USA > New Jersey > Marriage records, 1665-1800, Vol XXII (from various church records) > Part 13
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89
"IV. Every justice of the peace, minister of the gospel, or other person, having or pretending to have authority to join
1 This list of prohibitions was usually found in the opening pages of the King James version of the Scriptures, as well as in the Prayer Book of the Church of England. It had not been incorporated before in the laws of New Jersey. See Par. 76, of the Instructions to Lord Cornbury. p. xciv, ante.
2 Compare this with the Act of the East Jersey Assembly, May 30, 1668, forbid- ding marriages except by "some approved Minister or Justice of the Peace within this Province. or some chief Officer, where such are not. " p. lxxvi. ante.
3 See the Act of the West Jersey Assembly. May 2-6. 1682. p Ixxxiv, ante; and the Act of the East Jersey Assembly, Nov. 2, 1693. p. xeii. ante. And compare with Sees. 1 and 2 of the Act of 1719, pp. xcix-c. ante.
4 Compare with Sec. 3 of the Aet of 1719. p. ci, ante.
cxix
THE MARRIAGE ACT OF 1795.
persons in marriage, who shall marry any minor or minors, by virtue of a certificate had and proved as above directed, shall register the same, or cause it to be registered in a book by him to be kept for the purpose of registering of marriages, and within three months after, transmit the original certificate to the clerk of the county, in which the marriage was solem- nized, to be by him filed in his office.
" V. If any justice of the peace, minister of the gospel, or other person, having or pretending to have authority to join persons together in the holy bands of matrimony, shall marry any minor or minors, without the consent of the parent or parents, guardian or guardians, person or persons, having the care and government of such minor or minors, had and obtained, ac- cording to the direction of this act, and contrary to the true intent and meaning thereof, every such justice of the peace, minister of the gospel, or other person, having or pretending to have authority to join persons together in the holy bands of matrimony, shall, for every such offence, forfeit three hun- dred dollars, to be recovered, with costs of suit, by action of debt or information, in any court of record of this State, by the parent, guardian, or person having charge of such minor, as shall be so joined in marriage as aforesaid, the one half of the said forfeiture to be paid to the treasurer of the State, for the use of the State, and the other half to be for the use of the parent, guardian, or other person, having charge of such minor, who shall prosecute the same to effect.1
" VI. Every justice of the peace, and minister of the gos- pel, shall make and keep a particular record of all marriages solemnized before him, and transmit a certificate of every par- ticular marriage (containing both Christian names and sir- names) within six months after the solemnization thereof, to the clerk of the court of common pleas for the county, in which the marriage was solemnized.
" VII. If any justice of the peace, or minister of the gos- pel, shall neglect, omit, or refuse to make return to the clerk of the county as aforesaid, of all the marriages by him pro- nounced, he shall, for every such offence, forfeit the sum of
1 Compare with Sec. 2 of the Act of 1719. p. c. ante.
CXX
THE MARRIAGE ACT OF I795.
fifty dollars, to be recovered, with costs, by the clerk of the said court of common pleas, or any other person, who shall prose- cute for the same, by action of debt or information, in any court having cognizance thereof.
" VIII. The respective clerks of the courts of common pleas, in and for the several counties of this State, shall register and re- cord all such returns of marriages at large in a book to be kept for that purpose, and no other, within the space of one calendar month after receiving the same, for which service the said clerks respectively shall be allowed and receive, for each and every entry aforesaid, the sum of twelve cents, to be paid by the persons married to such justice of the peace, or minister, who shall perform the ceremony, and by such justice or min- ister, with the certificate thereof, be transmitted to the clerk ; and if any such clerk shall refuse. neglect or omit to register and record, within the said time, any such return so to him made or any part thereof, he shall forfeit the sum of one hun- dred dollars, to be recovered, with costs, by any person, who shall prosecute for the same, by action of debt or information, in any court having cognizance thereof.
" IN. It shall and may be lawful for every religious soci- ety in this State to join together in marriage such persons as are of the said society, according to the rules and customs of the society, to which they belong ;1 provided, that the clerk or keeper of the minutes, proceedings, or other book of the religious society, wherein such marriages shall be had and solemnized, shall make a true and faithful register of all mar- riages solemnized, in the society, in the book by him kept.
"X. Such books of marriages, so kept by the respective clerks of the court of common pleas, and by the clerks of such religious societies, as are authorized to solemnize marriages by the preceding section of this act, shall be admitted as evi- dence in all courts of law and equity in this State.
" XI. If any justice of the peace, or minister of the gos- pel, shall wilfully and knowingly make a false return of such marriages, or any of them, to the said clerk of the court of common pleas, or if the said clerk of such court shall wil-
1 Substantially the same as the first part of Sec. 9 of the Act of 1719.
cxxi
LATER LEGISLATION.
fully and knowingly make a false entry, register and record of any return of marriages, so to him made, in the said book by him before directed to be kept: or if any clerk or keeper of the minutes, and proceedings of such religious societies, as are authorized to solemnize marriages by this act, shall wilfully and knowingly make a false entry, register and record of such marriages, or any of them, then every such person, so offend- ing, shall be adjudged guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on con- viction, shall be punished by fine or imprisonment, or both, at the discretion of the court.
"XII. The act entitled, "An act to prevent clandestine marriages," passed the twenty. seventh day of March, in the year of our Lord, one thousand, seven hundred and nineteen, be, and the same is hereby repealed."1
The several provisions in this act, requiring registers of marriages to be kept by the justices or ministers officiating, were taken from the English Marriage Act of 1754. The East Jersey Assembly had passed an act at the session begun at Elizabethtown, November 5, 1675, requiring registers of mar- riages to be kept by the town clerks, and the Fundamental Constitutions of East New Jersey, 1683, provided for a regis- ter in each county for births, marriages and burials. The West Jersey Assembly enacted, May 2-6, 1682, that marriages should be registered in a public register, and by act of March, 1682-3, required certificates of marriage to be entered in a reg- ister of the town and county, " where it is finished."2 Thus, the sections in the act of 1795 providing for public registra- tion of marriages were re-enactments of laws which had exist- ed in New Jersey for more than a century.
LATER LEGISLATION.
The act of 1795 was drawn with such artificial skill, and so accurately reflected public sentiment, that it remained on the statute-books without change for exactly sixty-one years. Then a supplement was passed (approved March 4, 1856), evidently to cover some particular case of recent occurrence. This legal-
1 Paterson's Laws, 1799, folio ed., 158-160.
2 Leaming and Spicer, 100, 163, 236, 446.
cxxii
LATER LEGISLATION.
ized a marriage, acknowledged by any religious society in this state, where either of the parties had belonged to the society at the time of marriage, the same as if both parties were mem- bers thereof.1
Ten years later a second supplement was enacted (ap- proved April 4, 1866), which in effect amended Sec. III. of the act of 1795, by adding this clause :
" Should the person called upon to solemnize the marriage not be satisfied with the declarations of the parties desiring marriage, that they are of lawful age, he shall administer an oath or affirmation that they are of lawful age, of which oath or affirmation he shall make a certificate and file with the rec- ord of the marriage in the office of the clerk of the county, which certificate shall be his justification should said parties de- ceive him as to their age." The second section re-enacted Sec. V. of the former act.2
The next supplement to the act of 1795 merely "extended to and conferred on the mayor of every incorporated city, town or borough of this state," the powers conferred on justices of the peace by the second section of the original act, to solemnize marriages.3
The Marriage Act of 1795, amended as above, was consol- idated with various other statutes, in " An act concerning mar- riages, births and deaths-Revision," approved March 27, 1874, the essential features of the original act being retained, with but slight changes.4
A general revision of the marriage laws, entitled "An Act concerning marriages [Revision of 1902]," approved April 3, 1902, embodied all the existing statutes on the subject, includ- ing a requirement for a marriage license to be issued by the county clerk, where both the parties are non-residents of New Jersey ; where the male applicant for a license is under twenty- one, or the female applicant is under eighteen, the consent of the parents or guardian of such minor is requisite to the issu- ing of the license.5
1 Laws of 1856, p. 129. 2 Laws of 1866, p. 960.
3 Laws of 1872. p. 27.
4 Gen. St., 2003.
5 Laws of 1902, p. 490. The Marriage License Act was approved May 18, 1897 (P. L. 1597. p. 378).
Cxxiii
LEGISLATIVE DIVORCES.
DIVORCES BY THE LEGISLATURE.
For more than a century after the conquest of New Neth- erland by the English, divorces were granted in New Jersey -- if granted at all-only by the Governor.1 Otherwise there lay an appeal to the ecclesiastical courts in England. In 1772 there was a unique departure from this practice, when the Legislature passed an act entitled "An Act to dissolve the Marriage of David Baxter with Margaret his Wife late Mar- garet McMurtrie." There is nothing to explain why the Governor had not granted this divorce. Perhaps the evidence adduced before him satisfied him of the essential propriety of a divorce, but was legally insufficient. The bill originated in the House, was promptly concurred in by the Council, and received the assent of Governor Franklin on September 26, 1772. But when it was laid before the King in Council for the royal approbation it was promptly disallowed, September 1, 1773, and instructions were at the same time issued to all the Governors in North America to withhold their assent to any bills " for the divorce of Persons joined together in holy Mar- riage"-so shocked were the King and his advisers at this ex- traordinary departure from all precedents.""
Although the so-called constitution of 1776 was silent on the subject of divorce, it so far modified the powers of the Governor as to vest in him judicial powers only in his capac- ity as chancellor, as ordinary or surrogate-general, and as a member of the court of appeals, in the last resort, in all causes of law, as theretofore. This seemed to leave it optional with the Legislature to exercise the divorcing power,3 but that body was slow to act in that direction, and from 1776 to 1780 only three couples were divorced by legislative act. From 1781
1 From a letter to Brigadier Hunter. Governor of New Jersey and New York, bearing date March 27. 1711, it may be inferred that the practice in divorce cases was by petition, of which notice was given to the defendant, and the matter re- ferred by the Governor to a magistrate of the vicinage to investigate. perhaps taking depositions. See N. Y. Col. Docs .. V., 215. No records of the New Jer- sey Court of Chancery prior to 1744 are known to exist. The published reports begin with the January Term. 1830.
2 N. J. Archives. XVIII., 334-5, 338, 371; X., 110 112: N. Y. Col. Does .. VIII., 402.
3 The constitution of 1776 vested "the government of the Province" in the Governor, Legislative Council, and General Assembly, the legislative depart- ment thereby appearing to be supreme.
cxxiv
DIVORCES BY THE COURT OF CHANCERY.
to 1790 but two such acts were passed ; during the next ten years there were eight; in ISor-1Sio there were only four, while in the ensuing decade the number jumped to twenty- five, increasing to forty-seven in IS21-1830, and to 109 in IS31- 40, and in the next four years no less than sixty-two acts were passed by the Legislature, divorcing as many couples from the bonds of matrimony. In the nature of things there could be no judicial investigation into the reasons for the divorces asked for, and they were granted through the favor and influence of some member of the Legislature friendly to the petitioners. During the period from 1776 to 1844, while this practice prevailed, there were two hundred and fifty-nine divorces granted in this way, one hundred and fifty-two of them being of women from their husbands, and one hundred and seven of men from their wives; figures which suggest that the " weaker sex" was either less patient with matrimonial woes, or had a greater proportion to bear than men ; or that they exercised more persuasive powers with the legislators. The abuses of the system were becoming so alarming that when the new constitution was framed, in IS44, there was em- bodied in it the provision, " No divorce shall be granted by the Legislature."I
DIVORCES BY THE COURT OF CHANCERY.
Curiously enough, while the Legislature, from 1776 to IS44, asserted its authority in the granting of divorces, it never- theless sanctioned the judicial method, by an act passed De- cember 2, 1794, entitled " An Act concerning divorce and alimony." This was evidently one of Mr. Paterson's, and doubtless embodied in statute form the existing practice. It provided : Ist, that the court of chancery should have jurisdic- tion of all causes of divorce by this act directed and allowed ; provided the parties were inhabitants of the state. 2d, that the like process and course of practice and procedure should be had and pursued in causes of divorce, as in other equity causes, except that the answer of defendants should not be un- der oath. 3d, that divorces from the bond of matrimony should
1 Art. IV., Sec. VII., Pl. 1.
CXXV
DIVORCES BY THE COURT OF CHANCERY.
be decreed in case the parties were within the degrees prohib- ited by law ; in case of adultery in either of the parties, and also for wilful, continued and obstinate desertion, for the term of seven years.1 4th, divorces from the bond of matrimony were also authorized where either of the parties had another wife or husband living at the time of such second or other mar- riage. Divorce from bed and board was authorized for ex- treme cruelty in either of the parties.2 By a supplement, passed March 4, 1795, provision was made for service on an absent defendant, by publication.3 The law was revised, Feb. 3, 1818, the jurisdiction being extended to causes where the parties are or should be inhabitants of this State at the time of the injury, desertion or neglect complained of, or "where the marriage shall have been solemnized or taken place within this State, and the complainant shall have been an actual resident in this State, at the time of the injury, desertion or neglect complained of; and at the time of exhibiting the bill." The other provisions were much the same as the act of 1794, which act, and the supplement of March 2, 1795, were re- pealed.+ Another revision was passed February 16, 1820, which amended the first section by providing that the com- plainant should annex an oath to the bill of complaint that the complaint was not made by any collusion between the par- ties.5 By an act passed Dec. 13, 1824, it was provided that suits in the court of chancery, for divorce, might be by petition. instead of by bill, and the practice in that method was pre- scribed.6 An act passed February 22, 1843, amended the first section of the act of 1820 by adding the requirement that where a divorce was prayed for on the ground of desertion, "the complainant or defendant shall have been a resident of this State for the term of five years, during which such deser- tion shall have continued."7 By a supplement, approved Feb-
1 Reduced, by act passed February 22, 1843 (P. L. 1843. p. 45), to five years; by act approved March 20. 1857 (P. L. 1857, p. 399), to three years; and by acts ap- proved March 7, 1889 (P. L. 1889, p. 48), and March 5. 1890 (P. L. 1890. p. 34), to two years.
2 Paterson's Laws, 143.
4 Laws of 1818, p. 20.
6 Elmer's Digest. 1838, pp. 139, 141.
3 Ibid., 160.
5 Laws of 1820. p. 43.
7 Laws of 1843, p. 48.
cxxvi
DIVORCES BY THE COURT OF CHANCERY.
ruary 21, 1871, the court was authorized to make and enforce or- ders in regard to the care, custody, education and maintenance of infant children of parents bringing suit for divorce, and where they are divorced.1 The Revision, approved March 27, 1874, provided (Sec. 4) that divorces might be decreed in cases of physical and incurable impotency at the time of marriage, "such marriages to be invalid from the beginning and abso- lutely void."" By an act approved May 11, 1886, it was pro- vided that the court should have "jurisdiction of all cases of divorce in case of adultery committed out of this state, where the complainant or defendant was or shall have been a resi- dent of this state for three years next preceding the time when said bill was or shall hereafter be filed."3 An amendment, ap- proved March 7, 1889, gave the court jurisdiction of all causes of divorce and of alimony and maintenance, where either of the parties should be resident of this state at the time of the injury, desertion or neglect complained of, or where the mar- riage shall have been solemnized in this state, and the com- plainant shall have been an actual resident in the state at the time of the injury, desertion or neglect complained of and at the time of exhibiting the bill ; or where the adultery was com- mitted in this state. and either of the parties reside in this state at the time of exhibiting the bill ; or where either of the par- ties shall be a resident of this state at the time of filing the bill of complaint, and either party shall have been a resident of this state for the term of two years, during which such deser- tion shall have continued .!
The several statutes on the subject in 1902 were revised and consolidated into one, entitled "An Act providing for di- vorces and for decrees of nullity of marriage and for alimony and the maintenance of children [Revision of 1902]."5
1 Laws of 1871, p. 15.
2 Revised Laws. 1874. pp. 3-14; Gen. St., 1267. The Court of Chancery, May T., 1873, had refused to annul a marriage for impotence. 24 N. J. Eq .. 19. Hence this statute.
3 Laws of 1586. p. 345.
4 Laws of 1889. p. 45; Gen. St .. 1273.
5 Laws of 1902. p. 502.
(Wanting Presents. ) il. We Dewia Bilderberger
Province of chi Jersey -
arebelden and de stand mynymdobredanto Mias Excellenen II . LLI. 1 V FRANKLIVEof Captain Generatarif Governo: in Cher of km
Money of New Jersey;c' puede hisgaid lesiure Consor Tiagra Bu che which Barn well and train to be made and done, We A bird market woyMing Lerdings and Inanistrater , and Rer & then Gende, & Leren chy firmly by these Presents number One stroufand Je a Hindra and deunity two _
Sebudition thestate gation is juk The' show as the above
bounden Lewis, Littleburger hath obtained Licence of Manque For Himplfof the one Party. and for Elizabeth Van Alar irom of the same Place - si'ne wher Party: Ann if ul hall not here after appear, that they the faut Lewis Bilderberger and Elizabeth Van Blerhum - 's sony tarful". Let of Impediment of Precontract, Afinitu. or Con sanguinity, to hin. der their being joined in the Holy Bands of Matrimony, and afterwards_ their living togetheras, Man and Wife, then this Obligation to be void, or dse to stand and remain in full Force and price. .
A.
Sealedand Delivered in the Presence of .~ In og a brahi Jung
am hang
MARRIAGE LICENSES.
-
MALES.
A
Aaronson, Joseph, Burlington, and Hannah Folwell. 1736
Aug. 25
Aaronson, Joseph, Burlington, and Achsiah Black. 1782
Oct. 9
Aaronson, Thomas, Burlington, and Sarah Black. . 1787 July 24
Abbett, William, Bucks, Pa., and Catherine Conrad. 1761 Feb. 18
Abbitt, Benjamin, Salem, and Hannah Wicks, Salem. 1770
Jan.
4
Abbitt, John, Hunterdon, and Elsie Akers 1779
Feb.
12
Abbot, William, Jr., Hunterdon, and Aguis Edmunds.
1778
April 4
Abbot, James, Hunterdon, and Mary Maddock, Hunterdon
1749
Nov.
15
Abbot, Jonathan, Bucks, Pa , and Sarah Strickland, Bucks, Pa
1738
Nov. 17
Abbott, John, Gloucester, and Elizabeth Harden.
1784
July
8
Abelea, Mclchesidec, Burlington, and Mary Power, Burlington.
1780
Oct.
30
Abel, Andrew, and Christeena Schuyler ..
1779
Jan. 26
Abel, Daniel, Gloucester, and Elizabeth Starkey.
1780
Nov. 11
Able, Edward, Gloucester, and Eleanor Starkey
1779
April 20
Abraham, John, Middlesex, and Abigail Perine, Middlesex
1759
Ang.
11
Ackerman, David, Bergen, and Margaret Banta, Bergen.
1749
Mar. 31
Ackerman, John, Bergen, and Christiana Peter son, Bergen .. .
1760
Feb. 1
Ackerman, Garrit, Bergen, and Mary Stag, Bergen. . 1761 July 8
1763
May
5
Ackerman, Abraham, Bergen, and - Hopper.
1764
Oct.
18
Ackerman, David, Bergen, and Antje Vanhorn.
1768
Aug.
18
Ackerman, Abraham S., Bergen, and Cerstina Mead ...
1769 Jan. 2
Ackerman, David, Bergen, and Catherine Cuyper, Bergen ..
1769 April 22
Ackerman, Albert, Bergen, and Antje St orr, Bergen.
1771
Jan.
22
Ackerman, John, Bergen, and Elshe Van Bushkirk ..
1783
Aug.
11
Ackerman, Garret A., Bergen, and Charity Hopper.
1790
Jure 23
Acorn, Samuel, Salem, and Jane McKean, Salem. 1763
Aug. 27
Acton, John, Salem, and Mary Oakford, Salem.
1772
Jan.
30
Acton, Benjamin, Salem, and Hannah Randolph, Cumberland 1773 Nov. 24
Acton, William, Salem, and Grace Ambler. 1776
Nov. 18
Adaire, Edward, Bucks, Pa., and Sarah Fariss, Bucks, Pa
1732
Aug. 1
Abit, Burroughs, Gloucester, and Elizabeth Thompson, Gloucester.
1764
Aug. 25
Abrahams, James, Jr., Matcheponix, and Anne Perine, Matcheponix
.1755
June 17
Ackerman, Peter, Middletown, and Elizabeth Patton, Middletown 1760
Nov.
3
Ackerman, Abraham, Bergen, and Brache Blauvelt, Orange, N. Y.
2
NEW JERSEY COLONIAL DOCUMENTS.
Adaire, William, Bristol, Pa., and Margaret Currant. 1759
July 13
Adair, John, Burlington, and Martha Crossley, Burlington. 1774 Dec. 5
Adams, Stephen, Burlington, and Sarah Rogers, Burlington .. 1733 Sept. 1
April 26 Adams, Abel, Gloucester, and Tabitha Jay. 1781
Adams, Abraham, Gloucester, and Ruth Peterson. 1764
Jan. 27
Adams, David, Gloucester, and Mary Covenover, Gloucester
1775
1774 April 18 Oct. 3
Adams, David, Salem, and Mary Townsend
1786
May
22
Adams, Ebenezer, Gloucester, and Rebecca Roberts 1781
May 16
Adams, Fenwick, Salem, and Watkins Anne, Salem. -1687
Aug. 18
Adams, Isaac, Gloucester, and Bersheba Weldon, Gloucester.
1730 Jan. 23
Adams, Jacob, Burlington, and Hannah Hammel.
1784
May
22
Adams, Jeremiah, Gloucester, and Mary Homan Gloucester.
1738
Jan. 5
Adams, John, Burlington, and Judith Pettitt, Burlington 1737
Aug. 15
Adams, John, Burlington, and Margaret Flint 1769
Nov. 19
Adams, Joseph, Gloucester, and Sarah Reeves, Burlington
1754
June 28
Adams, Joseph, Gloucester, and Susanna Rue. 178
Jan.
1
Adams, Moses, Mansfield, and Elizabeth Ingler. 1772
Sept
12
A lams, Thomas, Burlington, and Elizabeth Bowker, Burlington. 1771
Ang. 9
Adams, Thomas, Philadelphia, and Sarah Shaw, Burlington. 1781
Dec. 24
Adams, Thomas, Burlington, and Ann Eyres.
1785
May 30
Adams, Williams, Salem, and Hannah Evans, Salem
1762
Feb.
16
Adams, William, Jr., Salem, and Sarah Bralway. 1764
Aug.
18
Addams, David, Gloucester, and Catharine Wood, Gloucester 1745
June 20
Addams, Nathan, Burlington, and Sarah Oldale, Burlington 1745 Oct.
Addams, Jonas, Gt. Egg Harbour, and Mary Arnal, Gt. Egg Harbour 1750
May 3
Addams, Richard, Gloucester, and Rebecca Ireland. 1784
June 26
Addis, Thomas, Burlington, and Anne English, Burlington 1749
July 10
Addoms, John, Burlington, and Sarah Smith, Gloucester 1729 May 26
Oct. 24
Adkin, James, Morris, and Mary Budd, Morris .. 1751
May
4
Adrianez, Gozen, Perth Amboy, and Cornelia Banta, Hackensack 1743
June 11
Adudell, William, Freehold, and Allet Honce, Freehold 1767
1780
Oct. 1
Akerman, Philip, Burlington, and Hannah Stockton, Burlington .. 1771
Nov.
12
Akers, Jonathan, Hunterdon, and Catherine Abbit. . 1780 Oct.
Akin, Timothy, Monmouth, and Elizabeth Woolley, Monmouth 1748 Jan. 23
Akin, Stephen, Monmouth, and Elizabeth King, Shrewsbury.
1761 April 1
Akly, Adam, Burlington, and Mary Parker, Burlington. .
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.