The Six Wives of Captain Kearney Part Three: The Courtroom Bride

My previous posts The Six Wives of Captain Kearney and The Six Wives of Captain Kearney Part Two: The Kindly Gael's Daughter covered my exploration of the first two wives of Richard Adderley Kearney. This post turns to the woman at the centre of the bigamy courtroom drama, my own ancestor Mary Reeves Rainsford. It feels different to write about Mary because I am part of her story - however many generations removed. But as with Elizabeth and Jane, I didn’t begin with a clear picture of who Mary was. I knew her only as the woman whose marriage led to a bigamy conviction and whose child led to me.

I found out about Mary Reeves Rainsford and the bigamy trial at the same time. A few years ago, I started to research my family history, and my uncle David sent me what he had. Central to his materials was, of course, the bigamy trial of Richard Adderley Kearney and the role played by his supposed second wife. In fact, the very first thing I read about with respect to my line was the following newspaper article.

The Sydney Morning Herald - Thursday June 6, 1878

There is so much to take in from this article that I missed several important details until I had read it a number of times. The facts of the case were: Richard Adderley Kearney married Mary Reeves Rainsford on May 7, 1878. A brother of Mary (guessing which one will become a favourite hobby of mine over the years), being "strongly averse to the marriage, as he entertained great objections to the prisoner personally" instigated the prosecution against Richard Adderley Kearney. From the article, it appears that this brother's testimony was that Richard and Mary met on the ship the City of Grafton, where presumably they got along like a house on fire. It’s unclear exactly when or how Richard and Mary met, but if it was indeed aboard the City of Grafton, it must have been on one of its regular coastal trips between Sydney and Grafton, rather than on its transoceanic voyage from Glasgow, which carried no passengers. 

At the time of the marriage, Mary was said to be aware of Richard's first wife (Elizabeth Gilpin) and knew them to be separated. 

This snippet already tells us something interesting about Mary. Unlike Elizabeth and Jane, Mary wasn't entirely deceived by Richard. She chose a complicated man with a messy past, likely because she fell for him quickly and wanted to believe his version of events. That alone makes her unconventional. This was hardly the standard matrimonial path for a woman of the time. She seems to have defied her family, or at least one of her brothers, in going through with the marriage. 

The timeline makes that defiance even starker. Richard married Mary on May 7, 1878. The White Cloud arrived in Sydney Harbour on Monday, May 30th, and he was arrested as soon as the ship arrived back. Which means Mary’s brother had to act almost immediately after the wedding - filing a complaint, prompting an investigation, and obtaining a warrant - all while Richard was still at sea. It would have taken resolve, resources, and conviction.

Mary must have known how deeply her brother objected. She married Richard anyway. 

Sydney Morning Herald - Friday May 31, 1878

It's not the only time Mary's voice emerges strongly from the record. She gave trial testimony as well, which is later noted to be a mitigating factor in Richard's sentencing. The judge, in handing down the twelve months hard labour (three to be deducted for time served), noted that "the sentence would have been much heavier if it were not for the statements of the young lady with whom the prisoner had gone through the forms of marriage". While these newspaper articles gave me a glimpse of Mary, I wanted to learn more by exploring the family she came from. Parts of the story offer revealing insight into Mary and possible motivations for her later actions. 

Sydney Morning Herald - Saturday August 17, 1878

The Reeves Rainsford family

Mary was part of a very large and well-connected Anglo-Irish family that emigrated to Australia in July of 1865 on the British Peer. Her father bore the impressive moniker Patrick Persse Fitzpatrick Rainsford - although he was known as Persse - and was an attorney. After arriving in Australia, he applied to have his qualifications recognised in Australia. This was granted and he served as a clerk in the Supreme Court. 

Sydney Morning Herald, September 25, 1865

Persse's father Joseph Michael Rainsford was a Reverend from a very long-standing Irish family who could trace their heritage back to Canute and Edward the Confessor. He married Elizabeth Ryland who was a cousin of Viscount Lymington. Persse's great grandmother had been nephew of the Lord Mayor. Persse married a woman from another weel-to-do Anglo-Irish family, Catherine Reeves. But their union seems to have been scarcely less controversial than Mary's. 

According to family stories recorded by living Rainsford cousins in Australia, Catherina and Persse's romance was not looked upon with a kindly eye by Catherine's elderly father, Boles D'Arcy Reeves. He had raised her alone after the early death of her mother. He was wealthy, well born and had a cultivated taste, owning several paintings by the old masters. The Rainsfords were actually even better born and more well connected than Boles Reeves - Persse was encouraged to come to Australia by his kinsman Sir John Young, Governor of NSW (the connection was through Persse's mother Elizabeth FitzPatrick). Despite this, the elderly Boles Reeves forbade Catherine to marry. The highly spirited Catherine, however, was not minded to listen to her father, and at 21, ran away to be wed to Persse. To add to her defiance, she returned immediately to her father's home and sent up a manservant to announce the arrival of "Mr and Mrs Persse Rainsford".  

I can't help but think that this family legend may have played a role in Mary's own decision to defy her family and marry Richard, despite his obviously less than ideal circumstances. And if this sounds familiar, it is because it is almost the same story I uncovered about Elizabeth Gilpin's grandmother Jane Bradney. The women who married Richard it seems, were raised on stories of female defiance in love. I wonder if Mary wasn't just told her mother's story, but actively nourished on it as a part of her moral rearing. To pursue love at all costs might have become a sort of family motto for the Rainsford women.

Together, Persse and Catherina had eight children, although strangely a number of online trees completely omit my 2x great grandmother Mary and list only seven children. Considering her high-profile exposure in the bigamy case, it seems as though she would be hard to miss. Persse died suddenly on November 6, 1872, leaving "a large family to deplore his loss". The question of who stepped up to take the mantel of head of the family is one I have often mulled over, since we know that one of the Rainsford brothers played a central role in the bigamy case. But which one was it?

Sydney Morning Herald, November 7, 1872

Sydney Morning Herald, June 29, 1935

Which Brother Brought the Charge?

Introducing our suspects, the three oldest of the Rainsford brothers, all born before Mary Reeves Rainsford and to my mind, therefore the most likely.

1. Charles Davis Rainsford (1848-1920). On paper, he is a strong candidate. He became the head of the family after the untimely death of his father and would almost certainly taken that responsibility seriously. He worked in the Department of Justice like his father and younger brothers. He is an entirely rational candidate. And yet. He kept a low profile relative to his more prominent siblings. Aside from the entirely prosaic births, deaths and marriages announced to the paper, he barely features except when he is being quietly promoted. In 1878, he is a third clerk the Justice Department, not a particularly influential rank. Even his funeral notice has a reserved energy, reading "Mr Charles David Rainsford, who retired from the Justice Department about six years ago, after 40 years of service, died on Wednesday..." If it was Charles, then it doesn't seem like his was driven by fiery indignation, but more by dispassionate distaste for an illegal activity.
2. Persse Rainsford (1850-1939). Persse is my personal frontrunner. He had the most sustained and senior legal career of the Rainsford brothers. From the age of 20, he entered the service of the Supreme Court Department of Justice, progressing steadily from a third clerk in the Prothonotary’s Office (the court's chief administrative branch), to the Equity Office. Eventually he became a Clerk of the Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Court just over a decade after the bigamy charge against Richard. I can't help wondering whether he was drawn that that final appointment because of his experience with his sister. By 1878, Persse had already served in the Equity Office and was working in the Supreme Court. The photos I have seen of him show a man of sharp intellect and steely determination. I can see him expressing his views on Richard to Mary strongly and with conviction, with the full authority of the law behind him.
3. John Rainsford (1852-1925). John followed the family line into the Justice Department. He later moved to Temora, where he became a district registrar and JP. The move to a rural outpost away from Sydney society makes me think he wasn’t one for the spotlight. He superintended over low stakes local matters. In 9025, John Rainsford J.P. presided over the following case: "Thomas O'Brien, when charged by Constable Berry that he had on Saturday night consumed a larger quantity of intoxicating liquor than he could carry...pleaded guilty and was fined 5s or 24 hours." The Supreme Court, this was not. John strikes me as the quieter type. The kind of man who would disapprove in private but not air dirty laundry in public.

Persse Rainsford, circa 1891

And then there was Boles Reeves Rainsford named after the very grandfather who once disapproved so violently of a love match that he disowned his daughter. Could the name have come with a sense of duty to uphold tradition? If this were a novel, he’d be my villain. 

Ultimately, this mystery may not be solvable. What remains true is that one of Mary's brothers was motivated to bring bigamy charges against Richard, knowing the way it would expose Mary in the public eye. But the family didn't seem to be unified in their opinion.

Divisions among the Rainsfords

Whilst Mary's brother objected to Richard and instigated the charge, Mary's mother Catherine Reeves supposedly did not. An article on the trial from August 13th, 1878, states, "He [Richard] had good reasons to believe that she [Elizabeth Gilpin] was either dead or had altogether disappeared. Under these circumstances he proposed to the other lady, who was aware of all the circumstances of the case. Her mother was also made acquainted to with the facts and offered no opposition to the marriage."

I am sure that Catherine's own impetuous marriage choice informed her response to Mary's romance. It also must have caused controversy amongst the family members, with Catherine generally in support of the marriage, and at least one of her sons violently opposed to the point of public exposure. 

Kate Reeves Rainsford, Mary's younger sister also seems to have been a supporter of the marriage, having been a witness at the event. She is otherwise a quiet member of the family - barely a whisper compared to her louder siblings. The only mention of her in newspapers is her funeral and a probate notice - nothing that gives any sense of her as a person. 

The single extant photo I have of Mary and Kate seems to show to sisters who were close. Kate looks gentle and elegant. I like to think she was a secret confidant of Mary, lending her support by attending Mary's unpopular wedding. Other than that, the marriage certificate is unusually empty of family information. There were no parents recorded for either party and the marriage took place without fanfare in a private residence. Incidentally, Kate never married, perhaps scared off the whole endeavour by her sister's experience.

Mary Kearney and Kate Rainsford circa 1890

The Aftermath

Richard was eventually found guilty of bigamy, rendering his marriage to Mary Reeves Rainsford legally invalid. I now know it to have been doubly so, because of Jane Roberston Mclean, but at the time, people seemed to accept Richard's submission that "he had no felonious intentions but really believed that his wife had left him forever and that he was free to marry again". Richard served his nine months hard labour at Darlinghurst and was released. Mary and he evidently carried on living as if they were legally married, having their first child Kate Rainsford Kearney in December of 1880. A brother Edward Adderley Kearney followed in 1882 but died the same year. Mary Adderley Kearney was born in 1884 and finally in 1887, my great grandfather Richard Thomas Adderley Kearney was born. I'd like to say they were happy and that Mary never regretted her choice to stand by Richard. Maybe that's true. But if it was, it was only because Mary didn't know about Richard's later wives and children. But those stories are for another installment.

Richard died in 1898 of tuberculosis - alone at a sanitorium in Thirlmere. There's a muddled family story my grandfather told my cousin about a sea captain relative lost at sea. My cousin thought this story was referring to Richard's father, Richard Thomas, but he was never a sea captain. Likely the story was about Richard's grandfather Richard Adderley. If so, it suggests that the sad death by tuberculosis wasn't the story that was told to the family. Mary continued to be central figure in her family's lives and was intimately involved in raising my grandfather Richard Adderley Kearney (yes, another one) after his parents divorced. 

Mary died in 1943, the final surviving Rainsford sibling, and a mere six years before her son Richard Thomas Adderley Kearney. Her obituary notes her to be "relict of Capt. R. Adderley Kearney". It feels like an inversion of her mother's story, Mary declaring herself to be Mrs. Kearney on her way out. She even shares his grave in Thirlmere General Cemetery - reunited with her perfidious husband in death. Her portion of the stone reads "and his wife, Mary Reeves, in her 88th year, May 8, 1943".

Sydney Morning Herald, May 11, 1943

Inscription of Mary Reeves and Richard Adderley Kearney's gravestone, Thirlmere Cemetary NSW

I sometimes feel irritated by the way she still defined herself through Richard 45 years after his death. But I think it gives me a strong hint that her view of her marriage was very different from mine, Choosing to be buried in Thirlmere, where there is no family connection except for Richard, is a very specific kind of choice But for all that, Mary has a personhood that is visible through history in a way that few other women in my tree are. 

She made bold (sometimes questionable) decisions, even in the face of her brother's firm opposition. Even with everything that I know about her, it's hard to decide if she bought into her own fairy tale. Did she tell her children and grandchildren the story of defiance and love, much like her mother probably told her? If so, my investigations have torpedoed that narrative. But if she believed the story, perhaps that's all that mattered. 

She got to live a productive life for nearly 45 years after Richard left the stage. And she raised interesting and unconventional daughters and a son who made his own defiant choices in love (a story for another time). While the men of my family carry Richard Adderley Kearney's name (in some cases all three of them), Mary clearly had the greatest impact on how two generations of Kearney men were raised and the people they came to be. For lasting influence, I have to award Mary the prize.

The Rainsford's reunite

It's taken me a long time to realise the absolute loathing that that the mystery Mr. Rainsford must have felt towards Richard to drag his sister through a public scandal and send his brother-in-law to prison. The risks here were immense. Between 1816 and 1949, Australian courts prosecuted more than 3500 bigamists. Many of these stories ended with the women disgraced and pushed to the margins of society. Did Mary's brother think he could shield her from the worst of it because of the family's position? Or did he take a calculated risk, motivated by a burning need to punish Richard. The most charitable interpretation is that he thought he could free his sister from an unsuitable marriage. But make no mistake, it was a risk. It's a pattern I have seen throughout this story, men making choices and women being forced to endure them.

But any rifts this case introduced were clearly temporary. Years later, Richard and Mary’s son - my great-grandfather, Richard Thomas Adderley Kearney - appears as one of the chief mourners at his uncle Boles Rainsford’s funeral and then later at his cousin Gerald Rainsford's in 1939. Mary’s family was so fully reabsorbed into the Rainsford fold that her daughter’s husband, the Rev. Robert Wade, was later called upon to officiate the funeral of Mary’s younger brother Meyrick. It’s hard to imagine a clearer sign of reconciliation. Rev. Wade baptised my grandfather and my own father's middle name is Wade - so he clearly made an impression on the Rainsfords and Kearneys alike.

I wonder if Richard's frequent absences from home, purportedly at sea, left more room for Mary's family to reclaim her and the children. Whatever objections the Rainsfords had to Richard himself, they fully integrated his children into the wider Rainsford clan - treating them as valued members, not illegitimate outliers. And that, in many ways, feels like Mary’s final triumph. However, complicated her decisions, however public the fallout, she and her family ended up united in ways that are visible to me, even at a remove of nearly 100 years.