Ireland XO
Back to Message Board

Conboy and Clarke

LeitrimAnnaduff (Leitrim)

Hello!

I am descended from Peter Conboy (b 1811 in Leitrim). He married Bridget Clarke (b1819). They left Ireland for Liverpool about 1850. They had 5 Leitrim born children (Mary Teresa, Catharine,John, Michael and James)

I strongly suspect Peter had a sister named Elizabeth Conboy (b 1807) who married James McHugh in 1830 in Fenagh RC parish. The McHughs preceded the Conboys to Liverpool and served as godparents to the Conboy children born there.

I am not sure where my Conboys lived in Leitrim. I did find a baptismal record for a John Conboy born to a father named Peter in 1849 in Kankeel (Cankeel) of Annaduff Parish . Other than the first name (John), the baptismal record would be a perfect fit for my tree's James Conboy. Perhaps it was a mistranscription.

I would love to find out more about the Conboys and Clarke families in Leitrim.

Thanks in advance Chris

IrelandXO member

3 replies

Chris:

Welcome to Ireland Reaching Out!

It was not a mistranscription http://registers.nli.ie/registers/vtls000632361#page/7/mode/1up  The Annaduff parish register shows John. Here is the total register http://registers.nli.ie/parishes/0142  and the Fenagh register  http://registers.nli.ie/parishes/0165

Likely the marriage record and other baptismal records predated the start of the register if they were from Annaduff parish.

Roger McDonnell

Castlemore RoscommonIrelandXO Volunteer

Hello and Thank You, Roger

The baptismal record of 10 August  1949 perfectly matches my great-grandfather James's birth. Similarly, the mother's maiden is recorded as Bridget Clarke, matching his younger brother's baptismal record years later in Liverpool.

I just found the 1829 Tithe Applointment record for tiny Cankeel (mispelled or alternatively spelled in the parish register as Kankeel). Of the 3 farmers listed, one is M. Clarke. This fits perfectly with my theory that Peter and Bridget lived on land on which she was raised and that M. Clarke was her father likely named Michael. Their second son was named Michael, following the Irish naming pattern of the time. 

I am no expert researcher but I think there is a strong case the Annaduff baptismal record is his. Could the priest have written down the wrong name? Could the family have chosen John as his baptismal name, despite having already named their first son John, with the plan to call him James? I notice the godfather's name is John Clancy, maybe they want to honor or thank him. 

Please feel free to shoot down my theory.

Best wishes 

Chris

IrelandXO member

Chris:

It is very possible the priest made a mistake and wrote down the wrong name in the register. He may have John on his mind because of John Clancy. I don't think your second theory is plausible.

Roger

Castlemore RoscommonIrelandXO Volunteer

Reply

Reply
One image file up to 2 MB.