Quick Search : British Home Children : The RootsChat.Com Reference Library

HOME FORUM HELP SEARCH

News : The Surname Interests Table (SIT), the Database for Special Interests Groups (DBSIG) and Ancestral Anniversaries
are now "mobile friendlier" more here ...

The RootsChat Reference Library

RootsChat.Com » RootsChat Reference Library » Database for Special Interest Groups (DBSIG) » British Home Children : Quick Search

Record #21858

Name :: : James Ernest COWELL (1894 - )
Father: :
Mother: :

BMD and other details

Date of Birth: : 5 Jun 1894
Marriage (1): :
Marriage (2): :
Date of Death: : Notes : accident

Abode (1) : Place of BirthEngland

Abode (2) : Place of Death / BurialUnited States of America

Sailing Information

Date of Arrival: : 31 Jul 1904
Country: : Canada
Ship: : Southwark
Placement Family: :

Homes / Agencys

Institution (GB): :
Agency: : Barnardos

NotesSHINING THROUGH
The Life of James Ernest Cowell
by C. A. Head

1. England

James Cowell was born on 5th June 1894 at 18 Witham St., Hoxton Old Town, a fair haired, blue eyed baby born into a harsh world. He was registered under the name James Frederick but he never used the Frederick - he probably never even knew he had it. He was the fourth of six children born to George and Elizabeth Cowell (n?e Farmer). Hoxton was a very poor and squalid area of the East End of London. The construction of workshops, warehouses and the railway had displaced many people which contributed further to already overcrowded conditions. The area was a centre for furniture manufacturing which may be why the Cowell family lived there. James?s father, George, came from a long line of men who worked with wood and was himself a wood turner. The furniture workshops used ?sweated? labour, and George would have worked very long hours for very little pay. Charles Booth classifies Witham Street as ?poor 18 shillings to 21 shillings a week for a moderate family? - an improvement at least on some other streets in Hoxton where prostitution and crime were rife.
By the time James was born George and Elizabeth already had two daughters and a son - Elizabeth born 1888, Susan born 1890 and George born 1891. When James was just nine months old tragedy struck the family. Little Susan was playing in De Beauvoir Square with other children when her dress caught fire on a workman?s brazier. ?She ran around the square screaming with fright, and was speedily enveloped in flames?. Two gentlemen came to her rescue and took her to the Metropolitan Hospital where she died of shock and extensive burns on 13th March 1895. She was only five years old. We cannot know the effect on her family but, even though times were much harder and death in infancy was common, this must have been a terribly traumatic event. Certainly her sister Elizabeth still talked about it well into old age. In her version of the event George?s petticoats had caught fire and Susan had put the fire out but in doing so set her own long ringlets alight. Who can say which is the correct version?

In July of 1896 a little sister, Florence, was born and in December 1898 the last child, Rosina, joined the family. Elizabeth, George, James and Florence all attended Coleman Street School which opened in 1895. James and Florence started at the age of three, presumably because their mother was working. They lived at 3BB Whitecross Place, which is near the massive sidings of Liverpool Street mainline station, from early 1896 until August 1899 at least.

The family was not to continue long in this way. 1900 was a very bad year for the Cowells. Their troubles started on 23rd January when father, George, was admitted to the Poplar and Stepney Sick Asylum, a hospital provided by the Metropolitan Asylums Board in 1871 to serve the sick poor of London. It has been passed down by word of mouth in the family that he had wounded his hip on a wood working tool. It is not known how long he had had the wound by the time of his admission but, presumably, he had been struggling to work for some time. It seems that, by now, the family had moved to Limehouse to be near to George?s father and stepmother.

Three of the children - James, Florence and Rosina - were taken into the care of the Stepney Union and entered Ratcliffe Workhouse on 5th February 1900. This workhouse was changed to a children?s receiving home in 1909 but seems to have largely been used for that purpose when the Cowell children entered, with very few adults being admitted. They were now under the jurisdiction of the South Metropolitan Schools District which served several unions including the one at Stepney. On 1st March little Rosina was transferred to the Poplar & Stepney Sick Asylum and, on 28th March, she died there of whooping cough, presumably caught in the Home. Her mother was present at the death and her address is given as 113 Carr Street, Limehouse. She must have felt she was in some sort of nightmare.

In the meantime, while Rosina was in hospital, on 18th March, little Florence was transferred to St. Anne?s Convalescent Home for Children at Herne Bay in Kent. It is not known why she needed to convalesce - perhaps the family were under-nourished or perhaps she, too, had whooping cough. James continued to languish in Ratcliffe. The next known event is the admission of Elizabeth into Bromley House Workhouse, Stepney on 28th June. Had she managed to stay with her mother until then? We don?t know. She was transferred to Ratcliffe on 17th July. Perhaps she and James were allowed to meet.

On 3rd August of that terrible year, George, their father died in the Hospital. He was just 33 years old. The death certificate gives cause of death as ?morbus coxae? which means disease of the hip joint, usually a tubercular infection. This does seem to agree somewhat with the family story of a woodworking accident - perhaps the infection entered through a wound. The three surviving children whose whereabouts we know about - Elizabeth, James and Florence - were now all in grim homes. They must have been bewildered and grief-stricken at being torn away from all family and everything they knew. It is not known what happened to George junior who would have been about eight years old. He does not seem to come under the Stepney Union canopy and it hasn?t been possible to locate him.

In September 1900 James was finally discharged from Ratcliffe and sent to the South Metropolitan Schools District school at Brighton Road, Sutton, Surrey, a purpose built institution, grim by today?s standard but considered a modern facility in its day. He remained there for two years until September 1902 when the Sutton School closed and he was admitted to Stifford Children?s Home in Essex, a home run by the Stepney Union.

In the meantime, Elizabeth and Florence were being pushed from pillar to post. Poor little Florence was in and out of workhouses and homes numerous times, spending the longest time at The Bridge School, Witham, Essex, a former workhouse purchased by the District in 1882 for use as an orphanage. She was there from December 1902 to July 1904. Elizabeth spent three months in hospital and an extended period in Ratcliffe before finally being sent to the Stifford Children?s Home in October 1902, just one month after James entered. It is difficult to know whether they had much contact with one another as boys and girls were kept in separate buildings but it is likely that there was some as a correspondence was carried on between them in later years. Perhaps they were allowed special meetings or perhaps they met in church on a Sunday. Elizabeth, who was eleven at the time when the family split up no doubt remembered her brother well. James probably also remembered her even though he was only eight at the time of their reunion and had not seen her for some two years. Florence joined the same home at North Stifford in September 1904 but, by this time, her brother, James, had left. Little Florence had only been three when the split occurred and had not seen her sister, Elizabeth, for some four years. The sisters remained close throughout their long lives. The children do not seem to have had any contact with their mother since 1900. Certainly by 1904 the Stepney Union papers are stating ?mother unknown?. I found her in the 1901 census living in Limehouse in lodgings, occupation ?paper carter?.

James left the home at North Stifford on the 11th March 1904 and was received into Dr. Barnardo?s for special emigration. His birth date is given on entry as 25th Dec. 1893, whereas he was actually born on 5th June 1894. This error seems to have been passed on to them by the Stepney Union. How it originally occurred we don?t know. Poor little James never seemed to know his own birthday. The photo taken of him on entry into Dr. Barnardo?s (the only photo we have ever seen of him) shows his name as ?Ernest J. Cowell?. This is the first record of his use of the name Ernest but he seems to have used it throughout his life. Following admission to Dr. Barnardo?s, James was sent to Epsom, a home in Surrey. He was there just two months and on 9th May 1904 he was moved to the main home in Stepney prior to his emigration. During this time he was receiving letters from his sister, Elizabeth, who no doubt told him about the arrival at North Stifford of his sister, Florence. She probably told him to be brave and that she was thinking of him. So far he had been in five different homes in four years. These Homes were very strict and food was barely adequate. Things were to get even worse.

2. Canada

The practice of sending large numbers of destitute children to Canada started in the 1860s. It seemed to solve two problems at once. It removed destitute children from the streets of London and it provided a new sparsely populated country with cheap farm labour. In the early days there were very few controls. Children were sent out to farmers without any sort of supervision. Obviously, the children were often cruelly treated and abused. The fact that they were considered by the Canadian press and public as second class citizens - the dregs of society in the old country being dumped on the healthy, clean population of Canada - led to their being dehumanised. Girls were often sexually abused and both boys and girls were often beaten, overworked and neglected.

When Dr. Barnardo started sending his children to Canada in the 1880s he tried to solve some of the problems by way of a charter. This stated:

1. That no child shall be sent out manifesting criminal or vicious taint.

2. That no child is to be sent out who is not at the time in excellent health, and without tendency to disease.

3. That all such children (excepting, of course, the very young ones who go out for ?adoption?) must have been passed through a period of the most careful training, not only in industrial pursuits, but also of a moral and religious character.

4. That as regards all children who come up to the standard of the three previous conditions, only the flower of our flock are to be sent to Canada.

5. That upon reaching Canada all children are to come under the care of properly qualified persons connected with our institutions on the Canadian side, by whom they are to be distributed carefully into well-selected homes; and that even then our work is not to be considered complete, but that regular communication shall be maintained with these children for years by personal visitation of experienced assistants, and by a system of written reports from the child and its employer. That careful statistics shall be kept showing frequent reports of their whereabouts, progress, and general welfare, until they have reached an age when they no longer require our supervising care.

6. That if, in spite of all these tests, precautions and safeguards, it is found by experience that some particular child, after having been placed out in Canada, becomes definitely immoral or criminal, then every legitimate means is to be adopted to recover possession of that child, and to return him or her at the earliest opportunity to the old country.

In spite of all this, the prejudice against the children continued. There were constant references in the press to ?slum? and ?outcast? which did great damage to the children. Their reputation was wholly unjustified - the crime rate among the children, for example, was considerably less than in the population at large - but this was not the message conveyed by the Canadian press. It is interesting to note that, even amongst the kindliest and most philanthropic people of the time, there did not seem to be any realisation that these poor, lonely, heartbroken children might need love and understanding. The mindset of the day was that they needed work and moral guidance to build their characters. Furthermore, the annual visits that Dr. Barnardo put in place were of very little use. Officials tended to believe the farmers rather than the children, and very often didn?t even bother to interview the children at all.

James set sail for Toronto via Quebec from Liverpool aboard the SS Southwark on 21st July 1904, aged just 10 years old. There were six girls and 24 boys on the ship, all from various workhouse institutions. They were accompanied by Alfred de Brissac Owen, a clergyman?s son from England who ran Barnardo?s Canadian operations for over thirty years. By all accounts he seems to have been a decent man. James must have been filled with fear as the ship docked at Quebec on 31st July 1904. All the boys wore the same dark wool suits - tight wool coats on top and dark short pants below - thin socks and high black shoes. Each child had a small tin trunk which contained another pair of shorts and a shirt. When they came down from the ship they were taken into an immigration shed and examined by doctors. They were then taken in single file to catch the train to Toronto.

James spent only a day or two at the Barnardo?s headquarters on Jarvis Street, Toronto before being sent to his first placement on 2nd August with a Mr. McColman on a farm near the small scattered settlement of Red Wing in Collingwood Township. We cannot know James?s feelings or how he viewed his experiences because no-one living has been able to ask him, but he must have been very lonely, sad and confused. He had never worked on a farm before, he knew no-one. We do know that many of the children were treated in an abominable fashion - made to eat alone, over-worked and given straw to sleep on. The farmers signed contracts agreeing to provide board, lodging and schooling plus a few dollars a year which was put into trust for the child when they reached eighteen. Many farmers did not keep to their agreements, keeping the children away from school so that they could work all day and refusing to pay the money due.

It must be stressed that most of the children were badly treated. Those who found understanding homes were very lucky. Almost none received any form of affection. Most of the boys who were over eight were up before dawn and worked until dark. Often they were the first up and had to bring water to the house and take it to the livestock. In the winter they would have had to break the ice to do this. They would light the fires, feed the animals, milk the cows, pick potatoes, help with the harvest, clean out stables, and so on. Often they did all this with clothing that was not adequate for the hard Canadian winters and with empty bellies. James?s experiences seem to be typical - he was moved from farm to farm and was often unhappy.

His first placement in Collingwood, a township some one hundred miles north of Toronto on the shores of Lake Huron, was not a happy one.Mr. McColman complained that he was too small and couldn?t do the work required. He sent him back to the Home on 1st October 1904 after only two months. This was probably the best thing for James as children were often kept under sufferance which led to even worse treatment.

On 6th October, after only a few days at the Home in Toronto, James was sent to Mr. Thomas Jackson in Granton, a tiny hamlet in Biddulph Township. Biddulph is famous for the massacre of five family members of the Donnelly family in the 1880s after a long-standing local feud. It is about one hundred miles West of Toronto. James wrote a postcard to the Home on 10th October having already attended his first threshing. There follows a very stable couple of years in the life of James Ernest Cowell. Mr. Jackson was obviously a very understanding and pleasant man who kept his word. He liked James and James liked him. Mr. Jackson reported to the Home that James was ?a willing little fellow and does very well for a boy of his age?. James attended school every day as well as attending church and Sunday school. One wonders about James?s experiences in school. He seems to have done well but Barnardo boys were often shy and wary. They were marked out by their distinctive clothing as different. They were often bullied by teachers and children alike. Perhaps James was lucky - we don?t know. He also received letters from his sister, Elizabeth, during this period which probably gave him great comfort. The annual reports from inspectors show that his health and conduct were very good during this period.

This happy state of affairs was not to continue. In December 1906, just over two years after James had arrived at the farm, Mr. Jackson rented it to a Mr. Henry Hawkins. James was asked by the Home if he wished to stay at the farm. Naturally he wanted to stay in familiar surroundings and stayed on after the farm was taken over by Mr. Hawkins. On 12th February 1907, barely six weeks after the farm had been taken over, the Home receive a letter from Rev. F. Powell of Granton stating that James was being ill-treated and should be removed at once. We can only guess at what the ill-treatment was but the vicar obviously felt very strongly about it. Did James confide in the vicar whom he had probably seen every week for two years, or did the vicar see for himself what was going on? We cannot know.

It seems that James was visited by a Mr. Law of Barnardo?s on 16th February and immediately removed and taken back to the Home in Toronto. Just two days later, on 18th, he was placed with a Mr. Robert Johnston, in Beaverdale, Euphrasia Township. This Township adjoins Collingwood Township where James had been previously. It has very harsh winters with heavy snowfalls and cold winds blowing off Lake Huron. Mr. Johnston didn?t want James from the start but refused several requests from the Home to return him. He refused to sign the agreement and haggled with the Home about how much he should pay for James, stating that he was unsatisfactory. The annual report from the inspector in July states that he is not well behaved. Mr. Johnston finally sent him back to the Home on 30th November, James having spent the best part of a year where he wasn?t wanted. No doubt much of this time was spent being cold, hungry, lonely and harshly treated.

In its usual swift fashion, the Home soon found a new placement for James. On 3rd December 1907 he was sent to the farm of Mr. Nelson McDonald, this time in the settlement of Sonya in Brock Township on the eastern shore of Lake Simcoe. Mr. McDonald signed an agreement to keep James until 1911, to provide board, lodging, washing, clothing and necessaries plus $100.00 for the entire 3 year period. However, by November 1908, Mr. McDonald decided that he did not want James - he could not earn the amount being asked by the Home. On 3rd December, after exactly one year with Mr. McDonald and after much correspondence with the Home, James was transferred to a Mr. Gardner of Ashburn, a rural area of Whitby Township, just East of Toronto on the banks of Lake Ontario. By now, James was 14 years old.

The next we hear of James is on 27th January 1909 when the Home received a telephone call from the Fred Victor Mission in Toronto stating that James had run away from his employer and tramped the thirty or so miles to Toronto. The Fred Victor Mission was started in 1893 as an outreach mission of the Methodist Church to address the basic needs of homeless and transient men. The Mission were asked to direct James to the Home. As the Mission was on the corner of Jarvis Street, the very street where the Barnardo?s Home stood, it would have been an easy matter for James to find his way there. In fact, he could probably have gone to the Home in the first place if he had wanted to. However, he obviously didn?t want to because that same day he was brought into the Home by the police who had picked him up for wondering the streets. He must have left the Mission and wondered about not knowing what to do. The reason he gave for running away was that his employer had threatened to hit him. It is plain from the papers that the Home had no intention of forcing James to return to his employer but he had obviously come to the end of his tether and did not intend to be sent anywhere. He absconded from the Home the following day.

It is here that things become murky. The papers are not at all clear and it is difficult to piece together what happened to James. It seems, however, that he spent some time with Mr. McDonald, the employer he had been with during most of 1908. We don?t know whether he made his own way there or whether the Home sent him but certainly correspondence passed between him and the Home during May of 1909 care of Mr. McDonald?s address. Did James throw himself onto Mr. McDonald?s mercy as the least of many evils? Perhaps his year with Mr. McDonald had not been so bad in spite of the constant wrangling with the Home as regards money.

However, by 14th December 1909 the Home reports that they have no idea as to James?s whereabouts. On 30th December they received a postcard from James giving an address in Toronto and stating that he had run away (from where? from Mr. McDonald?) and wished to be taken into the Home.On 4th January 1910 he called at the Home and saw Mr. Alfred (de Brissac) Owen. He stated that he was working at the Canadian Gas Power and Launches Co. for $4.00 a week, learning the trade of tool maker. However his earnings were not enough to pay his rent and he had spent the previous night at the House of Industry, roughly the equivalent of a workhouse. He was allowed a small amount from the money set aside for him. However, just two days later he was in trouble again and back at the Home. He had lost his job because he?d had a day off - was this the day he called at the Home? Mr. Owen then put pressure on James to go back to farming. He was allowed to draw another $1.00 and told to think it over.

Poor James seems to have had very little choice. His heart obviously wasn?t in farming. The city was in his blood - he felt the pull of Toronto. Poor boy was fifteen and a half years old, on his own and with very little money. He had no family to turn to, the Home being his only option. Thus he informed Mr. Owen on the 7th January 1910 that he had decided to go back to farming. He was given some new clothes which were charged to his account and 25c. On 10th January he was placed with Mr. Sidney Lee near the village of Rodney in Aldborough Township, this time about 150 miles to the West of Toronto. This placement did not work out at all as a fortnight later James returned to the Home and Mr. Lee complained that he was not at all satisfactory. At the same time the landlady who James had boarded with in Toronto started pressing the Home for money for his unpaid rent.

Eventually, by the end of January, the Home seemed to give up on James. They allowed him to take the balance of his account and go to seek work in the City. On the 12th March James called in at the Home and reported that he had steady work with ?The C.N. Ry.? driving a team. It is not known what the abbreviation stood for unless it was the Canadian National Railway?

Over the next two or three years it is difficult to know what happened. A letter written by Mr. Owen in July 1912 to the Stepney Union reports that his whereabouts are unknown. Mr. Owen also goes on to state that James?s record has been far from satisfactory, having been in the hands of the police and having repeatedly absconded. This statement appears harsh bearing in mind that the only reason he was in the hands of the police was because he was homeless, young and penniless. He had committed no criminal offence. It is true that he ran away when he was unhappy and badly treated. Perhaps this showed pluck and an unwillingness to have his spirit broken. During his two years spent with Mr. Jackson, where he was treated with some understanding, he seems to have blossomed. It appears that after 1906 he received no further schooling and was passed on from one cold and mean farmer to another (with the possible exception of Mr. McDonald who was only mean!). He also lost touch with his sister during this turbulent time when he was desperately trying to escape his wretched childhood and make his own way in the world.

James does appear briefly during 1913 when he called at the Home to report that he was working for the Pedlar People in Oshawa. The Pedlar People was a sheet metal working company and Oshawa is a city about forty miles East of Toronto on the banks of Lake Ontario.

The next documentary evidence we have of James?s whereabouts is his Attestation paper for the Canadian Overseas Expeditionary Force on 22nd September 1914 at Valcartier, Quebec. On this paper he stated that he was already in the Militia - the Queens Own Rifles where he appears to have been from some time during 1913. This makes absolute sense as when the Canadian Expeditionary Force was mobilized in August 1914 following Britain?s declaration of war on Germany, 30 officers and 945 other ranks volunteered from the Queens Own Rifles and were assigned to the 3rd battalion. The 3rd battalion served with 1st Division throughout the War. James was obviously one of these volunteers. He gave his date of birth as 24th December 1892 - adding yet another year to his age. It is difficult to assess James?s physical appearance from the army documents. His complexion is variously described as ?dark?, ?medium? and ?fair?; his hair as ?light brown? or ?light?; his eyes as ?blue? or ?grey?, and his height varies from 5? 6? ? to 5?8?.

3. England and France

The 3rd Canadian Infantry Battalion with 42 officers and 1,123 other ranks, including Private James Ernest Cowell, became part of the 1st Canadian Infantry Brigade which in turn became part of the 1st Division Canadian Expeditionary Force. Thousands of troops were gathered together and organised at Valcartier during August and September 1914. Embarkation onto 40 ships began on 23rd September. However, delays in loading the ships and providing a British Royal Navy escort meant that the ships were kept at anchor at Gasp? off the coast of Quebec until 3rd October when they set sail. It took three hours for the line of 40 ships and 8 Naval vessels to steam through the harbour?s narrow exit into the Gulf of St. Lawrence. It was the first time such a large contingent of troops had crossed the Atlantic. James was on the SS Tunisian. The twelve days spent at sea were occupied in cleaning, physical exercises, concerts, sports on Saturdays and church parades. The first ship arrived in Plymouth on 14th October. 36 hours later all were safely docked. The citizens of Plymouth welcomed the Canadians with cheers and gifts.

The Canadians took the train followed by an eight mile march to Salisbury Plain where sixteen weeks training commenced. They were housed in tented camps. James was in Bustard camp. Abnormal rainfall started almost as soon as the Canadians reached their camp. Between mid-October and mid-February there was double the average rainfall for that period. The weather was also cold, sometimes dropping below freezing. Mud was everywhere and high winds added to the miserable conditions. In fact, the tented camps were flattened on two occasions. Many of the brigades were eventually provided with huts or billets in houses but the 1st Infantry Brigade, including James, remained in tents throughout the Winter. Training included route marches, musketry instruction, foot and arms drill and entrenching. The miserable weather turned training into drudgery. Soaking wet clothes had to dry on the soldiers? backs. Nevertheless morale was high, helped by up to six days leave and a free ticket to anywhere in Britain. I wonder where James went to. On 4th February 1915 the 1st Canadian Division marched off Salisbury Plain after an inspection by George V and Lord Kitchener.

They were taken on trains to Avonmouth from where ships went to St. Nazaire in the Bay of Biscay. The majority of troops were packed in the holds and gales caused sea-sickness. In St. Nazaire the French gave the troops a rousing welcome as they marched to the station to begin a 500 mile train journey to the front. The reason for the circuitous route was that German submarines lay in wait in all the usual short routes to France.

In early March the 1st Canadian Division relieved the British troops at Fleurbaix where they occupied shallow trenches and defended the line. The first week was uneventful but on 10th March the British forces to the right of the Canadians advanced on the village of Neuve Chapelle. The main offensive was carried out by British and Indian troops but the Canadians were ready to advance when ordered to do so. Their riflemen and machine-gunners opened bursts of rapid fire which continued at 15 minute intervals throughout that day and the following. The battle ended on 12th March. Some ground was gained at the cost of nearly 13,000 British and Indian lives and a similar number of German lives. One hundred men in James?s Division were also killed. The Canadians remained in their trenches until 27th March when they went to rest at camp in Estaires, five miles behind the line.

On 5th, 6th and 7th April the Canadians marched across the Flanders countryside to the Ypres salient. This was an area around Ypres that was surrounded by the enemy on three sides. Between 14th and 17th April the Canadian 1st Division took over from the French 11th Division. They defended the Eastern part of the salient with the British to their right and the Algerians to their left. The trenches left by the French were shallow with little protection or sanitation and were littered with dead bodies. The Canadians started converting their part of the front line to British standards, deepening the trenches, adding traverses and communication trenches and guarding all with barbed wire.

On the morning of 22nd April the 1st Brigade trained as usual. At 5pm the Germans, after heavy artillery, released more than 160 tons of chlorine poison gas, the first time the weapon had been used on a large scale during the War. Chlorine is not easily dissipated and it clung to the ground as the cloud rolled forward. It mainly affected the Algerians, attacking their lungs. They broke ranks and abandoned their trenches, half suffocated with eyes streaming, leaving behind a large number of dead. This left a four mile gap in the line, leaving the Canadians totally exposed. The Canadians tried to fill the gap in hastily prepared and scattered positions, the 3rd battalion occupying the space west of the village of St. Julien. At 3.47am on the 23rd April the 1st Canadian Brigade attacked northward., driving the Germans out of Kitchener?s Wood near the village of St. Julien. They fought bravely day and night, making two bayonet charges and taking part in fierce hand to hand combat. At 4 am on the morning of 24th April, after a heavy ten minute bombardment, the Germans released another cloud of chlorine gas directed at the Canadians. They were ordered to urinate on their handkerchiefs and place these over their noses and mouths. These measures proved ineffective and the Canadian lines were broken. Nevertheless the Canadians managed to hold back the Germans taking a heavy toll of German infantry while under constant attack until relief came on 26th April. There were over 6,000 Canadian casualties during this battle of which about 2,000 were fatalities. It has become known as the battle of St. Julien, and the entire offensive became known as the 2nd Battle of Ypres. It set the heroic standard that Canadians would follow for the rest of the War. It was in the trenches during the 2nd Battle of Ypres that John McCrae, who was tending the wounded, wrote the poem ?In Flanders Fields? when a close friend was among the 2,000 Canadian fatalities.

In among the mel?e was Private James Ernest Cowell and sometime during the 24th April he was both gassed and shot in the shoulder. James was taken to Bologne , presumably being treated in field hospitals, and from there to Lakenham Military Hospital in Norfolk, a hospital opened and equipped in 1914 especially for the wounded of the War. During the first week after his injury he expectorated blood. He arrived at Lakenham on 4th May and while there an X-ray showed that the bullet that had entered his shoulder was lodged in his lung. Notwithstanding his injury it must have been a relief to James to be in a real bed in a dry building after seven months of sleeping rough. On 4th June he was moved to Sunnyhill Red Cross Hospital. I have been unable to find this hospital with certainty but dozens of village halls, hotels, schoolrooms, stately homes, drill halls, workhouses, etc. were taken over during the War as temporary hospitals and were staffed with volunteer medical staff. The most likely hospital found is at Thorpe St. Andrew in Norfolk. On 26th July he was transferred again to the Canadian Convalescent Home in Bromley, Kent. Medical reports here on 1st September state that the bullet is still in his lung, and ?rales? of a high piping character can be heard in the region of the wound. James also coughed a good deal. On 20th September a medical board recommended that he should be invalided to Canada.

On 23rd September James was sent to Base, probably Shorncliffe near Folkestone in Kent. During his stay there, during October, he forfeited several days pay due to absence. One wonders if he was searching for his sisters. He must have felt very close to them. He didn?t really know where he came from but he knew it was the South East corner of England. On 25th October James returned to Canada aboard SS Corsican. Ironically some of the passengers aboard the ship were children being sent to Canada by the Catholic Emigration Society. Did James have chance to speak to them? Perhaps he shared a joke and a wink with them.

4. Canada and U.S.A.

Soon after returning to Toronto, on 29th December, James married Edith Winnifred Parker, the daughter of Arthur William and Emily Parker n?e Prentice. Edith had been born in 1897 in London, England. It is not known at this stage when she emigrated to Canada. Was this a whirlwind romance or had Edith waited for James to return from the War? At last James had someone to love and support him.

On 21st January 1916 James was discharged from the Army as medically unfit. During that year James seems to have spent some considerable time at Spadina and College Street Convalescent Hospitals, both in Toronto and both specially for soldiers returning from the War. A medical report on 14th April reveals that the bullet was still in James?s lung, that he had bronchitis and appeared anaemic. It recommends further convalescence. However, in May 1916 we learn from the Barnardo?s papers that James called at the Home to see Mr. Owen. As Mr. Owen wasn?t available he had to leave because he was working as a ?Waterworks Inspector? employed by the City of Toronto. The notes state that he was a smart, well dressed and intelligent fellow, a veteran of St. Julien. James and Edith called at the Home again on 20th June to see Mr. Owen. They were seeking the address of James?s sisters and were told to apply to the Guardians of the Stepney Union. On this occasion he and his wife were shown around the building. He seems to have been treated with great respect - a far cry from his first visit to the Home back in 1904.

A further medical report in August 1916 shows that as well as suffering from the effects of gas and the bullet which was still in his lung, James had shell shock. He was nervous and unsettled. We would probably call this post traumatic stress now. A medical board later the same month concurred that James had 20% disability and should be paid compensation. He seems to have been officially struck off the strength of the Army as medically unfit on 29th September 1916. This is a little confusing as back in January papers stated that he had been discharged and had been working elsewhere. There is a note in the papers in August 1918 that James had had the bullet removed from his lung. It is likely that this operation took place sometime between August 1916 and April 1917.

During 1917 James again tried to find a contact address for his sisters by calling in at the Barnardo?s Home. He had tried writing to the Stepney Union but had received no reply. He doesn?t seem to have received any satisfaction.

Perhaps James couldn?t settle to civilian life, which wouldn?t be surprising as he had been rootless since the age of six. Whatever the reason, by April 1917 he was applying to go back in the Army. He was attested at Toronto Mobilization Centre and declared fit by the medical board. He was taken on the strength of the No. 2 Special Service. The Special Service utilized soldiers of ?B? and ?C? medical categories (James was ?C?). They were used to guard prisoners of war, railways, large supply dumps and various other duties. By June he was re-attested at Spadina and transferred in July to No. 3 Special Service. His rank at this time was sergeant. His period with the Special Service lasted just one year and 120 days. In August 1918 he was discharged at Kingston Ontario as medically unfit for service. Medical notes suggest he had chronic bronchitis with a constant hacking cough as well as insomnia and night sweats. His rank on discharge was Company Sergeant Major and his address was given as 14 North 4th St., Minneapolis, the first record we have that he was working in America. Throughout his military career his conduct was exemplary. The last record on the army papers gave his new address a year later, in August 1919, as 1215 Mary Place, Minneapolis.

The paper trail at this point becomes very thin. We do know that by 1921 James was back in Toronto because he called again at Barnardo?s Home asking for details of his birth. The reason is not known. Perhaps he was intending to emigrate to the U.S.A. He was given the erroneous information that his date of birth was 25th December 1893. At the time of his visit he was working in Parkdale, Toronto, driving a motor truck for J. Harrison, Coal Dealers. He asked yet again, for the fourth time, for addresses for his sisters in England. It is thought that this time he was eventually successful in his quest because by 1923 there was certainly a correspondence going on between James and his sister, Elizabeth.

In fact, the last we hear of Dr. Barnardo?s is in August 1923 when they received a letter from Edith Cowell. She and James were intending to adopt Elizabeth?s daughter, Doreen, as Elizabeth was having difficulty raising two children on her own. It seems that after seven years of marriage James and Edith were childless. Edith was asking for help to bring the little three year old girl over to Canada (or the States). Dr. Barnardo?s replied by giving the address of various agencies they could apply to. At the time of Edith?s letter she was staying in Detroit although she states that her home is in Toronto. We know that this adoption never took place because the little girl was my mother and she never left her mother or the U.K.

Just two months later, in October, James. E. Cowell appeared on a manifest of passengers applying for admission to the United States. His occupation was given as millwright and his address as 27 Christie St., Toronto. It must have been sometime around this time, however, that they stayed permanently in the United States and applied for citizenship.

We know from Doreen that Elizabeth and her two children were hoping to join James and Edith, presumably in the United States, sometime in the mid-twenties, but the scheme fell through at the last minute when a telegram was received. James had been killed while working as a surveyor. Family tradition has it that he fell from a high building although this has yet to be confirmed by documentation.

The 1930 United States census shows Edith Cowell living in Detroit city with a five year old daughter called Betty Cowell. Did James and Edith finally have a child of their own? Did James see the child? Or did they adopt her? At present we don?t know. Edith states on the form that the child was born in Michigan of parents who originated from England which suggests that she was indeed their biological daughter. She also states that she had had American citizenship since 1922 and was a saleslady in a shoe shop. Inquiries suggest that Betty died, unmarried in 1992.

The mother of Elizabeth, George, James and Florence did eventually turn up again during the 1930s when she advertised for her children in the News of the World. Unfortunately, by this time James was already dead, but a reunion did occur between mother and daughters. She eventually died during World War II.

James Ernest Cowell had a short and hard life. Shining through the old records, however comes a real fighting spirit - an honest, brave and intelligent young man who refused to give up in the face of horrendous hardship and difficulties. I am proud to know he was a member of my family.

?Christine Head, great niece of James Cowell, 2009.

ContributorsCreated : 2013-09-10 20:18:17 / From original database

Last Updated :

Family History ResearchersRootsChatters with family connections to James Ernest COWELL:

Readers Comments

Surnames starting with: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 30 Entries

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 10313 Entries

ID	Name	DOB	Place of birth	Arrivals & Ships	Dest.	Agency	Family links
3004	AARON, Alfred Robert	1899	ENG, LAN, West Derby, Liverpool	Mar 1911 : Sicilian	CAN	Barnardos
3003	AARON, John Richard	1895	ENG, LAN, West Derby, Liverpool	Mar 1911 : Sicilian	CAN	Barnardos
3007	ABBEY, Bertha	1890	ENG, DUR, Stockton on Tees	Jul 1904 : Southwark	CAN	Barnardos
3006	ABBEY, John	1887	ENG, DUR, Stockton on Tees	Oct 1904 : Southwark	CAN	Barnardos
3161	ABBEY, Thomas	1892	ENG, DUR, Stockton on Tees	Oct 1904 : Southwark	CAN	Barnardos
3020	ABBOT, Alice	1877	ENG, MDX, Islington	Oct 1893 : Labrador	CAN	Barnardos
3047	ABBOT, William	1878	ENG,	Apr 1895 : Parisian	CAN	Barnardos
3019	ABBOTT, Alfred	1869	ENG,	Aug 1887 : Parisian	CAN	Barnardos
23669	ABBOTT, Alice	1877	ENG,	Oct 1893 : Labrador	CAN	Barnardos
3022	ABBOTT, Bertie	1894	ENG, SFK, Ipswich	May 1909 : Corsican	CAN	Barnardos	sharonmx5 , patty_in_ms
3025	ABBOTT, David Henry	1891	ENG, ESS, Grays	Mar 1901 : Tunisian	CAN	Barnardos
3055	ABBOTT, Douglas Groves	1910	ENG, HAM, Hartley Wintney	Apr 1924 : Montclare	CAN	Barnardos
3858	ABBOTT, Emily Jane	1886	ENG, YKS, Guisborough	Jul 1903 : Dominion	CAN	Barnardos
8354	ABBOTT, Frederick Albert Prosper	1885	ENG, LND, Homerton	Apr 1895 : Parisian	CAN	Barnardos
3036	ABBOTT, George	1894	ENG, MDX, London	Jul 1904 : Southwark	CAN	Barnardos
3038	ABBOTT, Herman Henry	1882	ENG, MDX, Hoxton, London	Apr 1895 : Parisian	CAN	Barnardos
10624	ABBOTT, John	1913	ENG,	Apr 1929 : Duchess of York	CAN	Barnardos
3045	ABBOTT, Leslie	1883	ENG,	Mar 1893 : Labrador	CAN	Barnardos
3060	ABBOTT, Lilian	1903	ENG,	Jun 1912 : Tunisian	CAN	Barnardos
3026	ABBOTT, Mary	1888	ENG, ESS, Maldon	Oct 1902 : Colonian	CAN	Barnardos
3049	ABBOTT, Penelope	1901	ENG, KEN, Sidcup	Jun 1912 : Tunisian	CAN	Barnardos
5046	ABBS, Bertie Cecil John	1914	ENG, LND, St. Pancras	Mar 1930 : Duchess of Richmond	CAN	Barnardos
3061	ABDALE, John George	1873	ENG, NBL, Newcastle Upon Tyne	Mar 1891 : Norwegian	CAN	Barnardos
3063	ABEL, Albert Edward G.	1901	ENG, ESS, West Ham	Aug 1910 : Tunisian	CAN	Barnardos
3066	ABEL, Charles	1891	ENG,	Mar 1906 : Dominion	CAN	Barnardos
3065	ABEL, Florence	1902	ENG, ESS, West Ham	Aug 1910 : Tunisian	CAN	Barnardos
3067	ABEL, Frederick	1889	ENG,	Jul 1900 : Tunisian	CAN	Barnardos
3068	ABEL, George	1887	ENG,	Aug 1905 : Dominion	CAN	Barnardos
3069	ABEL, George	1897	ENG,	Mar 1907 : Dominion	CAN	Barnardos
3071	ABEL, John	1886	ENG,	Jun 1897 : Labrador	CAN	Barnardos
ID	Name	DOB	Place of birth	Arrivals & Ships	Dest.	Agency	Family links

Surnames starting with: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 30 Entries

The Database for Special Interest Groups (DBSIG) is a RootsChat Reference Library project.

[Copyright] [Shrink Link] [Terms of Use] [About RootsChat]