Barrie's mother-in-law

[Robert Greenham]

Why should members be interested in Barrie's mother-in-law?  After all,
there seems to be little evidence that Barrie himself took much interest
in her, although that's not to suggest that he ignored her.  And readers
of one or two  particular biographies of Barrie may have picked up that
Barrie's wife, Mary Ansell, didn't relate particularly well to her
mother, Mrs Mary Ansell (nee Kitchen).  Please bear with me a little
while I explain.

As part of my research into JMB for my own book, I read the biographies
written by Darlington, Mackail, Asquith, Dunbar and Birkin.  I had
picked up on Barrie having ridden with his wife, in their
chauffeur-driven car, to his wife's mother's funeral, and I was
interested in this because my book includes a look at the Barries'
chauffeur and his work,  and I had found that, by the time of the
funeral, Barrie rarely travelled in the car (it was essentially his
wife's mode of transport, not his).

Of the five biographers listed above, only Dennis Mackail mentioned the
passing of Mrs Mary Ansell; on page 386 of the Peter Davies 1941 first
edition, wherein we are unmistakably within the year 1906, we read: "No
note on something else that happened this spring; his mother-in-law's
sudden illness and death at Hastings, to which Mrs Barrie was summoned
from one of the trips to Paris. But of course the note-books are only a
very special and unreliable sort of diary."

Hmm.  Unfortunately, it seems that biographies are an unreliable sort of
book, especially ones by Mackail.  Having found no other references to
Mrs Mary Ansell's death, I made a blunder by taking Mackail's statement
as correct.  Being a family historian, I searched the vital records for
this death.  The only Mary Ansell whose death was registered in the
spring of 1906, who was of about the right age, died in the St Giles
district in London.  Furthermore, her former husband's name was revealed
to be George Ansell, as I had expected.  With the Barries living mainly
in London, and travelling to Mrs Ansell's funeral in their car, it
seemed quite reasonable to think that Mackail had been mistaken about
Mrs Ansell's place of death, but not about the timing.  Additionally,
while I had confirmed that Mrs Ansell had lived in Hastings in 1881, I
had not managed to find evidence of her having lived there at the time
of the 1891 and 1901 censuses.  Indeed, in 1891 she seemed to have been
living on the east coast at Great Yarmouth, and so it seemed possible
that she didn't return to Hastings to live, but moved to London instead,
perhaps to be near her daughter in her final years.  It made sense, but
how wrong I was!

Since publishing my book, I obtained copies of two more biographies, by
Professor Roy and by Lisa Chaney.  Roy said nothing about Mrs Ansell.
Chaney, whose book was published on the same day as mine, echoed
Mackail's statement in this way (page 249, dealing with part of 1906):
"Barrie's contemporary notebook makes no mention of his mother-in-law's
death and funeral in Hastings that spring, for which Mary was recalled
from Paris."

Embarrassed, now, that two books asserted that Mrs Ansell died in
Hastings in the spring of 1906, whereas I had said in my book that she
died in London in 1906, I determined to get at the truth.  And the truth
came to light only when I finally obtained a copy of Mrs Ansell's death
certificate.  The truth is that Mackail, Chaney and I were all wrong.
I hereby admit my mistake, and Lisa Chaney should do the same.  It's too
late for Mackail of course.

The truth is that Mrs Ansell died in Hastings, yes, but not in the
spring of 1906.  She died more than a year earlier, in the winter of
1905.  She died on January 8th 1905, and she died from exhaustion and
cardiac failure 11 days after contracting acute bronchitis.

Why might this be of interest to us now?  The information tells us that
Mrs Ansell contracted acute bronchitis on 28 December 1904.  Ie. just
one day after the opening of the first performance of Peter Pan at the
Duke of York's Theatre.  So perhaps the death was not especially noted,
by Barrie or anyone else except his wife, because of the excitement at
the immediate success of Peter Pan, and all that that must have meant
for Barrie and those around him.  Clearly, for Mary Barrie that time
must have been one of great and mixed emotions.

According to the death certificate, Mary Barrie was present at the death
of her mother (at 45 Cornwallis Gardens, Hastings, a lodging house), and
she registered the death in Hastings on the following day.  But, given
the success of Peter Pan in those first few days of its opening run, did
the Barries really nip off to Paris for a holiday at that time?  Was
Mary really summoned back from there in January 1905?  Or was that
inferred by Mackail from a consideration of knowledge, if indeed it was
correct, that she was in Paris in the spring of 1906?