Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| Friday, April 17, 04:25:16pm | [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4], 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ] |
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Oh shit, I screwed up the html code for bold at the end! -- Chani, Friday, December 28, 06:54:39am (87-231-7-227.rev.numericable.fr/87.231.7.227)
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Damnit! -- Chani, Friday, December 28, 06:59:16am (87-231-7-227.rev.numericable.fr/87.231.7.227)
The word was eaten by the voy monster!
For the
INSERTED(here there is spelling error, hence your mistake!) onto the leaf of foreigners 12 August 1853.>
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
OK Last try! -- Chani, Friday, December 28, 07:03:01am (87-231-7-227.rev.numericable.fr/87.231.7.227)
Monsieur le Bourgmestre...
It have the honour of informing you that yesterday, in the evening, at about about 9 O'clock, the 2 persons, further named, arrived from Rotterdam without papers (it means they were illegal immigrants) and were taken before me. Namely:
No 1: Mr. Camille Englebert, age of 30 years, born at Glimes, Brabant, Doctor of Laws, address Glimes. He told me that last Sunday he left Brussels ( here there is a grammar issue: the translation should be "leaving Brussels..." and then there should be a main verb after that but it's missing, so I follow your translation and turn the "leaving" into "left" in order to the sentence to make sense), bearing a letter from l'Administration de la Sureté Publique (yes the Police civil service was called Sûreté, which means security, back then) for magistrate Louis de Berg en (here I just can't read the name, but it's obviously the name of a location given the rest of the phrase) where he was heading, in search of/looking for his cousin, Auguste Dumont (I understand that Auguste was Camille's cousin and the magistrate, to whom the letter was intended, would have helped Camille to find him).
Inserted (here there is spelling error, hence your mistake!) onto the leaf of foreigners 12 August 1853.
No 2: Mr. D. C. Steyn Parvie, age of 41 years, born at Lahaye, government commissioner....
A Monsieur le Bourgmestre d' Anvers
Page 2
----------
.... of the Low Country for the Dutch Indies. Going to Brussels to the house of Monsieur le Comte De Bylandt, Chambellan du Roi (not sure that the translation means anything in English but yes it's King's chamberlain), staying with Madam his mother, Rue de L'Observation no. 6.
The former (I guess he meant Camille Englebert) was known by Mr. Erffhardt(?), who is Cabaretier at La Croix Blanche au port (?), so he went to stay there, and the latter went to stay at the Hotel du Rhin.
Agréer Monsieur le Bourgmestre l'assurance de ma...(I am not sure of what is written past "ma" because it's abbreviated – although it could be "ma très haute considération"– but the whole thing is just a polite phrase used at the end of letters before the signature, and that could be translated into as "Yours faithfully").
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Thank you very much. I think this Camille Englebert is known to us in Indiana as Camille de Buisseret. -- Lij, Friday, December 28, 02:40:40pm (adsl-108-67-94-15.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net/108.67.94.15)
The names are similar....
En Belgique: Camille August Oswald ENGLEBERT
In the USA: Camille Eugene R. Oswald Englebert de BUISSERET
His signature in the USA on legal documents was: Eugene R de BUISSERET
It seems he changed his second name and added the "de BUISSERET"
I think the fraud case below may be the reason and he was hiding.
[>
Hot Links.... -- Lij, Friday, December 14, 08:36:13pm (adsl-99-31-14-235.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net/99.31.14.235)
Page One of Antwerp Police Index - ENGLEBERT/STEYN-PARVE
Page Two of Antwerp Police Index - ENGLEBERT/STEYN-PARVE
[> [>
Citation... -- Lij, Monday, December 17, 05:56:48am (adsl-99-137-200-61.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net/99.137.200.61)
name:
Camille Englebert
event:
Immigration
event date:
1840-1885
event place:
Antwerpen, Belgium
birth date:
birthplace:
file number:
10951
page:
81
film number:
2234256
digital folder number:
4331460
image number:
00081
Citing this Record
"Belgium, Antwerp Police Immigration Index, 1840-1930," index and images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/JSK8-NP8 : accessed 17 Dec 2012), Camille Englebert, 1840-1885.
[>
OH MY GAWD!!!! Evidence, circumstantial as it may be is building up. -- Lij, Sunday, December 16, 02:42:25am (adsl-99-14-208-117.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net/99.14.208.117)
I found the above 1853 record of Camille Englebert in Antwerp (the Antwerp Police Immigration Index). He was in the company of a D. C. Steyn Parve, who might have been a Netherlander/Belgian author who wrote books about the history of Italy??
This Camille Englebert was 30 years old in 1853 (fits a birth in 1823) and from Glimes in Brabant, Belgium. Glimes is 6+ miles east-southeast of Bonlez, the Boulanger home. Is this him!?!? If so, where did the name "de Buisseret" come in? He is a "docteur en droits" which freely translates as 'doctor in rights' but I think means 'doctor of laws.' One of our family stories about him stated he had studied the law (at La Sorbonne). I am guessing that if he did study law and this is him, then he studied at Leuven (Louvain).
There is the ENGLEBERT family in Glimes. He had a sister named Pauline who married a GODEFROID. And then I found the following court case which seems to confirm the family stories that our ancestor set up his sister with an income before he left for America. But it got her in trouble....
----------------------
ENGLEBERT-GODFROID COURT CASE
PREUVE TESTIMONIALE. - Preuve contraire. - Fraude. - Act authentique. - Foi.
On peut prouver par temoins contre et outre le contenu a un acte authentique, si la demande de preuve se produite en termes de preuve contraire de la fraude dont l'act est argue, fraude que l'on demande egalement a etablire par temoins. (Code civil, article 1341).
Ainsie, lorsqu'un acte authentique de vente d'immeubles est attaque du chef de fraude et vilete de prix,, circonstances dont on demande a etablir la preuve par temoins, l'acquereur peut, a son tour, demander a justifier par la meme voie que le prix reel paye est superieur a celui mentionne a l'acte.
(Godefroid, - C., Delbrassine.)
Par exploit du 16 novembre 1855, le sieur Gillis, curateur a la faillite Delbrassine et compagnie, fit assigner devant le tribunal de Nivelles le sieur Godefroid et la demoiselle Englebert, pour voir declarer que certaine vente, consentie par le siur Camille Englebert, de sa part indivise dans le immeubles provenant de leur mere commune, au profit desdit Godefroid et Pauline Englebert, par acte notarie due 24 avril 1853, est nulle et non avenue comme faite a vil prix et dans l'intention evidente d'enrichir sa soeur et son beau-frere Godefroid au prejudice de ses autres creanciers, et la position de leur frere. Divers faits furent poses a l'appui de cette demande.
Les Defendeurs poserent, avec offre de preuve par toutes voies legales, meme par temoins, entre autres faits, que le prix reel de la vente dont il s'agit avait ete de 72,000 francs qqui ont ete payes comptant, a savoir, 42,000 francs par la demoiselle Englebert, en deduction des sommes qu'elle avait pretees a son frere, et 30,000 francs par le sieur Godefroid, au moyen de 25,000 francs en especes et d'un effet de 5,000 francs; que les biens ne valaient pas davantage, etc.; que les prets vantes etaient reels.
Jugement du 21 fevrier 1856 que admet le curateur a preuve, par tous moyens de droit et par expertise quant a la valeur des immeubles vendus, de divers faits et notamment que les defendeurs n'avaient pas d'interet d'acheter les biens de Camille Englebert, vu qu'ils etaient eloignes et loues a bas prix ; que biens ne sont pas portes a leur juste valeur ; que Godefroid, etant dans le commerce, avait plus besoin d'argent que d'immeubles. La preuve contraire est reservee. Appel de Godefroid seul, le curateur ayant transige avec la demoiselle Englebert.
Godefroid soutient que le prix de 72,000 francs etait le prix que le locataire attribuait au bien ; qu'il avait emprunte au notaire Lebon 15,000 frankcs, a Beauthier 10,000 francs et avait signe un billet a ordre de 5,000 francs pour parfaire le prix d'achat ; que les biens ne valaient pas davantage, tant a cause de leur qualite qu'a cause du bail qui les greve et qui n'expire qu'en 1865, et il concluait a ce que la demand originaire fut declaree non recevable ne fondee. Subsidiairement il posait les faits deduits plus haut et demandait a en faire preuve par temoins.
ARRET
LA COUR; - Attendu que les circonstances de la cause ne permettent pas, dans l'etat ou elle se trouve, d'admettre des a present l'existence de la fraude dans le chef de deux parties contractantes, mais que l'ensemble des faits poses par l'intime peut servir a l'etablir;
Attendu que les faits articules par l'appelant dans un ordre subsidiaire, combines entre eux, sont pertinents, en ce qu'ils combattent directement l'existence de la fraude;
Attendu qu'en matiere de fraude, toute preuve direct pouvant se faire par tous moyens de droit, tant a l'egard des differentes circonstances de la fraude qu'a celui des actes pretendus frauduleux, il doit en etre de meme en ce qui touche la preuve contraire;
Attendu que l'intime etayant au besoin son systeme de fraude sur une absence partielle de prix de vente, l'appelant doit entre entier dans ses moyens de preuve sur ce point;
Que vainement l'intime soutient qu'on ne saurait prouver par temoins au dela du contenu d'un acte authentique fixant un prix de vent, puisque la preuve contraire sur ce point n'est presentee que dans l'ordre de combattre un moyen de fraude, base sur une pretendue absence partielle de prix, que l'intime pourrait etablir par tous moyens de droit;
Attendu, au surplus, que les faits poses par l'appelant trouvent au besoins un commencement de preuve par ecrite dans la transaction passee entre l'intime et Pauline Englebert qui etaite in cause avec l'appelant devant le premier juge (ladite transaction homologuee le 19 juin 1856, par le tribunal de Nivelles, dument enregistree);
Par ces motifs, M. le premier avocat general Cloquette entendu en son avis conforme met l'appel incident a neant; et statuant sur l'appel principal, sans s'arreter aux conclusions principales de l'appelant dont il est deboute, met le jugement dont appel a neant, en tant seulemont qu'il n'a pas admis l'appelant a prouver, en termes de preuve contraire, les faits par lui articules; emenddant, quant a ce, admet l'appelant a prouver par tous moyens de drout, meme par temoins, etc.
Du 12 aout 1856. - Cour de Bruxelles. - 1re ch. - Pl. MM. Mascart, Duvigneaud et Leharde de Beaulieu.
______________________________________________________
TESTIMONY. - Evidence to the contrary. - Fraud. - Act authentic. - Faith.
It can be proved by witnesses against and also the content has a deed, if the request for evidence is produced in terms of contrary evidence of fraud whose act is argued, that the fraud was also asked by etablire witnesses. (Civil Code, Article 1341).
Ainsie when deed of sale of real property is the chief attack fraud and vileness of price, circumstances demand that we establish proof by witnesses, the purchaser may, in turn, seek to justify the same way that the actual price paid is higher than that stated to the act.
(Godefroid - C. Delbrassine).
By writ dated 16 November 1855, Mr. Gillis, curator of the bankruptcy Delbrassine and Company was assigned to the Court of Nivelles Mr. Godefroid and Miss Englebert to see some declare that sale, made by Mr Camille Englebert, their (his? - Fr. 'de sa') undivided share in the property from their mother shared, for the benefit desdit Godfrey and Pauline Englebert, by notarial deed due April 24, 1853, is null and void as a cheaply made and the obvious intention to enrich its (his) sister and brother-in- law Godefroid prejudice to their/his other creditors, and the position of their brother. Poses various facts were in support of this application.
The Defendants rested with evidence offered by all prescribed by law, even by witnesses, among other facts, that the real price of the sale in question had been 72,000 francs were paid in cash, ie, 42.000 francs by the girl Englebert, a deduction of sums which it (she) had lent to his (her) brother, and 30,000 francs by Mr. Godfrey, with 25,000 francs in cash and a note of 5,000 francs, the goods were not worth more, etc. .; loans that were lowing real.
Judgment of 21 February 1856 as the curator admits evidence, by all legal means and expertise as to the value of the property sold, various facts including that the defendants had no interest to buy (the) goods (of) Camille Englebert, as they were distant and rented at cheap, that goods are not doors at their fair value as Godefroid, being in the trade, had more money than necessary buildings. Evidence to the contrary is reserved. Call only Godefroid, curator having dealings with the girl Englebert.
Godfrey maintains that the price of 72,000 francs was the price attributed to the tenant well, that he had borrowed from/(lent to) the notary Lebon 15,000 francs, to Beauthier 10,000 francs and had signed a promissory note for 5,000 francs to complete the purchase price and that the property was not worth more, both because of their quality has because of the strike and lease which expires in 1865, and it was concluded that the original demand was not declared inadmissible founded. Alternatively he asked deducted above facts and asked to make a proof by witnesses.
OFF
THE COURT - Whereas the circumstances of the case did not, in the state where it is, this has to admit the existence of fraud on the part of both contracting parties, but all made by the intimate poses can be used to establish;
Whereas the facts articulated by the appellant in the alternative, combined together, are relevant in that they directly combat the existence of fraud;
Whereas in matters of fraud, any direct evidence may be made by any legal means, as has the respect of the different circumstances of the fraud that has ALLEGED fraudulent acts, it must be the same with respect to evidence to the contrary;
Whereas the necessary intimate and with its system of fraud partial absence of sale, the appellant must between the world in its (his) evidence on this point;
Vain(ly) that intimate argues that it (his) witnesses to prove beyond the contents of a deed setting a sale price, as contrary evidence on this point is presented in order to fight a way fraud, based on an alleged partial absence of price that could establish intimate by any lawful means;
Whereas, moreover, that the facts posed by the caller needs to find a prima facie written by the transaction entered into between the intimate and Pauline Englebert who was in dispute with the appellant before the trial judge (the transaction homologuee the June 19, 1856, by the Court of Nivelles, duly registered);
For these reasons, The First Advocate General Cloquette heard his assent, puts the appeal was nil, and acting on the main appeal, without stopping the main conclusions of the calling which he is dismissed, is the judgment appealed from was nil, as it has not only allowed the appellant to prove in terms of evidence to the contrary, the facts articulated by him; as to what émendant(past part verb: émender?) admits the appellant to prove by any means law, even by witnesses, etc..
August 12, 1856. - Court of Brussels. - 1st c. - MM Pl. Mascart Duvigneaud Leharde and Beaulieu.
________________________________________
Two years late for you mom, but I think I have actually found him.
[> [>
I have to find the records of this notary of the contract.... I would suspect it could be - the notary Lebon from which he borrowed 15,000 francs -- Lij, Sunday, December 16, 02:48:09am (adsl-99-14-208-117.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net/99.14.208.117)
This is a real detective story..... and it has my blood boiling.
[>
I see your post only now -- Chani, Sunday, December 16, 04:37:13am (87-231-7-227.rev.numericable.fr/87.231.7.227)
I will check the pages later in the week if you don't mind waiting.
[> [>
Merci!! -- Lij, Sunday, December 16, 04:59:14am (adsl-99-14-208-117.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net/99.14.208.117)
Please take your time, I know you are busy and the holidays are coming up. This is just so exciting to me that I am even now trembling as I write this.
I only ask because you may be able to judge some of the written hand better than I as you are perceiving the word in French and I am trying to break it down letter by letter to then translate to English.
Then there is the name of the judge that gave him the letter.... I have no idea what that name is but I would like to find out. It seems to call Auguste Dumont his cousin... but in fact August Dumont is the husband of the sister of the stepmother of Camille Englebert.
I really want to find the records of that notaire Lebon (and could you check the sense of that court record as to possessive pronouns for me, and who won the judgement!). I've found that there are two notaires Lebon in Bruxelles and it is likely they are the descendants of the Lebon in question. The work of notaries seem to carry on in French/Belgian families and they even keep the work papers of their ancestors in private archives. So.... I am hopeful.
So much is coming together, our family myths, though focused on Paris and the famille de Buisseret, especially le comtes de Buisseret, are all falling in line on this one man. It certainly helps that he went to Harwich, England, with a woman whose name is near-exact that of our great-great grandmother here in Indiana.
I'm so excited over finding and translating the Godefroid court case above that I cannot get to sleep.
LOL!!!
Thanks, Chani...
....
[>
La famille Englebert de Glimes - to Regine Brindle -- Lij, Tuesday, January 15, 09:34:16pm (adsl-99-50-230-131.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net/99.50.230.131)
La famille Englebert de Glimes
Hi Regine, thank you.
I believe Camille Auguste Oswald ENGLEBERT from Glimes, Belgium, "became"
Camille Eugene Oswald Englebert de BUISSERET in America. That last name is the
full name the family in Indiana knew him by. Strangely enough the family always
refered to him as "Camille." However, he primarily signed all legal and family
(like births, weddings, etc) documents using the name Eugene de BUISSERET.
Oddly enough if you remove that signature name from the full name the family
knew then you are left with Camille Oswald ENGLEBERT - which is line with the
Englebert from Glimes. It is almost if his true name was encoded in that way for
us to find, and some family in Indiana have always held the true surname to be
ENGLEBERT. Also, some of think he chose the name Eugene because his signet ring
was engraved with a "CE."
Given that they are one and the same, I assume he was attempting to hide after
his brother-in-law GODEFROID & sister, Elvire Pauline ENGLEBERT, were sued (in a
court in Nivelles) by a curateur of a bankrupt company over the distribution of
their inheritance from their mother (Jeanne DeJARDIN).
However, I am still not sure that the Belgian ENGLEBERT is my American Englebert
de BUISSERET. It would be interesting if I had a signature of the Belgian
ENGLEBERT so that I could compare with their handwriting, especially the "E's"
in Englebert and Eugene - the "E" is quite disctinctive. And as both names end
in a "t" the ending could be distinctive.
If they are one and the same person, the wife of Camille ENGLEBERT was a
maid-servant in the Englebert household in Glimes. She was Marie Catherine
Josephe BOULANGER b. 1829 in Bonlez to Pierre Jacques BOULANGER & Marie
Josephine FLEMAL. BTW - the rest of the BOULANGER family emigrated to near
Thiry Daems in Red River Twp, Kewaunee Co., Wisconsin.
But that is the big question, where is the marriage. A notation by the Bonlez
baptismal record of Marie Catherine Josephe BOULANGER claims she married
"Camille Buisseret" in 1853 - and nothing else. I find it interesting that the
name recorded there is not Eugene. But I am skeptical of the date. The date
would seem to indicate that they were married in Belgium as there is the ships
record that appears to be their entrance into Harwich, England, in May 1855.
The question would be, who reported that marriage to her parish in Bonlez? If
they were married in 1853 in Belgium then he likely married her under his
surname of ENGLEBERT. Did they then self-report the marriage to the parish of
Bonlez that she married "Camille BUISSERET" at some later date? Possibly at the
time they left Belgium? Or is the notation of the date as much a lie as his
surname?
If they were married in Belgium in 1853 I would assume it had to be under the
ENGLEBERT name, but the marriage may have been in a larger city, specifically,
Nivelles, Bruxelles, or Liege. However, if the date is also a lie then I
suspect the marriage occurred near the date they left Belgium, May 1855, and
then perhaps even in Antwerp. Or they may have even married in England. I
suspect that they were not married until 1855 as their first child, named
Pauline, was born "a few days" before the child's death on 28 Nov 1855 in
Vincennes, Indiana.
The first record in the US was 3 months earlier on 28 July 1855 when a deed was
created to the land that became their homestead. I would assume they arrived at
least a month earlier. So between arriving in Harwich, England, on 7 May and
getting to Vincennes, let's say 7 July, they were travelling for 2 months. They
must have had already decided on going to Vincennes, and we have a family story
which may explain that. The family myth claims that the Bishop of Vincennes
(Indiana) convinced him to come to Vincennes. Whether he met the Maurice de St
Palais, Bishop of Vincennes, or simply read of him is unknown. But our ancestor
in Vincennes did lend the Bishop $3520.00 under an agreement dated 28 Jan 1856.
This is how the visit to Belgium in the spring and summer of 1852 of Maurice de
St. Palais, Bishop of Vincennes, was described in the History of the Sisters of
Providence of Saint Mary-of-the-Woods (1949): "His visit to zealous and
hospitable Belgium was however much more satisfactory, and it was there in the
most generous country of Europe eventually that he secured the musician for whom
the Community had been praying. In the great Catholic families of the Belgian
aristocracy, so high-minded and so profoundly religious, the Bishop was welcomed
everywhere, and they disputed with one another to the honor of receiving him and
hearing his account of his needy diocese. Several of these noblemen gave
generously to this worthy cause. The Bishop was both gratified and encouraged
especially as he expected aid also from Catholic Brittany, which he was
reserving to the last place upon his itinerary." The Bishop arrived in New
York on 10 Oct 1852. The family myth claims the DeBuisserets were on that same
ship; but I have located the ship's list and have proven they were not.
I think more importantly than a marriage record may be any record dated from
perhaps 1847 through April 1855 from Glimes which may record a Marie Catherine
Josephe BOULANGER from Bonlez. These could include a baptism or a marriage for
which she stood. Even more important may be an 1850 (1851?) census record for
the Englebert household in Glimes which would list Marie Catherine Josephe
BOULANGER from Bonlez. She is listed as gone on the census record at Bonlez for
that year.
Seems I answered more than "where was his wife from?" LOL!
Best... Lynn
[> [>
Email to Mike Eskew -- Lij, Tuesday, January 15, 10:02:10pm (adsl-99-50-230-131.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net/99.50.230.131)
Mike...
If I haven't mentioned it I am researching this idea through a professional genealogist.
The family story my mother told me goes something like this.
1 - Marie Catherine Josephe Boulanger left her home and became a maid in the DeBuisseret household in Paris.
2 - Catherine and Camille Eugene DeBuisseret fell in love but his father forbade the marriage.
3 - Camille Eugene DeBuisseret had studied law at La Sorbonne.
4 - Camille's father died and...
5 - After his father's death, Camille oversaw the disposition of the inheritance and made sure his two sisters were thus taken care of.
6 - Camille and Catherine were married.
7 - Something unseemly happened - speculation runs from simply the marriage that his relatives would not acknowledge or that he fought a duel.
8 - Maurice de St Palais, Bishop of Vincennes, Indiana, was in Paris and convinced Camille Eugene DeBuisseret to relocate to Vincennes - and Camille Eugene DeBuisseret and Catherine Boulanger were on the same steamship out of Le Havre the Bishop returned to America.
-------------------------------------------------------
So let's examine what happens if you consider Camille August Oswald ENGLEBERT to be our Camille Eugene Oswald Englebert de BUISSERET:
1 - Catherine Boulanger left her home and became a maid in the DeBuisseret household in Glimes.
2 - Catherine and Camille Eugene DeBuisseret fell in love but his father forbade the marriage. Likely true!
3 - Camille Eugene DeBuisseret had studied law at Leuven (Louvain) or Liege. Back in the 1980s I was living in OKC and an acquaintance from the Mormon Family History Library there took my information to people at La Sorbonne and they researched old records to see if he (under the name Buisseret or Englebert) did attend La Sorbonne about 1835 to 1852. None was found.
4 - Camille's father died.... True, for Camille ENGLEBERT: the father of Camille ENGLEBERT, Francois Joseph Auguste ENGLEBERT, died on 2 May 1853.
5 - After his father's death, Camille oversaw the disposition of the inheritance and made sure his two sisters were thus taken care of. True for Camille ENGLEBERT. That Camille created a notorial act dated 24 Apr 1853 which distributed his mother's inheritance to he and his sisters (Pauline & Hortense, who was married to a Godefroid). Their mother had died earlier in 1827. This date about a week earlier than his father's death would seem to be in anticipation of that death, perhaps his father was gravely ill. So this is mostly true for Camille ENGLEBERT.
6 - Camille and Catherine were married. There is a notation in the Parish register of Bonlez by the baptismal record of Marie Catherine Josephe BOULANGER stating that she married "Camille Buisseret" in 1853. That is all it says. When the notation was made is unknown. It could have be that the marriage between Catherine BOULANGER and Camille ENGLEBERT was performed in Belgium in 1853 and at some later date Camille reported the marriage to Bonlez? This is unknown but, of course, the marriage record is that record which is most sought after at this time. But if I have to fit this fact into the narrative then I would consider that their marriage occurred in Belgium in 1853 and then self-reported later to be most probable.
7 - Something unseemly happened - speculation runs from simply the marriage that his relatives would not acknowledge or that he fought a duel. For Camille ENGLEBERT this appears to be the court case that the notorial act of 24 Apr 1853 which he arranged. That act resulted in a trial of fraud against Godefroid (husband of Hortense Englebert) and Pauline Englebert (and possibly Camille Englebert?). The result of which by a writ dated 16 Nov 1855 from the court in Nivelles decreed that the notorial act of 24 Apr 1853 null & void. A further court case in a higher court in Brussels mentions that Pauline Englebert is in negotiations to settle that case but Godefroid seeks relief from the Brussels court to have evidence presented which the Nivelles court did not allow. Godefroid won that case on 12 Aug 1856, and it is supposed he got another hearing in the court at Nivelles.
These ongoing court cases may be one reason why Camille Auguste Oswald ENGLEBERT would have changed his name to our known Camille Eugene Oswald Englebert de BUISSERET in Knox County, Indiana. In land and court records in Indiana ours uses mostly uses the name Eugene de Buisseret which is completely different than the Belgian's name. Further he always identifies in these early records as being from France (same goes for the census except the 1870 census which names his country or origin as Belgium). Despite all this the name used for him which was passed down in the families was Camille. Further, his signet ring (John Ostendorf) has the initials C E on it. If this means Camille Englebert, then did he change his second name to Eugene in order to explain the "E" on the ring?
Finally, the birthdates of each are 'similar.' Camille Englebert was born 15 Jul 1822. The tombstone of Camille Eugene de Buisseret records his birth as 18 Jul 1823. These dates are sufficiently close, especially since it was likely his son or daughters who recalled his birthdate.
8 - Maurice de St Palais, Bishop of Vincennes, Indiana, was in Paris and convinced Camille Eugene DeBuisseret to relocate to Vincennes - and Camille Eugene DeBuisseret and Catherine Boulanger were on the same steamship out of Le Havre the Bishop returned to America. - This may be partly true. What is not true is that our two ancestors were on the same ship as the Bishop when he returned to America. The Bishop arrived in New York on 10 Oct 1852. I have found that ship's list and no one who could be identified with Camille and Catherine are on that ship. Which makes sense, since there is a record for an arrival of a Camille Englebert and Catherine Boulange (sic) in Harwich, England, on 7 May 1855. Further the earliest known record for Camille Eugene Oswald Englebert de BUISSERET is a deed dated 28 July 1855. Thus it appears that if Camille Englebert and Eugene de Buisseret are one and the same that he arrived in Vincennes about two months after leaving Belgium (assuming about a month to find and buy the land purchased on 28 July 1855).
What is possibly true, however, is that he met Maurice de St Palais, Bishop of Vincennes, at one point during the Bishop's tour of Belgium in 1852. This is how the visit to Belgium in the spring and summer of 1852 of Maurice de St. Palais, Bishop of Vincennes, was described in the History of the Sisters of Providence of Saint Mary-of-the-Woods (1949): "His visit to zealous and hospitable Belgium was however much more satisfactory, and it was there in the most generous country of Europe eventually that he secured the musician for whom the Community had been praying. In the great Catholic families of the Belgian aristocracy, so high-minded and so profoundly religious, the Bishop was welcomed everywhere, and they disputed with one another to the honor of receiving him and hearing his account of his needy diocese. Several of these noblemen gave generously to this worthy cause. The Bishop was both gratified and encouraged especially as he expected aid also from Catholic Brittany, which he was reserving to the last place upon his itinerary."
The fact which backs up this idea concerns a loan made by Camille Eugene de Buisseret to Maurice de St Palais, Bishop of Vincennes, on 28 Jan 1856, in the amount of $3520. This was the second financial record for the family made just 6 months after their first. The death of their first child Pauline occurred a few days after birth on 28 Nov 1855. However, none of this directly impacts on the idea that Camille Auguest Oswald ENGLEBERT became Camille Eugene Oswald Englebert de BUISSERET.
---------------------------------------------
But to me, all of that seems to add up that they are the same person. But we need something more exact to prove that they are the same person. Chief among those that ProGenealogists is searching for is some mention of Marie Catherine Josephe BOULANGER of Bonlez in the ENGLEBERT household in Glimes or simply in Glimes at all.
Best... Lynn
Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.