Notes for Hannah -----

Sponsored by American History Press.

Americanhistorypress.com

"Keeping American history alive, one good book at a time!"

Notes for Hannah -----

As noted in comments under her husband, Jonathan, C.C. Gardner suggests that Hannah might have been a "Potter". This is probably based upon the statement in Jonathan's will naming "my brothers and friends John Potter and John Clark, both of
the Borough of Elizabeth" as executors. Jonathan was born ca 1690. and died in 1748 naming his children as "under age" and not including his wife Hannah. Hannah could have been quite a bit younger than Jonathan, but probably would have been born by
1725.
The largest concentration of Potters in the area at that time would have been descendants of Deacon Samuel Potter, who settled in what is now Connecticut Farms (Union), NJ His family has been the subject of extensive research by Helen Potter
Alleman, who compiled "Descendants of Deacon Samuel Potter (1671-1756)" with her research being about 1961, and published after her death. Her documents are also on file with Special Collections at Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N.J. To this time
we have not found any Hannah Potter in her book or papers who would "fit" as the wife of Jonathan Clark. Deacon Samuel Potter had a daughter, Hannah, [#33204 in this program] born in 1691, but she is named as Hannah Crammer in the 1760 will of her
sister, Sarah Potter Bonnel. It is unlikely that Jonathan's reference to John Potter as a "brother" was the result of Jonathan's wife being a Potter.
*****
I would suggest that she may have been an "Osborn" judging from Jonathan's probate papers - dek
*****

| HOME | SURNAMES |

Sponsored by American History Press.

Americanhistorypress.com

"Keeping American history alive, one good book at a time!"