Mr. Hauxwell's birds (1 Viewer)

I contacted Prof Dr. Gerardo Lamas. His reply was the following:

Unfortunately, I have not been able to find any reliable biographical data on John Hauxwell. Even the dates of birth (1827) and death (1919) given for him appear to be spurious. The only true facts about him seem to be that he was an Englishman living for about 30 years in the small town of Pebas, in Loreto, Peru, and collecting mammals, birds, herpetological specimens, butterflies, snails, etc. there and in several other places along the upper Amazon riven and some of its tributaries, sending those specimens to Europe (mainly England) and the USA. Before settling in Pebas he spent some time (in the 1850's) in Manuas, Brazil. Several naturalists passing through Pebas (like Orton, Steere, etc.) met him there, and Darwin was in correspondence with him. My guess is that Hauxwell stayed in Pebas and died there, and he may have started a Peruvian family, as the surname Hauxwell is not all that rare in the Loreto area of Peru...

Click to expand...

Thanks, Martin!

All in line with what we've come up with, this far ...

:t:

So one of his descendants may or may not Sixto Hauxwell Mariño. But I have no clue how to contact him.

Hold on to your hats!

Finally, some progress, I was just about to give up on finding anything additional regarding Hauxwell, after hundreds of Google-searches, in all various combinations, but at last, here's a (in my mind) long-awaited, minor break-through ...

In the book Notes of a botanist on the Amazon & Andes, ... by Richards Spruce (edited and condensed by Alfred Russel Wallace ...), vol. 2, 1908 (here), we find the following text (on page 74):

[The next letter from Tarapoto to Mr. Bentham, dated April 7, 1856, is chiefly personal and botanical gossip relating to his work and future travels. After describing how a box from England was damaged and nearly lost by the boat being wrecked in the rapids of the Huallaga he adds: “The difficulty, risk, and expense of getting plants from here all the way to the mouth of the Amazon are so great, that I see my Tarapoto collections are not likely to repay more than the expense of collecting.”
The letter concludes with a reference to the news he had just received of the ravages of yellow fever at the Barra, and then gives a short biographical note about a bird-collector, whose name and specimens must be well known to most English ornithologists. I therefore give it.]
"I am sorry to say that Hauxwell is about perdito (lost) as far as natural history is concerned, which is a pity, as no one has come here who puts up birds so beautifully as he does. He has got an Indian squaw and a child, and is turned ‘merchant’. I am surprised he writes English (with a small taste of ‘Yorkshire’) so well as he does. His parents removed from Hull (where he was born) to Oporto when he was a little boy; thence he came out to the coast of Brazil as merchant's clerk, and anon turned naturalist."

[written, as I understand it, by Alfred Russel Wallace referring to, and quoting, a letter sent by the botanical collector Richard Spruce, from Tarapoto, Peru]

Click to expand...

Even if, as we all know by now, Mr Hauxwell wasn't lost to natural history (as Mr Spruce feared), but kept on collecting, preparing and selling birds (also as a merchant), well into the mid-1880's, this letter does tell us some of his origin! And that Hauxwell, like Professor Lamas assumed, apparently did start a "Peruvian family".

This is the first text ever where I have seen anything of where he was born! In Hull (which I assume is Kingston upon Hull), in Yorkshire, on the East coast of England. And of how Mr Hauxwell ended up in South America ...

The search goes on. We're getting closer.

If of nothing else, now I feel a bit more secure claiming he was English ...

However; enjoy!

Björn

Maybe another one for Paul at least regading his birth in Hull? More difficult the peruvian part.

Calalp said:

This is the first text ever where I have seen anything of where he was born! In Hull (which I assume is Kingston upon Hull), in Yorkshire, on the East coast of England. And of how Mr Hauxwell ended up in South America ...

Click to expand...

Could it be him https://www.myheritage.de/names/john_hauxwell John Hauxwell, 1830 - 1913 ? But doesn' look like https://www.geni.com/people/John-Hauxwell/6000000026440996681 .

Investigating obscure historical figures like this is fascinating but tricky. You learn a lot about history as well.

I can't say anything definitive but I can give Wallace's information corroboration.

A Mathew Hauxwell (widower) married Mary Willmore (widow) on 24/10/1833 in the British Factory Chaplaincy, Oporto, Porto, Portugal.

The history of the British Factory is fascinating (and obscure).

Anyway this William is most likely John's father William Pearson Hauxwell 1780-1857 - who died in Oporto) and so with this supposition, one can make a small advance.

There are all sorts of possible leads. A plus is that the Hauxwell variant of the name is quite rare. Anyway, the following scenario is my current informed supposition:

If John was born around 1817, there may be a good reason for John's birth to not be recorded in Hull. In 1811 a William Hauxwell was tried and acquitted of embezzlement. It appears a Hauxwell family moved to the Dales for a time where John was born on 30 Jul 1817 in Askrigg. After a time (Elizabeth's (Johns mothers) death in 1822 and his brother Edmund's bankruptcy in 1830) William and the younger members of his family moved to Oporto where they were established by 1833. John when he reached his majority emigrated to Brazil (one might surmise to avoid his stepmother).

Undigitized Brazilian immigration records are the most likely source of further information...

P

Sorry I did not get the logic from Mathew to William. Was Mathew a brother of John?

The story of his possible father here https://books.google.com/books?id=-3Q0AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA36

I'm sorry, Paul, I have to agree with Martin, I cannot follow your reasoning/s:

PScofield said:

Investigating obscure historical figures like this is fascinating but tricky. You learn a lot about history as well.

I can't say anything definitive but I can give Wallace's information corroboration.

A Mathew Hauxwell (widower) married Mary Willmore (widow) on 24/10/1833 in the British Factory Chaplaincy, Oporto, Porto, Portugal.

The history of the British Factory is fascinating (and obscure).

Anyway this William is most likely John's father ...

Click to expand...

And this is where you lose me; at "this William". What William? Who's he? Is he equal of a "Mathew"?

PScofield said:

If John was born around 1817, there may be a good reason for John's birth to not be recorded in Hull. ...

Click to expand...

And; what made you think that "our guy" (John) could have been born "around 1817"? That's a decade earlier than what's been suggested (or claimed) earlier, in various texts (in this thread). And not even in "Hull" ... !?

However; even if so, if born "around 1817", it certainly would make the alleged Death year "1919" (with or without question mark), far, far less likely.

Please enlighten us!

/B

Sorry transcription error:

William Hauxwell (widower) married Mary Willmore (widow) on 24/10/1833 in the British Factory Chaplaincy, Oporto, Porto, Portugal.

And why 1817? Because that's the only digitised record of the birth of a "J Hauxwell" (a John) to a William and Eilizabeth Hauxwell (or any similar spelling) in the early 1800s in Yorkshire that I can find. Sure it doesn't fit the previously published dates given but I infer:

1) the "latest proof of life" I can see in the references given is in the 1880s.
2) The 1919 reference is presumably based on a publication that used Hauxwellls collections.
3) 70 is a good long life in the Amazon - 90+ would be increadible.

As I say, this is supposition, there are a lot of Parish registers undigitised and there is a good chance William may have been non-conformist.

I do think this account is making progress and at times like this family knowledge is usually crucial.

Cheers P

Fair enough, Paul, we've all done transcription errors ...

However, there were quite a few "John Hauxwell", born in "Yorkshire, England" in "the early 1800s" (at least on the net, see, for example; here, or elsewhere). How to know which one is/was, or even could be, "our guy"? I haven't got a clue.

It gets even worse if your findings are based on a "J Hauxwell", as in possible/presumptive John, if so there are far, far more, multiple possible candidates in the same area (and Era). Unfortunately the name (John) Hauxwell wasn't (and isn't) as uncommon as one might believe at first.

This far I haven't seen any texts where any of his Parents was mentioned (nor any other part of his Family). At least not of a John Hauxwell that we know (for certain) is "our guy". Not only of one that might, could be.

In my opinion we haven't got any further/closer than what Alfred Russel Wallace told us (in post #24). I'd still be looking in or around Hull, and Oporto (for possible clues).

But thanks for trying Paul. Truly appreciated. :t:

Let's hope we can fit all the pieces together.

Björn
-

Hi Björn,

Ok so what we do know is that J. Hauxwell went to Oporto "when he was a little boy" and that he was collecting in Brazil by the late 1840s.

The search you made that identifies all those John Hauxwells is, I am afraid, a red herring - this search was done using Hauxwells of the right age in the 1841 UK census BUT we know based on Wallaces account that "our man" was not in the UK in 1841 and thus every single one of these can be eliminated as "our man". What is useful however that there is NO John Hauxwell born in 1817 in Yorkshire at that time (and I can find no registered death) so thanks for an extra bit of corroboration

The only Hauxwell that features in any Oporto records is William Pearson Hauxwell (1780-1857). He re-married in Oporto in 1833 and died there in 1857. We have William Pearson's first marriage records and we know he had 4 sons and 2 daughters with Elizabeth Collinder before 1811 in Hull (he was a non-conformist).

I do consider Hauxwell (this spelling) to be a rare variant and I do consider it almost certain that the fact that William Pearson Hauxwell was in Oporto pretty solid evidence that he is a relative of J. Hauxwell and most likely his father. We do know that William Pearson Hauxwell was tried and acquitted for embezzlement in 1811. We do know that there are no more records from William Pearson in Hull after his acquittal. The church he was born into and all his older children were baptised in has no further records - leaving your "mother church" is typical of someone disgraced in the 1800s.

Using the assumption that William was J. Hauxwells father there is ONLY one J. Hauxwell born between 1805 and 1833 to a William and Elizabeth Hauxwell in any digitised record: John born 1817 in Askrigg.

BUUUUT I say probably 1/3 of all relevant records are not digitised and one day John may pop up but for now.....

Cheers Paul

Sounds plausible. Regarding his birth year please remember my # 21. So why not 10 years earlier?

PScofield said:

Hi Björn, [...] The search you made that identifies all those John Hauxwells is, I am afraid, a red herring ...

Click to expand...

I agree, Paul, the red herring (of 1841) will have to swim back into darker waters (into the shades of totally irrelevant facts), where it belongs. My mistake (too quick, trying to be clever), sorry.

And while talking of fishes (even a red herring must be considered a herring, mustn't it )...

See the following short phrase from the Swedish ichthyologist Sven Kullander*:

... and by James Hauxwell at Pebas.

Click to expand...

If we're to trust Orton's word (in The Andes and the Amazon; ..., link in #15, p.286): "The few English residents [at Pebas] (Messrs. Hislop, Jeffreys, and Hauxwell), ...", there shouldn't be any other guys in the same area (at that time), at least not by the name Hauxwell, which makes it highly likely that Kullander was writing about "our guy".

Could we, once again, be dealing with a James 'John' (Hauxwell)... ?!? Just like I hinted/asked at the very end of my post #1.

However, note that this is the only single text (that I have found) where this particular (first/given) name was used.

I will try to contact Mr Kullander, as soon as possible (it will probably take a while, it's vacation times here in Sweden right now).

We'll see what he has to say about the basis for the claim of this/his "James Hauxwell".

Either way, this far I will stick with "John Hauxwell" (in my MS).

Cheers

/B

______________________________________________
*Kullander, S. O. 1986. Cichlid fishes of the Amazon River drainage of Peru.
Department of Vertebrate Zoology. Research Division. Naturhistoriska riksmuseet/
Swedish Museum of Natural History. Stockholm, Sweden. 394p.
(here, on p.7, Kullander himself, here, or here).

I had a very quick reply, yesterday afternoon (!), and Sven Kullander (who himself have studied the fish specimens collected by Hauxwell, in the Philadelphia Museum/Collection) admits that his "James Hauxwell" (from back in 1986) simply ought to have been a mix-up between James (Orton) and (John) Hauxwell.

Thus; simply yet another "red herring".

We're back where we were before.

/B

PScofield said:

Peru has much better records than many European countries!

Click to expand...

May there an existing death record from Hauxwell in the Loreto area and/or in Pebas?

Just another try to solve him.