Lucy AH KIN
Name Variations ATCIN, ATKEN, AICHIN, AHKENN, ACKAN
Father Lee aka Le aka John AH KIN or ATCIN b. 1825 m. 18521 d. 18982
Mother Sarah A. RATCLIFF3 aka LAIDLEY4 b. 1824 m. 18525 d. 18946
Sister Jane ACTIN b. 18537 m. d.
Inmate Lucy AICHIN b. 18558 m. 1872 (see below) d. 19219
Sister Sarah ACKAN b. 185810 m. d.
Brother Samuel Le AKIN b. 186011 m. d.
Sister Maria AH KIN b. 1862 m. 187812 Thomas AH SEE d. 194013
Sister Hannah LE AH KIN b. 186414 m. unknown d. unknown
Brother Luppit aka Lip Dick AH KIN b. 186615 m. unknown d. 189816
Husband (1) Joe aka Chu COEY aka COY aka COOEY b. unknown m. 187217 d. unknown
Husband (2) Charles ON b. unknown m. none d. unknown
Daughter Julia Wing COEY b. 187318 m. d. unknown
Daughter Mary COOEY b. 187519 m. d. unknown
Daughter Dolly Mary ON b. 188520 m. d. 1919
Son William ON b. 188821 m. d. 195122
Daughter Rosanna ON b. 188823 m. George SUE WON d. unknown
Son David AHKENN b. 189224 m. d. 196325
Son Robert COY b. 189526 m. unknown Eliza d. 196127

Note An image of Lucy and her descendants appears in the exhibition Tracking the Dragon.28

Lucy was admitted to Newcastle on 17 June 1868,29 and KING confirmed her admission in her report on 23 June.30 Lucy was fourteen years old and was able to read the alphabet and write letters on slate. She was recorded as a Protestant and her name appeared on SELWYN's list compiled in June 1868.31 The Braidwood Dispatch reported in the Empire32 that Lucy, the daughter of a Chinaman at Jembaicumbene, had recently charged the Chinese immigrant, LI TIN, with indecent assault. The case was dismissed and Lucy was placed in gaol pending the decision of the Bench to approve an application by her mother, Sarah, to send her to Newcastle. It was reported that Sarah was unable to support Lucy and that her father refused to do so. The bench met at Braidwood gaol on Thursday, 30 April 1868, and committed Lucy to Newcastle making an order for her 'unnatural father'33 to contribute to her support. While the Entrance Book,34 and also Lucy's trial in Muswellbrook during 1871, recorded that her father was dead, this was not the case. Lucy also stated at her Muswellbrook trial that she had been admitted to the Sydney Infirmary suffering from St. Vitus' dance and from there she had been sent to the school and there was some element of truth in this statement.

On 23 September 1870, CLARKE arranged a three-year apprenticeship for Lucy with Alexander JOHNSTON, Esq., of Scone. This apprenticeship was short-lived as, on 5 October, JOHNSTON35 wrote to CLARKE stating:

I am sorry to inform you we cannot take the girl you wished to send in consequence of Mrs Johnston's not liking to have a girl with Chinese blood as other servants would annoy her and make her life miserable. That is the only reason.

CLARKE arranged another three-year apprenticeship for Lucy as a domestic servant to Mr. JOSEPHSON, of the Bank at Muswellbrook on 10 October 1870. She was to be paid four shillings per week during her first year and this was to increase by one shilling a week each year for the following two years. In an attempt to avoid a further rejection of Lucy due to her appearance, CLARKE reported to the Colonial Secretary on 13 October 1870, when requesting permission for the apprenticeship to go ahead that

Mr Josephson has seen Ah Kin and rather likes her appearance than otherwise.36

Nearly three months later on 4 January 1871, Lucy accused a local labourer, Edward MADDEN, with raping her at the Muswellbrook burial ground while she was caring for JOSEPHSON’S three young children.37 The Police Gazette in connection to MADDEN’s arrest reported that her surname was ATKIN.38 On 9 January 1871, JOSEPHSON returned Lucy to the school.39 He accompanied her return with a letter that stated.

I am afraid that the man will get into it for his trouble she has known[?] enough to constitute "rape" and not the mere attempt she swore to in the indictment. I can hardly believe but that she gave the man a good deal of encouragement for she said nothing about the affair until the next morning and I think being frightened that we should hear of it, told the servant girl about it. The morning before Lucy left here she was locked up in the servant's room, the next morning the the girl missed a 5/- piece now noone else could have taken it except Lucy however we could not find it on her but she acknowledged to having seen it in the girls [sic] box and as there was some wages coming to Lucy I paid the servant out of it feeling certain that she took it as we have found her out in many thefts before even the children's clothes that were given to her to wash she had thrown down the closet and buried about the yard. I have still a few shillings of her wages on hand (and will forward them to you).
Hoping you will be able to make something of this specimen of humanity.

Lucy's readmission isn’t recorded near the first entry of her name in the Entrance Book and, on her return to the school, she was temporarily admitted to the Newcastle Reformatory.40 Because the reformatory records are not extant it is unknown whether her name was entered in that register at this time. A letter from LUCAS stated that Lucy:

… was returned to the institution on the 6th [sic] Jan. last and placed by my Predecessor Capt. Clarke in the Reformatory under the charge of Mrs King (as I am informed) for safety and to prevent her being tampered with.

Lucy absconded from the reformatory on 14 April 1871,41 with the reformatory admission, Mary Ann MEEHAN, and another industrial school admission, Annie HOWARD.42 The Empire reported the girls’ discovery by constable LEONARD of Wallsend Police43 when

… a suspicious character had been seen purchasing rations from a store near Hexham, and then proceeding into the bush at Minmi. A search in the locality was instituted, and the trio were discovered concealed in a hut, where they said they had been staying ever since their escape with three men whose names they refused to give to the officer. The police, however, have the names of the scoundrels.44

One of these ‘scoundrels’ was Thomas HAFEY who was also arrested by LEONARD and subsequently received one month in Maitland Gaol for concealing an absconder. The identity of the other two men has not been made possible. Lucy was confined by LUCAS in the cells as punishment for this escape and also for her disorderly conduct.45 At MADDEN's trial in Muswellbrook on 21 April, one week later, Lucy’s admission to Newcastle in 1868 and this escape were used by the defence against her.46 The fact that she had not reported the rape until the day after it had occurred and then to a ‘fellow servant’ and not to her mistress, was also used against her, as was JOSEPHSON’s decision to return her to Newcastle after the assault. A doctor called as a witness stated that Lucy wasn’t a virgin as she had claimed and that she showed no bruises or ‘marks of resistance.’ MADDEN and his witness maintained that Lucy had gone with him willingly and had not screamed. Although the judge stated that47

… it was not because a female had been or was a bad character that she was to be ravished by anyone who chose to do so; still at the same time the character of the person making a charge of such a nature was not to be altogether left out of consideration. He referred in very strong terms to the low estimation in which the female sex is looked upon by a certain class of men, who appear to regard women as created only for the gratification of their animal passions … but unless the prosecutrix had objected to what the prisoner did to her, and plainly showed to him that she objected, he could not be found guilty.

MADDEN had pleaded not guilty to this capital offence and was subsequently acquitted.

Lucy transferred with the school to Biloela in May 1871 and was listed in the transfer records for the industrial school and not the reformatory so after the Muswellbrook trial she was almost certainly returned there. On the 21 November 1871,48 LUCAS requested and gained approval to apprentice Lucy to Captain GIBSON, the pilot at the Sydney Heads, for one year at a wage of two shillings a week with a further provision for clothing. LUCAS noted that Lucy was conducting herself well and no record of her name has been found amongst the Biloela rioters of September. This apprenticeship didn't last and Lucy may have been returned to Biloela but the records for this period are missing from the register. Further permission was gained for another apprenticeship to Mr George P. EASTMAN of Balmain on the 5 March but it is unclear whether this apprenticeship took place as on the 23 April a request was made and approved for an apprenticeship for one year at two shillings a week to Percy SCARR49 of Wagga Wagga.

Both Lucy, recorded as ATKIN, and Jane WHITE (2) were apprenticed to Percy SCARR as both girls appeared in Wagga Wagga court on Friday, 31 May 1872, charged with absconding from their indentures. They were discharged from custody on the condition that they return to SCARR's service.50 Shortly after this, in June 1872, Lucy's apprenticeship was cancelled by the Wagga Wagga bench, as Lucy had signed the consent for this to occur.51 Lucy and Joe COEY,52 a greengrocer, were married by Edwin H. TOMPSON on 30 July 1872, at the Office of the District Registrar in Wagga Wagga. Their places of birth, names of their parents and their ages were not recorded on the registration. The witnesses were Mary SISSANS and William H. WILSON. The birth registration for a daughter, Mary, where Joe was almost certainly referred to as Chu, suggested that he too was Chinese or of Chinese descent.53 Only three children were recorded for the couple.

Lucy charged Sam, a Chinese man, with abusive language in Wagga in August 1872.54 She was listed to appear for insolvency in Wagga Wagga court on 13 July 1875,55 but no further information about this case has yet been located. Recorded variously as Lucy Choo, Chew or Chu COOEY she took Mary CROSS to court for assault in September 187956 and in March 1880, Lucy's husband, CHEW COOEY, was advertising that he would not be responsible for her debts as she had left their home.

19150204218_451674157c.jpg

Chew COOEY's Advertisment [1880]
Image courtesy of Trove - Digitalized Newspapers
Wagga Wagga Advertiser (NSW : 1875 - 1910)57

After this date Lucy commenced a relationship with another Chinese immigrant, Charles or Charles ON WON and is relationship was confirmed in online trees. Nothing is known of Charley On WON. An image of Lucy and her children with Charley ON WON may be viewed in the photo contained in the website, Tracking the Dragon: A History of the Chinese in the Riverina.58 Online trees confirm this relationship and have identified many of the births and deaths of these children. Lucy was assaulted by Frederick CULSON [?] in Wagga in April 1882.59 It is unlikely that Lucy reconciled with her first husband, Chew, and uncertain what happened to Charley as in 1892 Lucy delivered an illegitimate son, David, and by 1895 it may be that she and Chew had reconciled as Lucy's last child, Robert, was registered with these parents.

Lucy eventually moved to Bathurst and died there in 1921.60 Her parents were recorded on her death registration as Ah KIM and Lucy.

Family

Lucy was the daughter of Le aka Lee aka John AH KIN and Sarah. The Entrance Book only named Lucy's mother, Sarah, and recorded that her father was dead.61 This statement had almost certainly been provided by Lucy and was false. Le AH KIN had been ordered to financially support Lucy while she was in Newcastle and a receipt for money that he had paid in 1871 and which was received from Braidwood Police on 11 January 1872, was retained by the government and appeared in the CSIL. It is thought that Lucy was angry with her father and refused to identify him when this information was collected in Newcastle. Le's receipt is reproduced below with the permission of SRNSW.62

7959267836_fb2f041bb6.jpg

Receipt from Le AH KIN [1871]
Source: Courtesy of State Records NSW: SRNSW: CSIL: 72/285 [1/2161]

There is little doubt that Lucy's baptism occurred in 1855 in the Canberra area63 of NSW under the name Lucy AICHIN. Her parents were identified on the index as Lee and Sarah. This baptism cannot easily be read and an online tree for Lucy has identified that Lucy had been born in Bell's Paddock, Braidwood, on 1 October 1855. Although their father's given name and surname were variously recorded, registrations for Lucy's siblings confirmed that she was the daughter of the Chinese immigrant, Lee aka Le aka John AH KIN, and his wife, Sarah. As Lee ATCIN and Sarah RATCLIFF they had married in the Presbyterian Church in Yass on 10 June 1852. Lee and Sarah were both from Bedullack, NSW. The witnesses were Elizabeth ENTWISTLE of Yass and Mary DEREPAS of Duro.64 The birth registration for Lucy's sister, Maria, identified that she had been born at Strike-a-Light Flat, Braidwood, but also that her mother's maiden name was Sarah LAIDLEY.65 Maria's birth confirmed that the couple had three girls and one boy who were alive in 1862 and the record further identified that Lee and Sarah had married in Yass, NSW, in 1851. Based on the two differing records, it is believed that Sarah had married as a widow or did not use her maiden name. As John was the informant for Maria's birth in 1862, the surname of LAIDLEY and the age she provided at the time must be questioned but until further evidence for any differing names appeared, the surname LAIDLEY has been retained.

Sarah had been born in Manchester, England. Her year of birth was reported to be about 1824 on her daughter, Maria's, birth registration. At the time of her death she was reported to have been born in about 1833. Sarah died of the effects of alcoholic poisoning producing syncope of the heart at Hill End, north of Bathurst, on 30 October 1894. She was attributed the alias BROWNING by the coroner.66 It is likely that Sarah had arrived in NSW at the age of four with her parents, Joseph and Susannah RADCLIFF, and her brother, Crispian, aboard the Champion in 1840. The family was from Oldham, a part of Greater Manchester, England. This potential arrival suggests that Sarah's age at death was more correct and that she was about 16 when she married. This then suggests that the surname recorded on Maria's birth registration was in error. For this registration Le was the informant. No identification has yet been made of either Sarah RADCLIFF or LAIDLEY on the 1841 English Census.

Lee aka John was from Canton, China, and had been born in about 1825. He was recorded as a gold-digger at the time of Maria's birth. As Le, his death was possibly registered at Wagga Wagga four years after Lucy died. As Le, his death was possibly registered at Wagga Wagga four years after the death of his wife, Sarah. The different death locations, if the correct deaths have been identified as no registrations have been viewed, suggest that by the 1890s, Le and Sarah may not have been living together. It is interesting that eventually Lucy also moved to Bathurst.

It is considered likely that the Sarah AH KIM,67 who appeared in the Wagga Wagga court with Ellen SEYMOUR on 20 October 1888, charged with keeping a disorderly house is connected. She was sent to Albury gaol for six months and was released on 19 April 1889. The Albury gaol records indicated that she was a native of the colony but had been born in Beechworth, Victoria, in about 1856.68 It may be that she was Lucy's sister, Sarah, who had been born in 1858.

Updated January 2017

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License