I’ve written about various members of the Jaques family before; and have learned never to get too cocky about the family tree I’ve put together for them. Whenever I think I have things wrapped up in a pretty little bow, something inevitably comes along that knocks me off my pedestal.
But, it’s good to know I am not the first, nor probably the last, to be stumped about certain aspects of the family tree; I have letters written by grandchildren of James Angus and Wealthy Jaques Angus in which information is shared, sifted, and sorted through, and questions are raised.
One area of confusion concerned Wealthy’s grandfather Samuel Barron Jaques (1730-1799) and who exactly his parents were. I did a post on that in March 2013 (see: “Samuel B. Jaques (d. 1798/9) of Woodbridge, New Jersey“) and seemed to be able to draw a few conclusions there.
From Samuel on down, things seem pretty clear; see my post “Striking gold: Gleanings from the Samuel Barron Jaques family Bible” which includes a clipping from the Newark News containing information written by James Angus Knowles, a grandson of Wealthy’s. The family Bible information is fantastic, of course, but if the information in the clipping is indeed correct, it indicates (as I’ve remarked before) that Samuel and his wife Mary Coddington had a 39-year age difference and that their children started arriving when Samuel was in his early sixties. (Wealthy & James Angus’s grandchildren found that remarkable as well.) So, perhaps, someday evidence of a 1st marriage will surface.
In any event, I’ve come across more Newark News communications regarding the Jaques Family history. So, evidently the clipping I found almost two years ago and put in that “Striking gold” post was one of a number of “back and forths” James Angus Knowles had via the paper’s “Jersey Genealogy” column, circa 1914-1915. Some entry numbers mentioned are not in my possession (i.e., 4912 and 4938) so I can’t include them here, obviously.
I’ve had a quick look through them and nothing is popping out at me with regards to figuring out Samuel Barron Jaques’ possible other marriage(s). But I know a few of this blog’s readers are hot on the trail of different lines of the Jaques family, so rather than take the time to dissect all the information in these additional two clippings, I am just going to post them here on the off chance they may be of use to someone. There is a lot of non-Jaques info as well (Docherty; Applegate; Wainwright; Hull; Coleman; Whitehead; Roll; Winans; Denham; Ball; Mead; Keeler; and Sutton; Salem County Church Inscriptions for Trullender, Watson, Wood, and Woodruff), so who knows?—maybe someone will find an interesting morsel there, too.
As always, comments, corrections, additions, etc., are always welcome.
NO. 4920—FIRST SETTLERS OF PISCATAWAY AND WOODBRIDGE—JAQUES FAMILY—Continued from No. 4912 in issue of Saturday last.
No. 4965 JAQUES (Referring to No. 4938, by JAK, in issue of January 2, 1915)
No. 4995—JAQUES—Referring to No. 4965, by FWG, in relation to No. 4938 of JAK)