ThruLines

Bones in the Belfry home page
Thomas Henry Smalley and Thrulines

There are two sets of ThruLines coming in to James Smalley and Martha Goode's Family
    Thomas Henry Smalley has 27 DNA matches and an average match of about 6 segments,
    Harriet Smalley has 3 DNA matches and an average match of 2.3 segments.

Why are the numbers so different? The number of matches is driven by your number of descendants and completely makes sense. But why is the number of segments do different?

If we take John Marshall and Thirza Davis who are at a similar level, for their children we have
    Sydney 7 matches averaging 4 segments
    Emily 8 matches averaging 5 segments
    Agnes 2 matches averaging 3 segments

Similarly for Charles Martin and Frabcis Prickett we have

    Charles Henry 3 matches averaging 2 segments
    Henry 1 matches averaging 1 segments
    Alice 4 matches averaging 2 segments
    Louisa 2 matches averaging 2 segments
    Hannah 5 matches averaging 2 segments

Quoting information that was already up on BonesInTheBelfry\
    “Thomas' story starts with a mystery. The family came to Australia on the Ship Constance, sailing from Plymouth on the 15 July 1851 and arrived Hobson's Bay 27 October 1851
    The shipping list shows:
            Smalley, James Age 46 Farm Labourer Newton P. Methodist, could neither read nor write
            Martha (wife) Age 39 Native place Wisbeach could read                      
            Harriet Age 4
            Infant born on board (Thomas Henry)
    Listed separatelT
           Mary Ann Smalley Age 18 From Newton, P. Methodist, could both read and write.

Of four infants born on board, Thomas Henry was the only one to survive to Australia. The other three all have the mother's surname and Christan name recorded. In Thomas' case, only the mother's surname was given, leading to speculation he might actually have been Mary Ann's child.”

The above figures support the Mary Ann's child case, as Harriet would have 100% James and Martha DNA, and Thomas would have 50%, Our DNA sample is from a Thomas descendant so should be twice as strong as ones from Harriet. Thomas and Harriet are very close in age, so the number of generations should not be a major variable.

A DNA match from a verified descendant of Mary Ann would clinch the case, but no luck. All I can find is that she married Charles Williams in May 1852 and had a son James Herbert Williams in 1854. Charles Williams died in 1855 and Mary Ann died in 1876. No more children and nothing more about her son, Certainly no DNA matches.

If you have additions or corrections to this page, please contact us      Bones in the Belfry home page     Page last updated - 2025