In your spreadsheets, it's nice to sometimes have a heading situated above multiple columns. It makes things easier to read, and makes your spreadsheets look more professional. Here's how to do it.


Highlight the cells you want the heading to span. In this example it is B12..C12. On Home tab, Format, get dropdown to Format Cells and the box shown will appear. On Alignment tab, Text alignment, Horizontal, click on Center Across Selection. Excel will create one cell and center the text in that cell. If column widths are later adjusted, the text will still be centered over the desired columns.

​Easy peasy.  How will you use this in your spreadsheets?

Last week we left off with Julia's brother, Charles Brannack, arrested in the opium dens of Santa Cruz.  Today we return to Julia's saga...
​
By the time Charles Brannack was arrested in Santa Cruz, his sister had been married to her third husband, Meliton Achard, a Frenchman, and at last a husband near to her own age.  They were wed 2 July  1885 in Livermore, California.[i]  For a time they lived in Lodi.  This may be where Julia began her occupation as a midwife.  On 30 November 1889 Julia filed a patent application for a liniment, “highly beneficial in cases of sore throat, rheumatism, sprains, bruises, &c.”  It’s ingredients were specified as one gallon alcohol, one pound of chloroform, six ounces ether, six ounces laudanum, six ounces gum-camphor, six ounces tincture arnica, two ounces tincture cayenne, three large beef-galls, four ounces fresh butter.[ii]  She advertised her compound in various newspapers.[iii]

Julia and Meliton lived for a time in Lodi and then moved to San Francisco.  She advertised herself as a midwife and Meliton is listed in the city directories as a hotel keeper, The Liberty House.[iv]  It is hard to know how long they lived happily together, but the end of the marriage appears decidedly unhappy. 
​

"Julia Achard… charges cruelty as a ground for her application to be divorced from Meliton Achard.  The parties were married in Livermore July 2, 1885, and until recently, for aught that appears in the complaint, Achard was a good husband.  Achard entered upon his course of ill treatment by calling his wife bad names and imputing to her a want of chastity.  This sort of thing culminated last Monday in physical abuse and threats by Achard to take his wife's life.  He drove her from the house by force, and then nailed up the doors and windows so that she would not be able to return.  He has since held sole possession of the family residence at 555 [sic] Mission street, and Mrs. Achard has been compelled to look out for herself.[v]

Much as this would lead one to believe that Meliton no longer loved Julia, apparently he (or perhaps Julia) had a change of heart .  Seven months after his incident with the hammer and nails, Meliton’s obituary reads, “Died… Achard, In the Napa Insane Asylum, 9 July  1896, Meliton Achard, beloved husband of Julia A. Achard, a native of France, aged 52 years, 3 months and 29 days.”[vi]

Julia was not widowed for long.  On 12 June 1897 she married her fourth husband, Edward W. Matthews in Oakland.[vii]  But this turn at married life proved no happier for Julia, and she was granted a divorce from Edward on 9 January 1899 on the grounds of neglect.[viii]

Julia lived in San Francisco for several years as a “widow.”  She appears to have used the surname Achard, at least professionally, for most of the remainder of her life.  In June of 1898 she was practicing as a midwife with a “home in confinement” at 126 Second street.[ix]  Perhaps one such patient of Julia was Rose de la Fontaine. 

Rose, the daughter of Edward and Mary O’Neill was born about 1874.[x]  On 22 February 1893, Rose married John de la Fontaine.[xi]  Five months later Rose gave birth to Florence, who sadly died on 31 August 1894 at the age of one year, one month and one day.[xii]  On 22 January 1899, John and Rose lost another child, Grace, at the age of two months and 16 days.[xiii]  Maybe Julia Achard assisted at the birth of Grace.  In any event, in September of 1899, Rose was under the care of Julia Achard, when she died on 8 September.  “It was reported to Coroner Hill that Mrs. Achard had represented herself to be   a physician.  Should this prove the fact, the woman will be liable to prosecution for practicing medicine without a license.  Malpractice is suspected.”[xiv] 

However, the following week, the newspaper headline indicated “Midwife Achard was not to blame at all, Mrs. de la Fontaine died of a painful disease. First Verdict of the Jury not approved and a second verdict of death from natural causes received. Coroner Hill held an inquest yesterday morning upon the body of Mrs. R. de la Fontaine… The deceased had been attended by Mrs. Achard, a midwife, who had administered some simple remedy to relieve vomiting.  The autopsy showed that cirrhosis of the liver had caused death and that there were no evidences of malpractice or of even any necessity for it.  Mrs. Achard testified that in her experience of thirty-eight years as a midwife Mrs. de la Fontaine was the only patient who had died in her care.  She had suggested that a physician should be called, but Mrs. De la Fontaine refused to allow one to be summoned, as she did not believe her condition to be serious.  The jury returned a verdict that death had been caused by neglect, on the part of some person unknown, to summon medical assistance, but the coroner refused to approve of the verdict and the case was reopened and additional evidence introduced.  Autopsy Surgeon Zabala assured the jury that death was due to disease and even if a physician had been called in a few days before her death it was doubtful whether he could have succeeded in saving her life.  The jury returned a verdict of death from natural causes, and the verdict was approved".[xv]

If Rose de la Fontaine was the first patient who died in the care of Julia Achard, she was not the last. 


[i] San Francisco Chronicle, 6 Dec 1895, page 8, column 5, “Cruel Husbands Sued for Divorce”

[ii] Website: Women Inventor’s Index – 1790-1895, http://staff.lib.muohio.edu/shocker/govlaw/FemInv/patgifs/400992/01.jpg accessed 11 April 2013

[iii] Sacramento Daily Union, 22 Feb 1889, page 2, Advertisement “J.A.A. Liniment”

[iv] Great Register of Voters San Joaquin County, California 1890 California State Library, California History Section; Great Registers, 1866-1898; Collection Number: 4 - 2A; CSL Roll Number: 119; FHL Roll Number: 977281; City Directories for San Francisco, California, 1892, Publisher: Edward M Adams, Page Number: 163

[v] San Francisco Chronicle, 6 Dec 1895, page 8, column 5, "Cruel Husbands Sued for Divorce" (note:  city directories of the period indicate the address of the Achards was 550 Mission, not 555 Mission as stated in the newspaper article)

[vi] San Francisco Call, 17 July 1896, page 13

[vii] San Francisco Chronicle, 14 June 1897, page 9, column 3.

[viii] San Francisco Chronicle, 10 January 1899, page 6, column 1.

[ix] San Francisco Call, 2 June 1898, page 10

[x] US Census 1880 Year: 1880; Census Place: San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Roll: 77; Family History Film: 1254077; Page: 74C; Enumeration District: 151; Image: 0150, lines 6-15, accessed through Ancestry.com 5 March 2013

[xi] San Francisco Call, 20 July 1893 (sic), page 12, “Married” (note spelling is listed as de la Fontane)

[xii] Ibid, 1 September 1894, page 8, “Deaths”

[xiii] Ibid, 23 January 1899, page 9, “Deaths”

[xiv] San Francisco Chronicle, 9 September 1899, page 11 “Malpractice Is Suspected”

[xv] San Francisco Call, 12 September 1899, page 12, “Midwife Achard Was Not To Blame At All”

Don’t you just hate it when you search for an ancestor on FamilySearch and you get a hit for what you know is the correct record, and then you see the dreaded “No image available”?  Well last week in the Family History Library, the absolute nicest woman, Sister Hays, taught me a nifty little trick that just might get you around the “No image available” roadblock.  Here’s how you do it…

In my example I searched for a marriage record for Edward Barrett.  I knew from his death certificate his wife’s name was Catherine.  He was born about 1855 so I guessed he was married between 1875 and 1890.  I plugged that into FamilySearch and the second result looked promising.

​I clicked on the document icon and I could see a little more.

Note, the dreaded “No image available.”  Well, Sister Hays, sitting right next to me said “I maybe know a way around that.  It doesn’t always work, but let’s try it.”   And so we did.
​
Step 1 is to copy the film number, as I’ve highlighted in yellow.  Next, go to the FamilySearch catalog search and in the box for Film/Fiche number, paste the film number, like so….

Click on Search, and you’ll get… Search Results. Fancy that!

“Marriage records, 1801-1951” is a hyperlink to the next screen.  You’ll have to scroll down to see the film notes, but lookey here, there’s a camera icon.  That means pictures!

I got an array of thumbnails of microfilm images.  For this particular film there are two batches of marriage records, the first from 1875-1884, and the second batch from 1885 to 1890.  Edward and Kate were married in 1887 so I worked my way down to the second set.  The first few pages in each set of records are an index, which appears to be alphabetical by the first letter of the groom’s name, and then in somewhat chronological order by the date the marriage was recorded.

​Edward’s index entry was found on image 396 of 768.

​This told me their marriage record would be on page 420.  (Note this is not image 420.  It’s the register page labeled 420, which happens to be on image 646.)  And look at the fruits of my labor!

It's the sideways one in the upper left corner.  And here in all it's glory...

This little trick doesn’t work with every “No image available” record.  But thanks to Sister Hays I now know a workaround to try. 

​I’m certainly thankful for the week and a half of research I’ve been able to do at this wonderful library with its incredibly helpful staff.  If you haven’t been here, definitely put it on your research bucket list.

It would be difficult to assess who was the blackest sheep in the Brannack fold, but Julia’s brother, Charles Edgar Brannack might be a good candidate. 

In  January 1882, Charles and his nephew, Fred Wermuth (the two of them only a year apart in age) were involved in a barroom brawl in Calaveras County.  Charles and Fred along with their friends, a pair of cousins named Thomas and Robert Pope had gone quail hunting. The four men, none older than 23, packed their hunting gear, including four shotguns, and camped in a deserted cabin in the Sierra foothills.   On Friday evening they traveled to the town of Camanche, and after a period of drinking in John Cavagnero’s general store, they got into a row with each other, breaking up furniture, glassware and windows.  Henry Cavagnero, John’s brother[1], sent word to John who came in, calmed the men down and got them out into the street.  Back inside, the Cavagnero’s heard someone in the street yell, “Look, he’s going to shoot!” whereupon Charles Brannack rushed back inside, leveled his shotgun at Henry and exclaimed, “Shall I shoot the son of a bitch?”  And he did!  Cavagnero was seriously injured, shot entering in his head and neck.  Another man standing by him, Michael Fox, was also struck with shot in his nose.[2]

The four ruffians took off in a wagon at break-neck speed, headed for Lodi.  The wagon hit a stump, threw some of the men and some of the shotguns which fired as they hit the ground.  The Pope cousins, one of whom was wounded on his head, turned themselves in the next morning, but were later discharged.  Charles Brannack was arrested and jailed in Sacramento, though no charges were brought against Fred Wermuth.[3]  In July, Brannack was sentenced to two years imprisonment at San Quentin prison for shooting Cavagnero.[4]  It appears Henry Cavagnero survived.[5]

Any time he may have served in prison did little to improve Charles Brannack’s behavior.  In November 1887, the Santa Cruz police chief and another officer witnessed a man purchase opium.  The two followed him, trying to find his “joint” – the place where he would smoke the entrancing drug.  They followed him to Lyman Brannack’s barn .  The officers saw a light in the upper part of the barn.  Stepping to the door, the officers were confronted by Charles Brannack, the son of the owner, carrying a lantern in one hand and a shotgun in the other.  Seeing the officers, Brannack blew out the light.  They seized Brannack, and upstairs in the barn found there a regular opium joint.  They arrested Brannack and confiscated all the paraphernalia.[6]  Charles Brannack and fellow smoker, Henry Horn, were brought before Justice Skirm, who fined Brannack $100 and Horn $25, and while Brannack was able to pay his fine, Horn could not and was sentenced to $25 in jail.[7]
​
By the time Charles Brannack was arrested in Santa Cruz, his sister had been married to her third husband, Meliton Achard, a Frenchman, and at last a husband near to her own age….  More next week about Julia’s marriage to Mr. Achard. 
 


[1] It appears that Henry Cavagnero was likely John Cavagnero’s brother-in-law per the 1900 census. - US Census 1900 Year: 1900; Census Place: Jenny Lind, Calaveras, California; Roll: 84; Family History Film: 1240084; Page: 6A; Enumeration District: 1038; lines 36-43, accessed through Ancestry.com 29 January 2017

[2] San Francisco Chronicle, 22 Jan 1882, page 8 “A Barroom Brawl” and Sacramento Daily Union, 23 Jan 1882, page 1, “Result of a Carouse”

[3] ibid

[4] San Francisco Bulletin, 22 July 1882, page 2, “State News Items”

[5] US Census 1900 Year: 1900; Census Place: Jenny Lind, Calaveras, California; Roll: 84; Family History Film: 1240084; Page: 6A; Enumeration District: 1038; lines 36-43, accessed through Ancestry.com 29 January 2017

[6] Santa Cruz Daily Surf, 5 November 1887, page 1, col 5.  “Opium Smokers Arrested”

[7]“Sentinel Jottings,” Santa Cruz Sentinel (Santa Cruz, California) 06 Nov 1887, Page 3, col 1, accessed through Newsapapers.com 29 January 2017

Normally I post my Tuesday tips on Tuesday.  But I've been so busy researching in the FamilyHistoryLibrary I'm a day late.  Hope you don't mind...  I think this one's worth the wait..

I recently discovered a new-to-me Irish resource.  I have Irish Catholic ancestors on both my side and my husband, Mark’s side.  I’ve spent the last several days in the Family History Library in Salt Lake City trying to get a handle on the geography of where some of them lived and I found a wonderful website that is helping me do that.

The site is www.swilson.info  I’ve spent some time trying to figure out who SWilson is.  I don’t even know if S is male or female but I do know that I love love love him or her!

One of my favorite things on the site is a “Church and Catholic Parish Search.”  According to the website, “This option searches for the closest Catholic Chapel to a selected location based on Chapel locations as they were in the late 1830s and early 1840s.”

I have been able to determine the place of origin for some of Mark’s ancestors from records in the US and tracing back to Ireland to discover where four known children were baptized. I believe I’ve also found a marriage record for the parents, not in the same church, but in a different, nearby parish. I’ve also used Griffith’s Valuation and some Tithe Applotment Books to ascertain a townland. 

But using www.swilson.info, I can establish exactly where the parish church for the baptism is, and find the nearby churches.   Here’s how I did it.
​
Look at http://www.swilson.info/gmapsetcoords.php.  You will see a yellow search marker.  Drag the marker and drop it on the map close to where your person of interest lived.  You can zoom in on the map to refine the location using the +/- buttons in the lower right corner of the map.  

Once you’re narrowed in to the approximate location of where your ancestors lived, click on the “Start Search” button in the lower right corner.   Colored pointers will pop up all over the map showing all the Catholic churches.  On the right side of the map is a key naming the parish and the church.  If you click on the “Show Parish Details” icon between the columns you’re taken to a new screen, full of information, including the Roman Catholic Diocese, the linked Civil Parishes, a list of nearby parishes with notations of how far away they are and in what direction. 
​

​My favorite part, however, is smack dab in the middle of the screen where there is a link to the NLI (National Library of Ireland) Film Details and Website.  Once there, you can select the relevant register for baptisms, marriages (or death in some cases) and then filter by selecting the year and month if you know it.

​

My favorite part, however, is smack dab in the middle of the screen where there is a link to the NLI (National Library of Ireland) Film Details and Website.  Once there, you can select the relevant register for baptisms, marriages (or death in some cases) and then filter by selecting the year and month if you know it.
​
SWilson.info is gem of a site, allowing the researcher to point to a location in Ireland, and drill down to the relevant available parish registers.  Thank you SWilson, whoever you are!  You’re my new fave.