Excerpts from our Mass.-San Fran connection:
In searching census and other records for San Francisco’s David Tierney, or any other David Tierney born in Massachusetts during the first half of the 19th century, several David Tierneys were identified living in Massachusetts, but Charlestown’s David Tierney was the only one reported to have been born in the state. In the years following the 1870 Census, there is no available record of death in any part of the country for any David Tierney, nor even the existence of a David Tierney, other than the one we identified in census years 1880 and 1900 in San Francisco. This Massachusetts-born David Tierney was listed in the 1880 Census living in San Francisco with his Irish-born wife, Margaret (Ryan?) Tierney, and their two young children: Mary and Daniel, both born in California. (Was Daniel named after his grandfather, and Mary after her aunt?)
Almost with certainty, we can state that this was the same David Tierney who was identified in the 1900 Census as a widower, residing with son Daniel at 23½ Dearborn Place in San Francisco, in the 34th Assembly District. David’s occupation was that of an engine fireman, and son Daniel was a shoe maker. Living with them was a childless widow, named Mary Burke, identified in that 1900 Census as the sister of David and “head of household.” The birth years of siblings David and Mary, as recorded in this 1900 census, do not match those of the two oldest children of DANIEL and ELLEN TIERNEY in 1870 Charlestown, but the birthplace of both Mary and David was identified as Massachusetts. Based on that and other facts cited herein, we think it probable that they were the same people, despite the inconsistent - we think erroneous, birth data in the 1900 Census. It looks like either the census taker, or the reporter (perhaps young Daniel), may have confused the ages of David and Mary with their birth years.
There was a Mrs Mary A Bourke (sic) listed in an untitled 1889 city directory at 119 Van Ness Ave, San Francisco, with her occupation designated “liquor saloon.” If Mary A (Tierney) Burke was running a saloon in turn-of-the-century San Francisco, it is perhaps no surprise that she was identified as head of the 1900 Tierney household. Van Ness Avenue was not far from the Uptown Tenderloin district, which was the center of the city's more reputable nightlife. That meant that the brothels were classier than those of the more infamous Barbary Coast. We do not know if either Mary or David was at all associated with such activities, but it's safe to say that they experienced more worldly influences than did their parents or siblings, who virtually never left Charlestown, MA.
No further information on San Francisco residents David Tierney or Mary (Tierney) Burke was found in post-1900 Census data, nor, it appears, is there any record of death for either. An interesting question: Were David Tierney and his sister Mary (Tierney) Burke living in San Francisco at the time of the Great Earthquake and Fire in April 1906? It was estimated that the catastrophe was responsible for over 3,000 deaths. Most victims were never identified or otherwise accounted for. Of a total population of about 400,000 people in San Francisco at the time, 225,000 were made homeless. Over 28,000 buildings were destroyed. Dearborn Place, at which David and Mary were reported to reside in 1900, does not even exist today. Source: Virtual Museum of the City of San Francisco. See http://www.sfmuseum.org/1906/06.html
David was an engine fireman in 1900, and no doubt would have been called upon to perform life-endangering work, if he was in San Francisco in April 1906. A Mary Bourke (sic), as early as 1889, lived and/or worked in an establishment on Van Ness Avenue, which street was on the perimeter of an area that was devastated by the conflagration in 1906. It was reported that even millionaires, at the direction of city officials, destroyed their homes on Van Ness Avenue in an effort to slow down the spread of the fire, but to no avail when it became apparent that this entire residential district was doomed. Young Daniel Tierney, who lived with his father and aunt in 1900, appears to have survived the conflagration. Perhaps Daniel's marriage in 1903 was the reason why he escaped what we think was the site of devastation........ Daniel Tierney, son of David, was identified in the 1910 Census living in San Francisco with his wife of 7 years, Julia (Buckley), on Elizabeth Street. Like the home Daniel shared with his father and aunt in 1900, this home was also in the 34th Assembly District, but evidently in an area that escaped the earthquake-and-fire devastation. Having immigrated from Ireland in 1884, Julia's birth family is first identified in the 1900 Census, also living in San Francisco: James and Catherine (Mahan) Buckley and their children, William and Julia. Living with Daniel and Julia in 1910 was their daughter Margaret Catherine, who may have been named for Daniel's late mother and Julia's mother.
The year of Daniel’s death is unknown, but he appears to have died before 1920, since that year’s Census identified wife Julia as a widow living with her brother, William Buckley, and her daughter Margaret on Mission Street. After Margaret's marriage, the 1930 Census has Julia living with her widowed mother, "Kate" Buckley, on Castro Street. Julia (Buckley) Tierney died in 1952 at age 72. Margaret Catherine (Tierney) McKenna, daughter of Daniel and Julia Tierney, was 84 when she died in 1992 in California.