| Author |
Message |
    
Eric Sauder
| | Posted on Thursday, September 27, 2001 - 4:22 am: | 
|
Mark Baber was kind enough to send me an article from the London Times about the passing of another "unknown" Lusitania survivor.
Yvonne (Eve) Marichal Pugh passed away several days ago at the age of 92. The Marichal family was traveling second class and was returning from Canada where Mr. Marichal, a French citizen, had been a Lecturer in Romance Languages at Queen's University in Ontario.
Traveling with Yvonne were her father Joseph, mother Jessie, and two siblings, Maurice and Phyllis. Yvonne was the oldest of the three children.
When the torpedo struck, the Marichals were at lunch in the second-class Dining Room. Upon hearing the second explosion, Mr. Marichal carried the two older children, his wife taking the baby, and they made their way to the second-class Boat Deck aft. Leaving the ship in lifeboat 21, astonishingly, the entire family survived the sinking.
After requesting to be heard at the British Inquiry, Mr. Marichal was among the first to raise publically the possibility of the second explosion being caused by ammunition. Mr. Marichal then went further and criticized the Cunard Line for their poor treatment of the survivors. Mr. Marichal's testimony (and Lord Mersey's reaction to it) is among the most interesting parts of the inquiry.
The family eventually reached Birmingham, and Mr. Marichal filed a claim in the amount of £1,050 for loss of personal effects and "shock to [his] system."
Mr. Marichal was killed in action in World War I. I don't what became of the rest of the family, but I'll try to find out from Mrs. Pugh's children.
Eric Sauder |
Inger Sheil
| | Posted on Thursday, September 27, 2001 - 8:53 am: |
|
G'day Eric -
Ta to you (and Mark) for this piece. What was the date on the article? And why do I have a feeling that this family name was prominant in one of the books published about the Lusitania?
Based on the comments above, I wouldn't mind calling up the inquiry transcripts of evidence. I'm also still keen to see what Bestic had to say.
~ Ing |
Geoff Whitfield
| | Posted on Thursday, September 27, 2001 - 11:20 am: |
|
Hi Ing,Joseph Marichal has appeared in several Lusitania books and articles. As a professional man, Marichal was no fool. He insisted that there had been a second explosion and also insisted on appearing at the British Inquiry. I have access to the minutes to the pre-inquiry meetings in which it was suggested that Marichal was "a fool", a trouble maker" and to round it off "a damned Frenchman!" It also suggested that Marichal should be pursuaded that as an alien (although his wife, Jessie Emerson Marichal was British) it might be against his own good if he continued his outbursts. Marichal also bombarded Cunard with letters of complaint, only to receive their standard answer that "the situation has nothing whatsoever to do with the Cunard Shipping Company and any action for financial gain should be addressed to the German Government at the cease of hostilities".
Cunard appeared to do what they could for survivors and the families of those who had lost loved ones, their hands were tied though as by admitting any form of liability they left themselves open to countless claims for compensation.
Unfortunately, the really interesting telegrams and messages concerning events in May 1915 have now been either locked away or "removed", I only gained access to them because I had once had a brief "dalliance" with the lady who was then the Archivist, way, way back in my teenage years and she possibly feared blackmail!!
Geoff |
Mark Baber
| | Posted on Thursday, September 27, 2001 - 2:34 pm: |
|
Ing---
The article was published on 21 September, I think. At least that's the date on the online version at
2-2001325592%2C00.html,http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,2-2001325592,00.html
MAB |
Inger Sheil
| | Posted on Thursday, September 27, 2001 - 2:45 pm: |
|
Ta, Mark and Geoff! Were the 'removed' materials the ones in the Cunard records up in Liverpool? I'm going to have to borrow a leaf out of your book, Geoff, and start a few illicit dalliances with well placed archivists as a guarantee against future problems. There are a few fetching blokes that work at Kew...
~ Ing |
Peter Engberg-Klarström
| | Posted on Thursday, September 27, 2001 - 5:15 pm: |
|
Inger, if you're going for a research party soon, there are two or three people I have been trying to find;
H J Dingby, 39 (waiter)
C Price, 29 (waiter)
G Gowan, 32 (waiter)
I am interested in their first names (not available in the CWGC)
I would be ever so grateful if you were to find information about these people.
Best regards,
Peter |
Inger Sheil
| | Posted on Thursday, September 27, 2001 - 9:01 pm: |
|
G'day Peter -
Will add those names to the list and see what, if anything, turns up on them.
All the best,
Inger |
Geoff Whitfield
| | Posted on Thursday, September 27, 2001 - 10:54 pm: |
|
Inger, No, they were not part of the Cunard Archive. Goodness only knows where they came from but they were found in the cellar of a building in which I had worked for five years! Someone just managed to stop the janitor from stoking the furnace with them! They were removed to the William Brown Library where I got to see them. The next time I tried to sneak a peep, half of them had been removed by "an official"!
Geoff |
Inger Sheil
| | Posted on Friday, September 28, 2001 - 10:47 am: |
|
G'day Geoff -
Wow! What an amazing find - it's remarkable what's stashed away still, and just where it's stashed. Bit rough, though, that they're inaccessible to the plebs (i.e. most of the population). I can understand that access needs to be restricted in the case of documents in need of conservation work, or those that might experience extremely high 'traffic', but would be very curious as to what the reasoning behind the withdrawal of these items was.
~ Ing |
George Behe
| | Posted on Friday, September 28, 2001 - 9:13 pm: |
|
Hi, Geoff!
Considering the subject matter of our recent private conversation, it appears that at least two shipwrecks still harbor a few mysteries that "officials" don't want us to solve.
Take care, my friend.
All my best,
George |
Geoff Whitfield
| | Posted on Saturday, September 29, 2001 - 8:32 am: |
|
Hi George - Yes, and isn't it strange that some of the eighty years protection laws over here have had an extra period slapped on them? Which means that we will all be long gone before anyone can dig into these files! Smacks of the Jack the Ripper/Royal Family connection to me. I'll respond to your last email soon - just off to the doctor as I seem to have this ticking in my ears all of the time!
Geoff |
Inger Sheil
| | Posted on Saturday, September 29, 2001 - 7:19 pm: |
|
G'day Peter -
I did get out to the PRO today, but thanks to the vagaries of London Underground (specifically the District Line - grrrrr), my time was somewhat limited. I did call up the Lusitania agreements for the final voyage, but didn't have too much time to do anything too useful. It's not something to go into cold - I'd need more background to make a more effective use of them. I'd forgotten that passenger lists with notations (such as that of 'Master John Stewart' pencilled in under 'Mrs James Stewart') for all three classes are lumped in with the crew agreements - I wonder if these were the master lists for compiling the names of the lost? It's chilling to see the number of names with red lines drawn through them, and retyped lists headed 'missing'.
Not much on the three you asked about - no first names, and I expect that what little there was you already have. They joined the ship in NY, but didn't sign the usual supplemental articles for late additions to the crew. Their names crop up in the C.21b Return of Seamen Engaged, sent over from the NY consulate.
G Gowan signed on the 30 April 1915, giving his address as 459 Beavers Hill Southampton
G Price also signed on the 30 April 1915, giving his address as 19 Bonfield Street Liverpool.
H J Dingby (which looks like 'Dingley' in the Returns)signed on the 29 April. He was born in Dunoon, and gave his address as 60 Horatius St [New?] York.
I came across a reference to Gowan in a letter from the Registrar General to the Supertintendant of the Merchant Marine Office, dated 24 June 1915. The passage read:
It will be observed that the name of G. Gowan does not appear on lists cont., and particulars of his engagement and disposal should, therefore, now be added.
Sorry it's not much. Can have a glance in the GRO birth registration to see if their names turn up, unless you've already done that.
Geoff - Gack! Not the Duke of Clarence furphy...!
~ Inger |
Inger Sheil
| | Posted on Sunday, September 30, 2001 - 10:54 am: |
|
Addendum to what I posted yesterday - have heard from favourite Soton local, Andrew, who pointed out that there's no 'Beavers Hill' in Southampton. It did strike me at the time as an unusual name given the locality, but I was reasonably confident in deciphering that bit of writing. Andrew suggested that there is a 'Bevois Valley'. But it seems either the individual writing the entries misheard, or I've mistranscribed!
~ Inger |
Hildo Thiel
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 2, 2001 - 10:38 am: |
|
Hello All,
A question about the ages of Miss Marichal and her siblings.
Miss Yvonne Marichal, was then about 6 years old, am I correct? Her siblings were younger, but how old were they exactly?
Regards,
Hildo |
natalie marichal
Member
Username: natmarichal
Post Number: 1
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 8:55 pm: |
|
Hello,I'm not sure if your still interested but Maurice Marichal was my Great Grandfather, he died before I was born, he had one son, John who is still alive today. |
Peter Kelly
Member
Username: pgk1
Post Number: 15
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 12, 2004 - 9:14 pm: |
|
Hi Natalie
As I see that this is your first posting on ET, let me say you are very welcome.
I, and I am sure many others here, are very interested to hear about your great grandfather and we would greatly appreciate any information that you could provide about him and his family.
Hope to hear from you soon,
Peter |
Phil Fazzini
Member
Username: newmen
Post Number: 45
Registered: 9-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, July 12, 2007 - 2:30 am: |
|
Simpson's is mistaken in saying Professor Joseph Marichal was KIA while serving with the East Yorkshire Regiment IN WORLD WAR I-He WAS KIA WHILE SERVING WITH THE FRENCH ARMY. SEE LINK below
http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=34128&hl=Lusitiana
Incidently has anyone confirm that his "offenses"
was while serving in French Army was as horrible
as the British Press put out as reported in Simpson? |
Matthew Bird
Member
Username: matthewbird
Post Number: 20
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 10, 2007 - 10:15 pm: |
|
Is that the same man?, it says he was only 22 a year after Lusitania sunk, seems a young age to have 3 children. |
