Aitkin 1912 NJ Index of Wills, Vol. 1 — Essex County (suffix G) Cooper section — 21 verbatim entries, 1732–1898, including the state index's own row for Col. John Cooper's 1732 will.

What this document records

It confirms a24

ENTRY #8 IS THE STATE INDEX'S OWN ROW FOR THE WILL THAT FALSIFIED THE NEWARK HYPOTHESIS — "Cooper, John, 851-852G. B. C, p. 154. W." ⇒ book C p. 154, an exact match to [A.24]'s citation, plus the loose docket 851-852G which [A.24] did not have. That docket is orderable, and the will body would settle the "sister Elizabeth Frayley" question [A.24] raised.

And brother samuel

ENTRY #18, "Cooper, Samuel, 883-888G. B. C, p. 173. Int." ⇒ the brother Samuel named in [A.24]'s will, intestate, on the very next pages of the same book. His administration is worked at [A.47] — widow Experience Cooper (Experience Cooper), inventory £307.10.0. This index row is where that docket number came from.

The null

NO DANIEL COOPER AND NO GRACE COOPER IN ESSEX — the same null as [A.35] found in Middlesex. ⇒ taken together, the two counties most associated with the family's early presence hold no state-indexed probate for that household. Not evidence of absence from the counties — only of absence from this index, which covers Secretary-of-State records and not those retained at county level (the distinction [A.37] makes explicit).

A second early john

Entry #9, "Cooper, John, 1900-2004G. B. F, p. 193. W." — a second mid-1700s Essex John Cooper with his own compound docket. Unidentified, and worth keeping distinct from the 1732 Col. John: two men of one name in one county is exactly the shape that produces conflations.

Ocr doubt

Entry #12, "Cooper, Joseph, 24427G. W. 1802", is internally inconsistent — a five-digit docket in that range belongs to the late 19th century, not 1802. Flagged as a probable OCR error, not corrected.