Paul Palmer of Texas sent in several issues concerning this early family:
Issue #1
Elizabeth JANNEY married Lawrence PEIRSON
Who says so? Prove it!
The LDS IGI (page 8,228) shows the marriage between Elizabeth JANNEY and Lawrence PEIRSON twice ~ once in 1644 in "Chester, of Pownall Fee" and once in 1646, apparently "of Wilmslow". The event dates are in parentheses, presumably indicating that they are undocumented.
Immediately following the above entries, the IGI shows a marriage of Lawrence PEARSON and Elizabeth JANNEY "of Wilmslow" in 1646 (in parentheses). Perhaps this entry is merely to show a common variant spelling. [I favor the PEIRSON spelling for Lawrence because that is the way he spelled it in signing his will.]
Immediately following the third entry is a fourth, showing Elizabeth JANNEY marrying Lawrence John PEARSON in 1649 (in parentheses) and showing no place name. [There is NO reason I can imagine for showing Lawrence with a middle name.]
Clearly these entries can't ALL be correct. The best evidence is that NONE is correct. Certainly none has been adequately documented. STOP PASSING IT ON!
The same IGI page (8,228) shows several birth and christening entries for females named Elizabeth JANNEY or JANNY. One of those is recorded as the daughter of Thomas JANNEY and Elizabeth WORTHINGTON, born in (1620) in "Chester, Pownall Fee". There is no record of such a person in the Wilmslow Parish Register, 1558-1652. Pownall Fee is one of four townships which comprised Wilmslow Parish at the time.
Another entry shows a "miscellaneous event" for an Elizabeth JANNEY dated "about 1619" and identifies her as spouse of Lawrence PEIRSON.
Other Elizabeth JANNYs (various spellings) are shown christened and married in Prestbury on various 16th-century dates and one christened 7 June 1607, also in Prestbury.
Several earlier genealogists have asserted that the Elizabeth JANNEY who married Lawrence PEIRSON/PEARSON was the daughter of Randall (various spellings) JANNY (various spellings) and Ellen ALLROD or ALLRODD or ALRODD or ALDROD or ALLRED or whatever. Some asserted the same 1620 birth date for this Elizabeth as the IGI shows for the alleged daughter of Thomas JANNEY (1605-1678) and Elizabeth WORTHINGTON JANNEY (1604-1682).
IN FACT ~ Randall died in 1613, seven years before such a daughter's improbable birth. I have a photocopy of and have transcribed his estate papers. I also have the christening records of all four of his children, one of whom pre-deceased him and the fourth of which was born posthumously. None was an Elizabeth.
FURTHER ~ I located, had photocopied, and transcribed the 1619 will of Randall's father-in-law, John ALLRED (1564-1620) of Wilmslow Parish. [I use the spelling ALLRED because that is the way he spelled it when he signed the will. Furthermore, I am completely convinced that the ALLROD and other deviant spellings stem from the fact that many careless transcribers never learned that an Elizabethan lower case 'e' looks like a modern cursive lower case 'o'. In fact, I have many times used a single word from ALLRED's will to demonstrate and illustrate the blunder. The word is 'money'.] John ALLRED's is an unusual will in a number of ways. Among other things, John ALLRED named ALL his grandchildren. None was an Elizabeth Janney.
I have searched the Wilmslow Parish Register repeatedly and failed to locate any person named JANNEY who was a suitable candidate to be Lawrence PEIRSON's wife (and my 7-greats grandmother). We know he had a wife named Elizabeth and that she was the mother of some of his children ~ probably all except the eldest, daughter Mary. We know that she died in the summer of 1662 and was buried in the Quaker burying yard at Mobberley in Cheshire.
Thus far we do NOT know 1.) what her birth surname was; 2.) who her parents were; 3.) when she was born; 4.) where she was born; 5.) when and/or where she was married to Lawrence PEIRSON. If anyone knows anything to the contrary, please let me know and be prepared to produce your source or sources. I will be extremely appreciative.
Issue #2
Lawrence PEIRSON's daughter Mary
came to America and married John SCARBOROUGH
A full and careful reading of Lawrence PEIRSON's will make several things pretty clear about his daughter Mary.
1.) He did indeed have a daughter named Mary, christened 31 October 1647, and identified as the daughter of Lawrence in the Wilmslow Parish Register 1558-1652.
2.) He gave her a special bequest of one shilling in his will dated 21 February 1673/4.
3.) He also gave her an equal share of the residue of his estate, equal to that of his other unmarried children, Thomas, John and Sarah. The combination of items 3 & 4 has led some to assert that Mary was especially favored by Lawrence. A more thorough and thoughtful reading of the will would probably lead to a different conclusion.
4.) A bequest of one shilling would commonly be made to prevent a challenge based upon the common law claim that one had been denied the minimal 'child's portion' of a parent's estate. It was decidedly not a sign of special favor. Except for the one shilling, Mary's portion of the estate was put into the hands of the executors to use according to their discretion to see to Mary's needs. You might assume that was because she was a female and not a male. Not so. No such condition was placed on sister Sarah's portion of the estate. Mary was 26 years old when Lawrence wrote his will. Sarah was only 14.
Another problem about Mary PEIRSON being the wife of John SCARBOROUGH and mother of his children is the fact that she was born in 1647 and would have been a bit 'long in the tooth' when some of his children were born.
Conclusion: There was 'something about Mary' that caused her father to consider her unfit to manage her own estate. Was she seriously physically disabled? Or was she mentally handicapped? Morally retarded? There was something about Mary that was deemed amiss to the point that she would not be entrusted to manage her own affairs.
People who have looked at the Quaker marriage documents of the Morley Monthly Meeting and Cheshire/Lancashire Quarterly Meetings might note that among the guests one can often find a Mary PEIRSON. What would an incompetent be doing as a witness at a Quaker wedding? If one checks the documents, one might discover that on 3-12-1663 (3 February 1664 NS) Lawrence PEIRSON's brother Robert married Mary JANNEY (daughter of Thomas and Elizabeth WORTHINGTON JANNEY), thus making her Mary PEIRSON. She ~ Mrs. Robert PEIRSON ~ was in attendance at numerous Quaker weddings from then until her death in 1698, always shown as Mary PEIRSON, and on at least one occasion after Robert's death in July 1674 she was specifically identified as a widow. I have yet to find a case where BOTH Mary PEIRSONs were recorded as present at any event.
What became of Lawrence's daughter Mary after his death in February 1674? In view of the fact that one of his co-executors (Robert PEIRSON) died within five moths after Lawrence, it seems very likely she was either cared for by her siblings or became the ward of the remaining executor, friend and neighbor John JOHNSON. Some speculate that she came to America with her brother Edward PEIRSON in 1687. I have yet to see any clear reference to her in any subsequent document. If anyone knows of any, please let me know.
Who was the Mary SMITH who was aboard the Endeavour in 1683 and identified as a sister to John and Thomas PEARSON? Perhaps she was Mary PEIRSON and had been misnamed, or perhaps Mary PEIRSON had been married to a man named SMITH and widowed since her father's death. Neither assumption is supportable. The Mary SMITH of the Endeavour was Mary SMITH (1661-1728), sister of Margery SMITH PEARSON, wife of Thomas PEARSON ~ and also my 6-greats grandmother. Instead of being listed as sister-in-law of the Pearson brothers (which she was), Mary was listed as sister ~ a practice not at all uncommon at the time.
And while we are at it ~ Mary SMITH also did not marry John SCARBOROUGH. She married Daniel WILLIAMSON and, despite her repeated and documented indiscretions, she was still married to Daniel when he died in Edgmont Township, Chester County Pennsylvania in 1727.
The SCARBOROUGHs will have to find their Mary PEARSON elsewhere.
Issue #3
Margery SMITH PEARSON was named Margery Ellen SMITH
In the dozen or more contemporary documents which I have examined mentioning Margery SMITH by name, I have NEVER seen her given a middle name. For reasons unknown to me someone decided and committed to print that Margery SMITH (1659-1747) bore the middle name Ellen. Again ~ I have never seen any contemporary document that showed her with any middle name. If Margery had a middle name, it was kept concealed throughout her life time. If Margery had a middle name (as few people did in the 17th century), it is very unlikely that it would have been Ellen. Why? After all, her mother's name was Ellen, wasn't it?
Yes ~ Margery's mother was Ellen WILLIAMSON (1628-1724). But one of Margery's sisters was ALSO named Ellen ~ Ellen SMITH (1667-1727). Ellen married a man named Bartholomew COPPOCK, but exactly when and where I have not discovered. I do know that both Ellen and Bartholomew COPPOCK lived out the last part of their lives and died in Springfield Township, Chester County, Pennsylvania ~ he in 1720 and she in 1726 or 1727.
Interestingly, in the few months between the writing of Bartholomew's will and Ellen's will, the spelling of her name went from 'Ellin' to 'Elinor'. [His was written in April 1720 and hers in January 1721.] My only explanation is that the widow changed her name on a whim. Well ~ why not? Internal evidence from the wills makes it unmistakable that she was Ellen Smith, sister of Margery and Mary (and Jane and Robert and William and Ann and Martha), daughter of Robert and Ellen WILLIAMSON SMITH, and widow of Bartholomew COPPOCK, one of several Bartholomew COPPOCKs of Cheshire and Chester County.
Follow Us
Like Us
Problem with this page?
Geni Pro
Private UserGeni Pro
Private UserGeni Pro
Geni member
Geni member
Geni member
Geni member
Geni member
Geni member