LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-L Archives

Archiver > LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS > 2009-12 > 1259948251


From: <>
Subject: Re: [LDR] Marjorie Adams - your two questions re Samuel Hopkins
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2009 09:37:31 -0800
References: <3DE6290ECFB84A879D1A3E698F0ED8D5@D9WXC981><89f244ab0911291035o77bf484fla1574e3303c11421@mail.gmail.com><6FCAB9085C464BD9A0CE2E7AFA355B4E@D9WXC981><89f244ab0912032001n23e4a988l1ee5250b9a77d1c5@mail.gmail.com><5CDEB519596B4077AB433EDCF622A61D@D9WXC981><89f244ab0912040902j4899b3aej6b3626f01eb93963@mail.gmail.com>


Marjorie .... Thanks for the tip on Wrights' "Vital Records". I have used that
pamphlet (book), and I did get several excellent confirmations from it.

If Wright had moved his end date out about 20 years it might have been even more
valuable. One complication to this whole Samuel thing is interesting (& I wish I
knew the "personal" story behind it).

The Mother of my 2nd GGF James was Cornelia McIlvain. Her first (AFAIK) husband was
William Hopkins, who died c1790 when James was 8 or 10 yoa. The marriage is
confirmed in the Wright book. #1 husband William Hopkins died c1790 (from an Orphans
Court doc). c1792 Cornelia (McIlvain) Hopkins married a 2nd husband & guess whom she
married .... William Hopkins [I should have written "Ta Da" there :-) ].

I knew of William Hopkins #2 who was in the area at the time. Based on my scenario,
#2 was a cousin of the #1 William Hopkins. Why didn't Mr. Wright cover that one ....
I had to figure it out myself, and it took a while for it to "dawn" on me.

Thanks, Joe Lake


Joe,
Your approach to evidence and proof is the best.

Hopkins is not my line so my exposure to this family was first in an
attempt to prove or disprove a connection to my David Murray whom I finally
determined was not the David (d Snow HIl) who began in the hh of Nathaniel
Hopkins. Now, as I look more closely at the location and history of the
properties of my Sussex lines, I am turning up Samuel Hopkins again.

I have nothing at this time to refute your thinking that Samuel LWT 1741 of
Sussex (in 1741he would have been north of Indian River) may have different
ancestors than the Hopins/Turner line. However, I would not write off the
Hopkins/Turner line as (1) the elder Samuel bequeathed land in Vines Neck
which is near now Dagsboro on the south side of Indian River and (2) Hampton
of Nathaniel gave land "on Indian River" (not specified whether south or
north) but even if it were south it is not unthinkable that some of the
descendants would have crossed the river. While most of my lines did remain
south of Indian River, some of them married people north of the river and/or
settled there.

Wright's *Vital Records of Kent and Sussex Counties* lists in the Lewes and
Coolspring Presbyterian Church records some entries from Buckingham which I
think is the church that was in Berlin Wor MD near where the Hopkins/Turner
line is found. In the index for Coolspring the names Ann, Archibald,
Hampton, Jean, Jenny, Jennet, John, Matthew, Samuel and William appear. If
you haven't pursued these 2 church's records, they just might be a gold mine
for you.

I will surely remember to send you anything else relevant that I find.

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 12:50 AM, <> wrote:

> Marjorie: Thanks for sending the abstracts below. <snip>
>




This thread: