Mary (Hatch) Polley (abt. 1714 - 1782)

As can be seen on Palfrey-166, see NEHGR 178:37. The article doesn't say much about it, other than to point out the problem, and concludes the church record is correct and the town/city records are wrong. I was hoping that there was another source (probate records?) that would shed light on the subject, or at least some other source that mentions the problem.

John Palfrey's marriage to Mary Hatch was performed by Rev. Samuel Checkley. The marriages of John Palfrey's siblings were also performed by Rev. Samuel Checkley. See Abigail Palfrey (m1. 1727, m2. 1736), Lydia Palfrey (m1. 1731, m2. 1749), Rebecca Palfrey (m. 1738), Thomas Palfrey (m. 1738), Elizabeth Palfrey (m. 1741).

Thanks. The part I seem to be overlooking is where, after they point out the problem, where is it stated a conclusion that the municipal records are wrong? I see nothing but a footnote of the information that includes the Boston record "which calls him John Polley" and footnote pointing to the New South Church transcribed page. Also, "John Howland of the Mayflower Vol 1 The First Five Generations documented descendants through his first child Desire Howland and her husband Captain John Gorham", White, Elizabeth Pearson, Picton Press, Rockport, ME, 3rd printing 1999. Pages 199 & 200 concur with the Doty silver book, using the Hanover records, Boston Marriages, Roxbury VR and TAG Oct 1965 as her references. Also, "This marriage is proven by the court records of May 1748 which stated "Mary Polley, then Mary Hatch and Sole but since married to the said John Polley... (Dudley Housewright) Konig 7:102-3" While I am not disputing the possibility that it could be Palfrey instead of Polley, it would appear odd that a number of municipalities and a court would have gotten the info wrong... Further research would definitely be warranted...

Do you still have access to this volume of the Silver Books? The Boston City Records say she married John Polley on 4 Nov 1736, and the Church Record says she married John Palfrey on 4 Nov 1736. The latest issue of the NEHGR (Vol. 178 Winter 2024) mentions this problem and concludes that the Church Record is correct. Does the Silver Book make reference to this problem? I assume they used the City Records that have been published in the Boston Records Commissioners Reports, but I'm curious what source they give.