wherein it was laid down that a larceny is committed where an adulterer was engaged jointly with the wife in taking her husband's goods, and subsequently appropriating them to his own purposes. Mr. Brenan, for the defence, quoted cases to show that an adulterer could not be indicted for stealing the goods of a husband even when they were taken to his lodgings by the wife ; how much less here, where it was clearly in evidence that the goods were taken from the husband's house by the wife as well as to her own lodgings-for it was in evidence that she and not the prisoner took the apartment and paid the expenses. He contended that there was not a single point on which his worship would be warranted in sending the prisoner to a jury. Mr. Brenan was about to speak in reference to the money drawn from the bank, when his worship intimated that it was perfectly unnecessary, as that transaction was long anterior to the date of the woman's leaving her husband's residence. After some consideration Mr.Holden said he did not consider that such a case had been made out as would authorise the committal of the prisoner, and he therefore discharged him.