Sussex Co. NJ marriage register, page 233 — Samuel Cooper to Sarah Balden, 15 September 1821, married by James Dewitt Esq., Justice; recorded 21[?] Feb 1822. No parents are named — the register predates the parent-naming NJ returns (1848). The couple a FamilySearch tree gives as the parents of [name.495] George G. Cooper.

Transcription and notes

Pulled 2026-08-11 to test a FamilySearch tree's claim about [name.495] George G. Cooper's parentage.

Data from the document [verbatim]

The page groups marriages under the officiant who performed them. The block reads:

1821 · Married by James Dewitt Esq. Justice June 2 — David Merrill to Margaretta R[osenberr?] Sept 15 — Samuel Cooper to Sarah Balden Oct 16 — Jonah Howell to Mary Freas (Widow) Nov 17 — Thomas Hadley to Rosetta Skiner 1822 Feb 7 — John Vanscoker to Sarah Adams Rec[eive]d & Recorded 21[?] Feb 1822 · Green, Cl[er]k

Page number 233, top-left of the opening at image 181.

The bride's surname reads BALDEN — B-a-l-d-e-n, clearly, at 5×. Not Belden or Bolden. The FamilySearch index has it right.

What this record does NOT contain

No parents. No ages. No residences. No occupations. The register carries only date, groom, bride, officiant and the recording clause.

That is structural, not an omission. The NJ statewide returns — the series with a Names of Parents column — begin in 1848; this is a county register of 1821. The same limitation killed the parentage route for [name.495]'s own 1843 marriage. ⇒ This record cannot, even in principle, say whose son Samuel was or whose daughter Sarah was.

What it does establish

Samuel Cooper and Sarah Balden were a real, documented couple, married in Sussex Co. on 15 September 1821 — no longer merely a tree assertion. The couple that FamilySearch's tree offers as [name.495] George G. Cooper's parents exists.

It does NOT establish that George G. is their son. That link is still a bare tree claim (possible), and it carries an internal contradiction — the tree dates George's birth 1819, two years before this marriage. This record sharpens that problem rather than solving it: the marriage date is now documented, so a George born 1819 cannot be their child. Either his birth year is wrong (the 1850 census says ~1821, which would work) or the parentage is.

Cross-references

• p.2089 George Green Cooper — the man whose parentage prompted this pull
• p.115 Samuel Cooper of Independence Twp Warren — the catalog's candidate for this groom
• D.39 — the 1830 Independence census placing a Samuel Cooper there
• C.83 — the 1851 return that did name parents, and why the date matters