Catherine Hayes (1821-1861) was a soprano from Limerick who made a fortune touring the world. In 1849, she was at the zenith of her fame and gave a performance for Queen Victoria at Buckingham Palace. Afterwards, she made tours of Ireland including Belfast, Dublin, Limerick, Kilkenny, Wexford, Waterford and Cork. She was aware of the importance of making a will especially in view of the dangers inherent in travel by sailing ship and probably made several of them over the years but it is the last will that matters. Ironically, she had no control over its contents and most of her hard earned savings were stolen from her family by an opportunist group of conspirators who happened to be present when she had a fatal stroke in August 1861.
The procedures for making a valid will and having it proved in 1861 were very much the same as today. The will had to be signed in the presence of two witnesses who were not beneficiaries and then presented by the legal personal representatives to a Probate Court for approval. Certified copies were made for the Court and the Executor acting for the deceased was given one duly stamped and signed by the Court Officer. An important difference to bear in mind is that the copies were handwritten by a small army of ‘Dickensian’ clerks armed with quill pens and Indian ink. There was no other way to copy a document. The original wills were retained by the Court along with a transcript. Today, anyone requesting a copy of a will of that era will receive a photocopy of the transcript. The signatures thereon are simply the names of the parties as written by the transcriber in his normal hand. They are not copies of the original signatures although, to the uninitiated, they may seem to be.
A recent biographer claimed that Catherine Hayes’ will was a forgery but he was using the transcription for comparison. Of course she could not have signed that as she was already dead. I applied for special permission to see the original will and from that, it was clear that although Miss Hayes had indeed signed it, her signature was not normal. It was a scrawl across two pages and over the wording as well. Furthermore, her first signature was invalid as she used her maiden name instead of her legal married name of Bushnell. The error was spotted and she was asked or forced to sign again. This time, she abbreviated her name to Ca. Bushnell which was a form she never used. (See image below) She may have had enough sense left to realise that she was not signing her true last wishes and tried to ruin it by not using her correct signature. I had the good fortune to acquire an original document by Miss Hayes as a widow which she signed Catherine Hayes Bushnell and I have several specimens of her signature as Catherine Hayes prior to her marriage.
At this point, let us consider what Joseph Fogerty wrote in his book ‘Caterina’ which was the name Catherine used in Italy. “Amongst others came the old music-master [Antonio Sapio] who had given her lessons in harmony, and had assumed the garb of a Druid when she sang in the opera of ‘Norma’ [Dublin,1849] ...he visited Caterina’s mother, who told him of a legacy provided for him by a codicil to a will made by her daughter in London. To Kate, [Henrietta Hayes] by a more recent codicil.. Caterina left the bulk of her jewellery, including the magnificent emerald bracelet presented to her by her enthusiastic countrymen in Australia and also made her the sole trustee of a fund to be used for the education of struggling musical artistes. To Natalie and Miss Twiss there were many valuable presents and finally, the bulk of her invested property, which was considerable, was bequeathed for life use to her mother, [Mary Hayes] with remainder to Tom McLean on her mother’s decease.”
Joseph Fogerty was the son of Joseph Fogerty who once owned the Theatre Royal in Limerick in which Catherine performed. He was a Civil Engineer who had known the Hayes family since childhood and, in 1861, he lived in Sydenham where Catherine died. He worked abroad a lot and helped design the circular railway in Vienna. In his book, he claims that Caterina was regularly collected from the stage door in Vienna by a gentleman in a coach. Clearly, he was in a position to know a lot of the truth about her life but heavily disguised it in his fictional work. I can’t place all his characters in Catherine’s real life and a lot of the time, it’s just pure fiction such as his description of her funeral cortege from Limerick to Kilfenora. He knew very well that she was buried in London at Kensal Green. No doubt he would have attended unless he was away at the time.
The forged will of 1861 didn’t contain any provisions like those mentioned above. Mary Hayes was given an annuity of a paltry £150 for life, Henrietta just £50 cash, £50 to Mrs. Knox, the emerald bracelet went to Maria Lee, a year’s wages to Bridget Miland (Catherine’s personal maid) and the rest of her fortune absolutely to one Captain George Power (posing as Catherine’s fiancé) . There is no evidence that Catherine even knew this person. There was no mention of Sapio or the Hall family who had been close friends of Catherine’s or any of her other known friends. For me, the last straw was the omission of the other servants, the cook, housemaid, 2nd lady’s maid and her butler. No way would Catherine have omitted them from a valid will. The butler and housemaid may have lived out but the others are listed on the 1861 census living with Catherine just a few months earlier.
Catherine Hayes died in the home of Henry and Maria Lee on a visit to them in August 1861. They were described as her friends in the press. She was accompanied, as was essential for a lady at that time, by her long serving personal maid Bridget Miland whom she had engaged either in Melbourne in 1855 or New York in 1851. A Bridget Miland from Galway sailed to New York in 1850. However, it’s possible that Miland was engaged by a family to accompany them to Australia and was hired there by Catherine. In any case, she’d been with Catherine on all her travels since 1855 at least and must have known a great deal about her friends and personal life. At first, I suspected her of collaborating with the fraudsters but clearly, they were not in possession of facts which would have made the will appear more genuine. For example, giving £50 to Mrs. Edmond Knox when some memento would have been far more akin to Catherine’s intentions. Why no personal effects to her sister, Henrietta? Forgetting all the other servants? It seems that Bridget Miland remained loyal to her former mistress and gave no helpful information but was forced to keep quiet about the whole sordid affair.
If we now look at the people who were present when Catherine had her fatal stroke, we can confidently say that the will was a hastily prepared document intended to get Catherine’s fortune for Henry Lee although Captain George Power is the named main beneficiary. Lee was a married man who could hardly pose as Catherine’s intended and Power was his choice for the job. At first, I suspected Lee of having killed Catherine and he may have caused her stroke somehow but he was not prepared for her death.
‘Captain’ George Power was a failed Royal Artillery officer who resigned (no reason given) soon after being promoted to a 1st Lieutenant. The blank reasons for resigning meant that he had been asked to go or face discipline for some offence. In normal circumstances, detailed reasons were recorded to prove an Officer had resigned in good standing. He awarded himself the rank of Captain and used it to his grave. His second profession seems to have been a conman and gigolo who escorted rich widows and helped to relieve them of surplus gold and trinkets. His father was a decorated war hero and a General who, disappointed with all his three sons, left most of his estate to his two daughters. George only got a gold watch but his father foolishly allowed him to continue as his executor. The result was that George cheated his own brothers and sisters out of all he could and never presented the will for probate. It came to light on his death when his sole surviving sister found it and finally claimed what was left of the inheritance she’d been denied. George was the ideal candidate for posing as Catherine’s fiancé. He was paid for his duplicity and went on a spree in London which landed him in a debtor’s prison when the money ran out. He was bailed out probably by his mistress who had his child at that time. He later married her and she acquired a lot of jewellery which she passed on to her daughter in her will. George himself probably didn’t trust wills and so made none.
Henry Lee was described as a ‘contractor of public works’ and lived in a fine house in Sydenham with his wife Maria. I suspect some of his ‘contracts’ were for the gentry who had little problems they could not sort out by conventional means. After Catherine’s will was cleared, they moved to a grand house in London. When Henry died, Maria retired to the south coast with her niece where they lived as ladies of ‘independent means’. Maria was still there in 1901. Sadly, she didn’t get the emerald bracelet she desired since it could not be found. I know who had it but that’s my secret for now. In a case against a dealer in stolen goods heard in 1870, Mary and Henrietta Hayes identified a diamond cluster ring set in gold which was stolen from their house in 1869. Mary Hayes said that this was the ring thrown on the stage to her daughter Catherine in California. Clearly then, Power and Lee didn't get all of Catherine's jewellery in 1861. Nevertheless, Mary and Henrietta suffered because of the stolen legacy.
Bridget Miland disappeared from the scene. Henry Lee didn’t want her around to be questioned about events. Whether she ended up in the Thames or on a ship back to Australia is uncertain but a Bridget Miland is buried in a town near Melbourne. It could be her last resting place.
The other people present were two men Henry asked to be witnesses. Perhaps they weren’t really present but they signed where indicated. There was also a doctor who certified that Catherine was compos mentis. Clearly he wasn’t at the time. The actual writer was a non-entity of a solicitor’s clerk who was hauled out of his house at night and taken to the Lees where he was ordered to draft a will as fast as he could. He didn’t even have proper legal parchment with him but used flimsy blue notepaper of the sort sold today as airmail paper. He also had six children at home to keep and, for a guinea, he’d write anything and swear black was white.
So, the will was drafted and signed but it had to pass probate before they could get a penny. This proved a problem because the judge was suspicious and ordered the witnesses to attend at Court. Only one turned up and he duly swore that he’d seen Catherine sign in his presence and in the presence of the other witness. In the absence of any family opposition, the will was granted probate in December 1861.
Why didn’t Mary or Henrietta Hayes contest the will? That puzzled me for a long time before I found the answer. They couldn’t because Henry Lee blackmailed them. Mary Hayes had many secrets too and she had her revenge by allowing Catherine’s best investment to be lost forever. All will be revealed in detail in my book “ Virtue and Vice” to be published later this year by Suir Vista.