Family tragedy: Just Williams

In May 1858 the Hull Daily News reported:

Peter was born in 1850 and almost certainly named after his cousin Peter William NELSON who had died in 1849 at the age of eleven from Asiatic cholera. The 1849 Hull epidemic claimed around 2.5% of Hull’s population. Once it struck the disease’s progress was rapid – Peter’s death certificate records that he had the disease for twenty-two hours.

Infant deaths were common at the time. Both Peter Williams were grandsons of my 3 x great grandparents William Taylor CLARK (1795-1869) and Ann CLARK (nee OSBOURN) (c1787-1877).

In total William and Ann had fourteen grandchildren, four of whom died in infancy. The other two children who died were Jeremiah William CLARK who died in 1847 at the age of twenty-two months having suffered from pneumonia for eight days, and William Thomas Taylor CLARK who died in 1856 at the age of four from acute hydrocephalous.

The other ten grandchildren all survived to adulthood. So it transpires that my 3 x great grandfather had fourteen grandchildren, only four of whom had William as one of their names, and those four were the four who died. Odd. How unlikely was this? Well that depends critically on the question you’re actually asking … but if we take it as a given that William Taylor CLARK did have fourteen grandchildren and that exactly four of them were going to die, then the chances it would be a given four are 4/14 x 3/13 x 2/12 x 1/11 = 0.1% or one in a thousand.

But then again the likelihood of last week’s lottery numbers coming up were 6/49 x 5/48 x 4/47 x 3/46 x 2/45 x 1/44 = around one in fourteen million … but they still came up!

I’m just particularly thankful my great grandfather was one of the ten who made it to adulthood, otherwise you might not be reading this story. Philosophical stuff all this chance and probability!

Bibliography

  1. Hull Daily News, 29 May 1858, 7a
  2. Cooper, Henry. “On the Cholera Mortality in Hull during the Epidemic of 1849.” Journal of the Statistical Society of London 16, no. 4 (1853): 347–51. https://doi.org/10.2307/2338134


Leave a comment