Correspondance Relating to Mrs. Joyce Boustead (formerly Senior) 1917-18
These letters were given to me by the family firm of lawyers in Edinburgh in August 2001
Major-General William Allan to Mrs. Selina Sinkins and Miss Harriet Senior
Hillside
Bidborough
4th September 1917
My dear Selina and Hattie,
Seeing a notice in The Times of the 3rd March ’17 that Dorothea Joyce Boustead was the only child of Hubert Husey-Hunt I thought it advisable when Alec was last home on leave to see what was recorded in the Registers of the Savoy Chapel & as it is stated under Hubert’s signature that he is her Father I thought it requisite to receive a copy, as enclosed. For all I know he may be the Father but is she a legitimate daughter by his marriage?
While the various members of the Family are to the fore it seems to me necessary that a statement should be sought on this from those who may hereafter have an interest in the succession of the late Mr. Husey-Hunt’s affairs and that they should sign a statement in their own hand either confirming or giving a contradiction as to the recorded registration. Joyce may have children & when Hubert passes away Capt. Boustead may retain an interest in the succession. If you Selina and Hattie are prepared to give a contradiction to Hubert being the legitimate Father & can give the true version of the adopted case or who is or was the Father, I think I can write to Hubert about its proper merits. I have privately & incidentally learned that before the marriage Hubert secretly told some lawyer that Joyce was an adopted daughter and that he declined to tell the Boustead family the correct version. It may be requisite to enquire where Joyce’s birth is registered – unless Hubert admits that he is not the Father of the girl. I did not like to raise the case pending the Silver Wedding of the 23rd [celebrating the marriage between Louisa Knight (Louey) Senior and William Henry (Willie) Wreford-Brown on 23rd August 1892] … [the rest of the letter is missing]
Mrs. Selina Sinkins to Major-General William Allan
Aldermoor House
Nr Southampton
6th September 1917
My dear Will,
I received the copy of the register yesterday and your letter this morning. Willie WB had already given me a hint on the matter so I was not surprised. I have sent the register copy, with a note, to the Priest in Charge, Chapel Royal, saying that the family know that Joyce either was not born in wedlock, if Hubert is her father, but that we are all under the impression that she is not his child, having been adopted as an infant. In any case, as I was sure he would consider it wrong to chronicle a falsehood in the archives of any church would he see Mr HH on the matter, saying that it had been represented to him, the Priest, that the register was wrong, and asking him to explain his reason for writing father, instead of ‘adopted’ father. Also asking him not to say who had called his attention to the fact, unless compelled to do so. I gave him Hubert’s addresses you see, I thought it would be a pity for Hattie to know anything that I was doing, she lives at the Cottage, and see Hubert occasionally it might cause some unpleasantness for her which would be a pity. Of course Joyce is not Ina’s daughter, unless she came on the scene by magic! Of course what one always gleaned privately was that Joyce was old Parson’s child by some servant or governess! And as she seems to be the image of Ina it’s not unlikely! I enclose you Sir Duncan’s letter about Alec, as it may interest you. I think with you that steps should be taken to clear up any doubt as to Joyce’s parentage, and why Hubert should sign a lie I can’t think, in church too!!
With ever so much love to Jen and yourself,
Yours always,
Lina Sinkins
I’ve locked up your letter, ready to post on to Hattie, if you wish me to do so.
Colin M.H. Campbell Esq. to Mrs. Selina Sinkins
Royal Chapel of the Savoy
WC
8th September 1917
Dear Madam,
I have received your letter. The circumstances of the case were pointed out by your brother to the Chaplain at the time of the marriage who fully approved of the entry in the register as it appears. If therefore you desire an alteration, I will get into communication with your brother, stating fully the objection that is lodged & lay all correspondence before him & act on his suggestion.
Will you kindly let me know if you wish me to take this course. You will quite understand that private family affairs can only be entered with very great diffidence by us, especially as I assume that the Chaplain knew all the facts before the wedding took place.
Yours faithfully,
Colin M.H. Campbell
Registrar
Mrs. Selina Sinkins to Major-General William Allan
Aldermoor House
Nr Southampton
9th September 1917
My dear Will,
I got this reply this morning. I do not call it satisfactory. Should he allow a “lie” to be registered. We know the child to be adopted. It of course makes no difference to me as any money from the Husey-Hunt property was definitely left to us after Hubert, and comes to Alec in due course. It’s Alec that may have to grapple with Boustead people in future generations! I am perfectly willing to uphold you in any course you may care to take but I think it useless to get Hattie to do anything and unadvisable to tell her even. Of course it would be better if you could see the Chaplain or Colin Campbell. If Hubert is asked for any “suggestion that the registrar says he’ll act upon” it will probably be something shifty or evasive, even if not another lie! He always has done exactly as he chose without telling anyone, & without interference. My love to Jenny, the fowls are laying A1! & much to yourself.
Yours affectly,
Lina Sinkins
Of course we could demand to see registration of Joyce’s birth – it would have to be at Somerset House – what year and date?
Major-General William Allan to Mrs. Selina Sinkins
Hillside
Bidborough
11th September 1917
My dear Selina,
I am this morning in receipt of yours of the 9th with enclosed letter from the Registrar of the Royal Chapel of the Savoy, which is the reverse of being satisfactory as he says he can “assure you that the Chaplain knew all the circumstances before the wedding took place and fully approved of the entry in the register”.
This is backing up what Hubert signed to that Joyce is his legitimate daughter, which cannot be allowed to pass unchallenged by the members of his Family as being correct and requires to be rectified – or a full explanation given to them. If allowed to stand in the register as at present, it might hereafter (when many or all of the Family had passed away) be called upon to be produced before a Court of Law & be taken as the correct version of the case. We are all unaware what Hubert explained to the Chaplain to allow him to pass that Hubert is the Father of the Child in wedlock – so without that the matter cannot rest as it is. You better explain this want of knowledge to the Registrar, be judicious as to what you say as it will likely pas to Hubert & the less friction the better for the sake of all & also Joyce’s unfortunate position.
You are quite in error in writing “It of course makes no difference to me as any money from the H. Hunt property was definitely left to us after Hubert”. That is only dependent on Hubert having no children in wedlock by Ina or any other future wife.
You say you have locked up my letter. Of course you have not parted with the extract from the Registrar, you better return it to me.
Mr. C. Cecil Dominy to Mrs. Selina Sinkins
Robins, Westlake & Dominy
Solicitors
11th September 1917
17 Portland Terrace
Southampton
Dear Mrs. Sinkins,
The copy of the letter which you forwarded to me certainly is a little extraordinary, but I think there may be some explanation of it.
In any case I consider the matter to be one of the utmost importance & I would suggest that you endeavour to obtain a Birth Certificate of the lady in question, but the difficulty in this case is, of course, that if the suggestions are correct she was christened in a name unknown to you or any member of your family. If the gentleman who entered his name in the Marriage Register as the Father was not in fact the legal Father he has committed an offence against the Perjury Act 1913 but of course nothing can be done with regard to having the Marriage Certificate amended without definite information as to the birth of the lady in question.
This letter I am afraid sounds a little mysterious but I have refrained from mentioning name with an object.
I return General Allan’s letter to you & suggest this should be kept, as also should the original letter from the Registrar of the Royal Chapel Savoy. I cannot emphasise too strongly how important I consider it to be that this matter should be thrashed out whilst the various members of your family are still alive.
Yours very truly
C Cecil Dominy
Miss Harriet Senior to Mrs. Jane Allan – 16th September 1917
Compton
North Cadbury
Somt
16th September 1917
Dearest Jen,
Our letters have crossed – I got yours sent on from Red X this morning. The lawyers were told about Joyce’s birth under oath of secrecy! but of course as you say in the passage of time when folk pass away no end of confusion might arise from this absurd deception. There is practically no doubting anyone’s mind as to who she really is! She is as like her half sister (Ina H.H.) as two peas most remarkable likeness. Whether old Parsons married the woman who I believe died I do not know – probably not – but that is the secret I have no shadow of doubt. Now about coming up to see you! I think I could run up Thursday for a week or so if that suited you? They can manage without me for a while – I am a bit fed up with them!! & it would be jolly to have a laugh together. I shall bring only a small box.
Lots of love dearie
Yours affectly
Hat
Mrs. Selina Sinkins to Major-General William Allan
Aldermoor House
Nr Southampton
19th September 1917
My dear Will,
I had to see Mr Dominy, to sign papers, and told him of our dilemma. He wrote me this. He suggests that Hubert may have explained to the Chaplain something about Joyce’s being adopted under his name of Senior and that this is what the registrar meant (nothing as to real parentage). Of course the old ‘report’ was that Joyce was the child of old Parsons, Ina’s father by the governess or companion of Ina’s and I’ve written to ask Louie if she remembers her name and date of Joyce’s birth (month would do) as then I could try for a copy from Somerset House. Unless I have the mother’s name I can’t. Of course we all know that Ina never had a child and would all sign to that effect if necessary.
Yours affectly,
L. Sinkins
Note by Major-General William Allan: Answered 14th Septr – did not keep a copy … awaiting reply and information that the Chaplain may give. May be requisite to trace Registration of Joyce’s birth and then let the Lawyer approach Hubert for the correct and true version of the case.
Mrs. Selina Sinkins to Mrs Jane Allan
Aldermoor House
Nr Southampton
24th September 1917
Dearest Jesser,
I return you all the correspondence to date & have tonight written again to the Registrar to return the copy of the marriage certif. to Will – as you will see I have asked him to do so 10 days ago. I have sent to Somerset House for birth certif. & will let you know results. You don’t say if Will is better. Have you read “Happy-go-Lucky” by Ian Hay? I love his books. I am going to London on Wednesday for the day.
Yours ever,
Lina Sinkins
The Registrar General to Mrs. Selina Sinkins
The Registrar General
General Register Office
Somerset House
London
WC2
25th September 1917
Madam,
In compliance with your request I am directed by the Registrar General to forward to you herewith the Certificate of the Birth of Dorothy Joyce for which the statutory fees have been paid.
The above-mentioned is a copy of the only entry found within the period 1893-97 inclusive in any way agreeing with the particulars furnished by you.
I am, Madam
Your obedient Servant,
N.H. Balingham
Secretary
Note: The entry relates to Dorothy Joyce, daughter of Jane Joyce, formerly Deadman, field worker of Walton, born 27th May 1895 at the Workhouse, Chertsey, Surrey. On the back is written a note in Major-General William Allan’s handwriting: ‘Believed to be incorrect as to the Birth of Joyce Husey-Hunt, now Mrs. Boustead.’
Mrs. Selina Sinkins to Major-General William Allan
Aldermoor House
Nr Southampton
26th September 1917
My dear Will,
This tallies exactly – evidently Joyce uses the mother’s surname now and it was Deadman first. She’s 22 so 1895 is right and she came from the workhouse. Of course she is probably old Parson’s child I send it to you directly and if you like me to show it to Dominy I will do so. Now we must ‘rectify’ the lie in the Savoy register! Just back from a long tiring day in London.
Yours,
L. Sinkins
Mrs Hankinson, nurse, Mrs Bentley and baby arrived here at 2 till next Tuesday.
[There is a loose piece of paper inscribed: Joyce Senior 21st birthday May 7 ’16 – born 7th May 1895.]
Miss Hattie Senior to Mrs. Jane Allan
Aldermoor House
Nr Southampton
5th October 1917
Dearest Jen,
Well we have been into Soton this afternoon and seen Mr Dominy and placed the issue before him – he says it would not hold water against the Savoy entry so he is going to wait a week to see what further details he can secure through his friend at Chertsey – and then he will write a civil letter to Hubert and request on behalf of the family that the entry be corrected in the register as it is untrue but that no details of the bride’s birth, etc., are required by us – so long as the entry is corrected – or words to that effect. Of course Will can have a copy of his letter and the answer to it when the affair is finished. I think this will settle the matter and I begged Dominy to be discreet which I think he is sure to be. I explained of course that Hubert had never made a secret to the family of the fact that she was only adopted – I then walked up to the dentist’s door and fled without having my tooth out! Courageous female! but I am really going to ’phone to him and make an appointment for tomorrow morning. The Hankinsons leave tomorrow – they have taken the cottage belonging to the Swanstons just below here as the raids were so bad they dared not stay in London. We told Dominy to write for the marriage certificate and cuttings as they are not to hand . I am hoping to hear from you that Will is keeping well up to his improvement? It is very cold here today.
Fondest love dear,
Ever yr afft
Hattie
Mrs. Selina Sinkins to Mrs Jane Allan
Aldermoor House
Nr Southampton
25th October 1917
Dearest Jesser,
What a fag for you having ‘dentist’ trouble again! thank goodness I’ve none left now! So glad Will is better. Dominy went to see the Somerset House marriage registrar Monday & he says that entry is absolutely wrong and must be altered. He has to go to Town again Sat. & is going to see the Chapel Royal registrar tell him, so, & demand Will’s copy back again. He says he’s not going to let the matter drop! but is seeing these people when he goes to Town on other matters to save expenses! Rather decent of him as I guess my bill will be pretty ‘tall’. I’ve paid him nothing yet. I hope my smell will be well ‘on the way’ by Saturday. No kitchen fire tomorrow & cooking again in the “Look hole”! My new cook who said she was 49 will never see 65 again, & is very deaf – always has to use an ear trumpet but she’s only on a month’s trial. Mrs White Elkins left today we went to Romsey with her and saw such a nice house near there afterwards – which I’d love – such views! but Romsey isn’t much of a place tho’ there are nice neighbours close by!
With much love,
Your own old Sli
Wasn’t it nice for Hattie being mentioned in the ‘Honours List’? I wonder if they’ll all get badges or something!
Mrs. Selina Sinkins to Major-General William Allan
Aldermoor House
Nr Southampton
27th October 1917
My dear Will,
As I told Jenny, Dominy went up to London yesterday (on some other business) and saw the Registrar. I got this this morning in consequence! Dominy ’phoned this morning that he had spend 2 hours with him! And he got a bit of a shock when D told him he’d been to see the Registrar General on the matter! He has promised to have the word ‘adopted’ put in another copy of same with the insertion sent to Dominy. I told him we did not wish to told who her parents were, but would be perfectly satisfied if that alteration were made – as soon as possible. So I think he’s done well for us and I think he’d be so pleased if you could write him a tiny note of thanks for his trouble. Cecil Dominy Esq 17 Portland Terrace, So’ton. He is so interested at you having been in the Crimea! and it’s nice having a capable man and a gentleman to act for me, isn’t it? I feel sure if it should happen that I outlived Hubert, I shall find him a comfort. Such a gloriously fine day today. I hope you are keeping well. Tell Jenny my ducks are laying too! I think it very lucky you found this out, and that the matter ha been put on a satisfactory basis, during our lifetime. I am going on Monday 5th Novr, for 3 weeks or more, to Kirkness House, Bath. I am chasing off the deaf cook Tuesday, she’ll never see 70 again!
With love to both,
Yours affectly,
Lina Sinkins
Mr. C. Cecil Dominy to Major-General William Allan
Robins, Westlake & Dominy
Solicitors
17 Portland Terrace
Southampton
31st October 1917
Dear Sir,
I thank you very much indeed for your letter of yesterday’s date and for your kind remarks.
The Marriage Certificate certainly could not be allowed to remain in its original condition and I was assured on Saturday last by the Registrar of the Royal Chapel Savoy that he would take steps to have it altered at once and I am hoping to receive this week a copy of the amended Certificate. This I think, should put the matter in order and save any trouble or complication that might arise in the future.
Again thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
C. Cecil Dominy
Mrs. Selina Sinkins to Major-General William Allan
Aldermoor House
Nr Southampton
1st November 1917
Dear Will,
Thank you so much for your letter. I saw Mr. Dominy yest. which was better than the ’phone. He says that the Registrar told him that the trouble was he was ashamed to write & tell me that he’d lost the certif. & they’d searched everywhere for it! At first he was quite offhand, & when Mr. Dominy said that “it was most important, as property might be involved another day”, he “thought it could make no difference, & that he did not see his way to making it altered”. So then Mr Dominy said: “Well, I have seen the Registrar General on the matter, & he says he will insist on its being altered!” So then his tune quite changed. He is going to put “Foster parent” & will post Mr. Dominy a copy, what shall we do with it, will you keep it? Any way the matter will there be finished & done with & I am thankful I asked Dominy … [the rest of the letter is missing]
Mr. C. Cecil Dominy to Major-General William Allan
Robins, Westlake & Dominy
Solicitors
17 Portland Terrace
Southampton
4th January 1918
Dear Sir,
I have to-day received from the Registrar of the Royal Chapel of the Savoy a copy of the amended Marriage Certificate of Mr. R.C. Boustead and Miss D.J. Husey-Hunt and, at Mrs. Sinkins’ request, I herewith enclose the same.
I have had to make repeated applications for this copy and you will observe that, although I only received it to-day, it is dated the 18th December.
Anyway I feel sure it will be a satisfaction to you to know that the original has been amended in such a way [by writing ‘father by adoption’] that any future complications will be avoided.
I am, Dear Sir,
Yours faithfully,
C. Cecil Dominy
Fragment of an Undated Letter from Major Willie Wreford-Brown to Major-General William Allan
… of opinion that he certainly gets £450 and probably more according to her age. As regards the pay of the Billetting Committee no one can tell me anything – nothing apparently is laid down and I gather it varies very much. I hope to see Major Heath tomorrow who is on the recruiting staff, and will try & get him to find out, he is certain to get £150 a year I should say, & probably more. What a dishonourable scoundrel the gentleman seems to be, one would not mind so much if he answered the letters and acknowledged he was hard up & asked for time to pay, but he has ignored everything, & I hope he will get it hot. The Italian business [the Battle of Caporetto?] is a bad affair, and has put us in a nasty mess, it will mean a setback in the War I fear, and through no fault of ours, as we offered help some time ago, but they were full of confidence in themselves. The whole thing is German and Papal propaganda, rank cowardice & disaffection, the Huns are not in strength, the Italians were considered the stronger in numbers; our Allies are a rotten crowd, bar France – …
… that the Joyce business is put right, once tackled I was sure that Hubert could not do other than he did, or he might have laid himself open to trouble. Louey [his wife, sister of Selina Sinkins, Jane Allan and Harriet Senior] works hard every day at Canteen, but is looking better than she did a month or two ago, when I was very worried about her. I hope in about a fortnight’s time to get about four days’ holiday. I think Louey & I will go to the Metropole at Brighton, to buck us up a bit: I am still getting such acute headaches behind my eyes, which I suppose is neuritis, & I feel I want a few days’ rest. Give my love to Jeannie.
Yours ever,
Willie Wreford Brown