Thompson / Corporaal Family History

Thomas Fitzarthur Smythe ⁶

  General Notes:

From the "Smyth Family History" by David Smyth. Version 8, Dec 3, 2004.
http://www.zipworld.com.au/~lnbdds/home/davidsmyth/ (accessed July 29, 2015)

However, I turn now to an email received from my distant cousin Charmaine Robson of Sydney, Australia, dated Oct. 7, 2004:

"My great grandfather was the son of Dr Arthur Smyth, son of Thomas Hutchinson Smyth and Abigail Hamilton. He and his brother Hamilton, the barrister, migrated to the Pyrenees in France in the middle of the 19th century. Arthur worked in the health spas and most of his offspring were born there. His son, Thomas Fitzarthur Smyth, then moved to Australia and from his two marriages, there are many descendents alive and well throughout this country.It was only about 10 years ago that the scattered branches of this family found each other, reunited and compared notes and oral histories, as well as official documents, and finally realised that our ancestors were the Smyths of Mullingar, County Westmeath. Thomas Fitzarthur, for some reason, added an -e to his surname.

I visited Benison Lodge some years ago in the company of a local historian from Mullingar and it was quite distressing to see it dilapidated and vandalised but I did manage to photograph an old portrait of the house in the possession of a woman who owned the house and land around it. She was using the land to graze cattle.

If you are interested in updating your records, according to the French civil registry, Arthur Smyth died at Pau, France on 20th November 1865 and his brother, Hamilton, also at Pau on 30th April 1859. Hamilton had been married to Elizabeth (I don't know if there were children) and Arthur's wife was Anna Elizabeth (nee Gibbons). They had six children all of whom were born in France except my great grandfather Thomas who was born in Dublin in 1839.

Kind Regards
Charmaine Robson"

Arthur's son, Thomas Fitzarthur Smythe, was a professor of languages, a journalist in Queensland and a civil servant. He migrated to northern Queensland before 1860 and married twice, with children from both marriages. His first marriage ended in divorce and scandal. In 1875, he took his family to England and then took an appointment as language teacher in South Africa. Unfortunately, he had developed a severe drinking problem and was unable to continue working. He returned to England where it seemed the family never heard from him again. His wife, Drusilla, took her children back to Australia and spent the rest of her life in Melbourne. After her early death, the children split up - some to Western Australia, one to Queensland, and the rest stayed in Melbourne. This left the family fractured. Only a few weeks ago, I discovered poor Thomas living in an asylum in England in 1881 so that gives me another trail to follow. As yet, we do not know when or where he died."

  Death Notes:

Event Description: Port Alfred Asylum
Cause of Death is recorded as "Senile Decay"
[It is not proven that this is the same Thomas Fitzarthur Smythe. Given that the name is an unusual combination it is assumed the same until proven otherwise]

  Some of his life's milestones were:

He was working as a 2nd class Officer in the Colonial Secretary's Office, William Street, in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia on May 12, 1860 ¹⁰
The following notice appeared in The Moreton Bay Courier May 16, 1860.
OFFICIAL NOTIFICATIONS.
(From the Q. G. Gazette, May 12.) [1860]
Mr. Thomas Fitzarthur Smythe is declared to have passed his examination satisfactorily, and is appointed a clerk of the second class in the Colonial Secretary's department.

REF: 1861 Government Departments List P52. Qld Governtment Printer.
Queensland State Archives, Runcorn.

He was working as an Officer 4th Class in the Registrar General's Office in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia in 1865/1867 ⁷

He was a member of the "Duke of Leinster" Lodge No 283 of The Grand Lodge of Freemasons of Ireland on Nov 29, 1865 in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. ¹¹

is a fraternal order that traces its roots back to the operative masons of the late Middle Ages. Non-operative or speculative Freemasonry was an established part of Irish society from the 17th Century at least. Founded by 1725, the Grand Lodge of Ireland is the second-oldest Masonic Grand Lodge in the world. The Grand Lodge governs Masonic activity in Ireland and in various provinces around the world.

He was involved in a court case concerning insolvency on Oct 7, 1867 in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. ¹²
SUPREME COURT.
MONDAY, OCTOBER 7.
IN INSOLVENCY.
BEFORE His Honor Mr. Justice Lutwyche.

RE SMYTHE.-In the insolvent estate of Thomas Fitzarthur Smythe, second sitting was held. Debts were proved amounting to £96 1s. 1d., and the sitting was closed.

He was involved in a court case concerning slander in Nov 1869 in Maryborough, Queensland, Australia. ¹³
CIRCUIT COURT,
Maryborough.
CIVIL SITTINGS,
Saturday, October 30.
(Before his Honor Mr Justice Lutwyche and a special jury.)
SMYTHE V LUYA.
This was an action for slander, brought by Thomas Fitzarthur Smythe, Gympie. against A. F. Luya, of tbe same place. Damages were laid at £500.
Mr. M^cDevitt, instructed by Mr. Stable, solicitor, Gympie, appeared for plaintiff; Mr. Blake, Q. C., and Mr. Griffiths, instructed by Mr. Tozer. for defendant
The facts of the case will be found in the evidence below. A claim was made for special as well as general damages.
Mr. M^cDevitt opened the case in a very clear and forcible address, and called
Thomas Fitzarthur Smythe: The plaintiff in this action ; I was for seven years in a Government office; have been since on the Press, and at the time of this action was em- ployed on the Gympie Times; on the 24th July last I was sent to report the proceedings of a public meeting held at the Varieties Theatre, Gympie; defendant was on the plat- Form, should say there were three hundred persons present; it was held about half-past six o'clock ; the defendant moved a resolution ; in moving it he read portions of a mining article which had appeared in that morning's Gympie Times ; and after this went on to say, This report prejudges the case; it is written by Bonny or one of his mates; a Mr. Fitzarthur Smythe has the reputation of being the writer of them, and it is rumoured that that gentleman is in partnership with the jumpers, and went to the Local Court with Bonny on the morning after the jump to secure the remainder of the bank shares, and smarted, no doubt, at having lost the opportunity of sharing the remainder of the plunder ; this report prejudges the case - I think he said - against the bank. There was great clamour and loud angry demonstrations amongst the audience at what was said ; I don't recollect anything particular being said, or any particular individual name being used ; I understood the remarks were directed against myself; the clamour was of a jeering character, or the tone of ridicule; I was in the employ of the paper until the Friday after the meeting, which took place on the Saturday previously ; I was discharged ; in consequence of my dismissal I consulted my solicitor, and directed him to send a letter to defendant ; I did not see it delivered. By Mr. Blake; I gave instructions in preparing this declaration ; I cannot tell why there is not in it that I went with Mr. Bonny to the Local Court; Mr. Nugent Brown, before the business began, said they were going to walk into me and the paper; it w is pretty generally known whilst I was employed on the paper that I was writing on the paper; had £1 a week, for which I wrote leading articles sometimes, the mining articles, got up the local paragraphs, and made extracts from other papers ; the clamour did not commence when the name of Fitzarthur Smythe was used, but after the words 'jumpers;' am at present unpopular at Gympie, but was not so before these words were uttered; Mr. Rogers, one of the proprietors of the paper dismissed me : had no conversation with Mr. Rogers before the 24th July about his dismissing me; had same conversation with John Thwaites, cabinet-maker, about 7th August; he wanted some money of me and I told him I had only been getting £1 a week; be said something, and I did not say in reply, 'Do not summons me; I have begun an action for defamation of character - I expect to get a hundred or two, and then I will pay all my debts' - or anything of the kind; what I slid was that I had been dismissed in consequence of Luya's statements, and he could understand that whilst I was receiving £1 a week I could not afford to pay old debts- that I had taken legal advice, and was advised that a good action for damages lay against Luya - that my dismissal from the Gympie Times might be the best thing that could have happened ; I did not say ' I lost my billet at the Gympie Times, but that is very lucky for me, for I should not have been long there; I was in Franklin and Bonny's jumping case, but I Don't wish it to be known; 'I wrote a letter to the editor of the Gympie Times about that date. Re-examined by Mr. McDevitt: Mr. Rogers told me when I first engaged with him that he could not give high wages, as he had then heavy liabilities on the paper.
William Stewart, miner, Gympie, remembered a public meeting; was present at that public meeting; plaintiff and defendant were present; defendant spoke; a great many things were said by him; remember what was said by defendant respecting plaintiff; he referred to an article in that morning's paper, and said it must have been written by Bonny or one of his party, and that Mr. Fitzarthur Smythe had the reputation of writing the article, and was reported to be in partnership with the jumpers, and had gone into the Local Court the next morning to take up the remainder of the shares, but it so happened he was too late, for the bank had secured the remainder of them, and there was no doubt he smarted at not having secured the remainder of the shares ; defendant said that no doubt the article had gone a good way to prejudge the case; I believe he used the words both before and after he read the article ; there were groans, hooting, and derisive cheering.
Mr. Biake cross-examined the witness to test his memory by reading the whole of the mining article referred to. The witness said he could not recollect the exact words read by Mr. Luya to the meeting, but he believed those read were the same.
This closed plaintiff's case.
Mr Blake moved for a nonsuit, on the ground that the words used were not action- able, and were capable of an innocent meaning, and that there was no prima facie case to go to the jury.
After argument, his Honor held there; was sufficient prima facie evidence to go to the jury
Mr. McDevitt then summed up the evidence. He was bound to admit that the case was not of so serious a character as it appeared when he made his opening address, inasmuch as he had not been able to make out a case for special damages, but it was sufficiently serious to warrant a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for the general damage he had sustained. Special damages were claimed by an individual for loss he has sustained in the way of his profession or trade, and this he confessed he had not made out. General damages were for injury sustained by the in- dividual in his good name and fame, and for this he claimed the verdict of the jury. The defendant was a reporter. It was necessary not only that a reporter should write without prejudice, but that he should be believed to do so ; and the proprietors of a paper recognised the right to dismiss their employees, even if they did not believe them prejudiced, if they thought they had lost the confidence of the public. It was not only necessary for an employer that a reporter should write honestly, but that people should believe be wrote honestly. The language complained of was more than a mere imputation upon the faithfulness of the reporter - it said he wrote to prejudge from interested motives. The plaintiff had up to the last moment afforded the defendant opportunity to make an apology, and he bad not thought fit to do so. No at- tempt had been made to justify the libel Then came the question bad the plaintiff sustained any damage. They found that be had been held forth by defendant at a public meeting to hatred and contempt, and the success of defendant's efforts to malign plaintiff had been shown them - the people at the meeting, infuriated at the language of defendant had groaned and jeered and hissed at plaintiff. He could not go into the question of the loss of his situation which followed, because he had not followed up the claim for special damages, but he claimed their verdict on the other count They must remember in estimating the damage that these slanderous words had now circulated far and wide, and it would take a long time before their verdict, which was the antidote, might reach as far as the calumny had spread, and to some it might never come. And further, they must remember it was not to one man but to three hundred the words were uttered - indeed; it was to all the world. As to the remuneration plaintiff was receiving, they had nothing to do with that; in the eye of the law the humblest citizen was of as much importance as a Minister of the Crown.
Mr. Blake replied, the jury had to determine whether the words complained of were defamatory in the sense applied by the law. The inuendo gave a certain meaning to the words used by the defendant. There were some words of which there could be no doubt as to the meaning, as if a man called another a rogue or a liar; but these other words had several meanings, and the purpose of the inuendo was to attach a meaning to these words. They had to be satisfied in this case that plaintiff had proved that the meaning which he had attached to the word plunder was the only one of which it was capable, and he contended it might have quite an innocent meaning, and had in this case. There was proof, too, in the report itself that the writer was conscious he was giving judgment on the case, though he said he would not prejudge it; and that report was a very different thing from an ordinary report; it was, in fact, a comment - a criticism on certain things that had happened on the dig- gings. The defamatory language complained of was a comment on that report, and one that defendant was entitled to make. Mr Smythe had the misfortune to be unpopular on the diggings, and this comment had not been well received; but defendant was not to pay for that. The words were not stated behind plaintiff's back, but on a public plat- form, where he had every opportunity of re- plying to them, and then was the time to have challenged the truth of them. He might have answered the words there and then, but he did not; but he treasured up the words, and he conned them over, and thought so much of the £500 he was to get by bringing this action that he put off a creditor on the strength of it. As for Luya doing this young man any harm, none had done him less, for he told him to his face that he differed from him, and he (Mr. Blake) was not aware that Mr. Smythe was always entitled to praise, and that no one was to comment on his performances, except at the peril of being made to suffer actions for damages in that court.
His Honor summed up: The plea denied speaking the words, and of speaking them in the sense implied in the inueudo; malice was implied if these were proved. The jury were not bound by the ruling of the judge; the jury in these actions were judges both of law and fact, but judges were at liberty to express an opinion, though not compelled to give an opinion. In the last case he had abstained from passing an opinion, but in this case he was of opinion a prima facie case was made out, but be repeated they were not bound by his opinion. The plaintiff had been in this case identified and prejudiced to the public mind - he was, in fact, charged with corruption; and it was for the jury to say if he was or was not libelled and injured, and if so, the amount of damages he was entitled to The jury retired, and after a few minutes absence returned with a verdict for plaintiff.
Damages £50.

Thomas traveled from Brisbane, Queensland, Australia to Melbourne arriving on Dec 1870 ² with Drusilla Lawton

He was divorced in absentia from Matilda Smythe on Jan 5, 1874 in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. ²

He was involved in a court case concerning Insolvency and was delcared insolvent on Aug 2, 1875 in Emerald Hill, Victoria, Australia. ¹⁴ The following article appeared in the Argus newspaper:
"NEW INSOLVENT.
Thomas Fitzarthur Smythe, of Stead Street, Emerald Hill, clerk. Causes of insolvency - Want of employment and sickness in family. Liabilities, £127 17s. 4d.; assets, £65; deficiency, £62 17b. 4d. Mr. Halfey, assignee."

He was residing at Middlesex Lunatic Asylum in Uxbridge, Middlesex, England on Apr 3, 1881 ¹⁵ Line 17 of Page 40 of the 1881 Census for the Middlesex Lunatec Asylum lists Thomas F Smythe,a Professor at Royal College, as a paitent at the institution.
Connection to Thomas Fitzarthur Smythe is not assured.

He was residing at 34 Grey St. (Owned by Elizabeth Cook) in Prahan, Victoria, Australia on Nov 13, 1893 ¹⁶ Note: the record lists Thomas F. Smythe (a clerk)
connection th Thomas Firzarthur Smythe is not assured.

He has conflicting death information of after 1886 and Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Thomas' last child Harry Sommerset Smythe was born December 26, 1886 to Drucilla Smyhte (nee Lawton)
REF: http://www.zipworld.com.au/~lnbdds/home/davidsmyth/Arthur 20Smyth 20Tree.pdf accessed November 22, 2016.

Thomas married Matilda Stratfold, daughter of Robert Collet Stratfold and Mary Millard, on Sep 13, 1860 in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.^{1 2 3} (Matilda Stratfold was born on Nov 17, 1824 in Woburn, Bedfordshire, England ^{17 18 19}, baptised on Dec 14, 1824 in Woburn, Bedfordshire, England,¹⁸ died on Aug 14, 1892 in South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia ²⁰ and was buried on Aug 16, 1892 in Toowong, Queensland, Australia.)

  Special events in their marriage were:

They published an intent to marry. On the 13th September, at St. John's Church, Brisbane, by the Rev. John Mosely, Thomas Fltzarthur Smythe, to Matilda, relict of the late Captain Frederic Blagg Hampton, K.I.C.

They were divorced in 1874. The Petition to Divorce was isued on Jan 5 of that year.

  Marriage Notes:

Divorced January 1874
According to the Divorce Petition Thomas deserted in May 1867 while Matilda & the family were in Europe (Nov 21, 1866 - Dec 1, 1867). He had taken up with his servant Drusilla Lawton. ²

Thomas next married Drucilla Lawton on Mar 30, 1875 in Fitzroy, Victoria, Australia.^{4 5} (Drucilla Lawton was born in 1849 in Hanley, Staffordshire, England ⁴ and died on Jun 27, 1896 in Kew, Victoria, Australia ⁴.)