We know from various sources that there was a John Lesan from Hopewell who was commissioned as an Ensign in the Provential Militia in Lancaster County (later Cumberland County) between March 29 and May 25, 1748. We can assume that he was therefore between 21 and 30 years of age, making him about the same age Mary Layson's son. We know that a John Layson, presumably Mary's son, died in Cumberland County at the Battle of Sideling Hill in 1756. Since John Layson was a private at the time, he could not be the same person as John Leason.

There was also a John Leason who was killed in Butler County at the Battle of Kittanning in September of 1756. Then there was a Robert Leason, a revolutionary war soldier from Westmoreland County, who settled in Venango Township, Butler County, PA in 1797. Westmoreland County lies adjacent to Cumberland County. In 1859, a Robert Leason is found also living in Venango Townsip, but this must have been his son since this was 83 years after the revolution. This younger Robert Leason is the one who married Hannah Sharp. Quoting from a letter she wrote in Scrubgrass, Butler County, Venango Township. October 26, 1867 [ http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~lynburge/sharpmass.html ].

"I was born in the year one thousand Seven hundred and eighty four february the fourteenth. I was married to my husband Robert Leason in the year one thousand eight hundred and two. He departed this life february the twelfth aged eighty seven in the year one thousand eight hundred and sixty three."

Making Robert Leason Jr. born 1776. He is undoubtedly the son of Robert Leason, the revolutionary was soldier who would have been born some time around 1750/1760. The Sharps originally settled in Newville, Cumberland County, PA and moved to Armstrong Township in Indiana County, near the Kittanning trail in 1785. It has been suggested that the Robert Leason Jr. is a grandson of Ens. John Leason killed at Kittanning in 1756. If this were true, John Leason's wife did not remain in Butler County after her husband was killed, because her son was from Westmoreland County. There are any number of reasonable scenerios that could explain this. On the otherhand, it could be a complete conicidence that a Robert Leason moved to the same area where a John Leason was killed 31 years prior.

There is also some question as to whether John Leason was killed at Kittanning at all. Coincidently, three of the seventeen soldiers listed as killed at Kittanning have the same name as those killed at Sideling Hill. This may be correct, but is suspicious. It is known for certain that John Layson was killed at Sideling Hill, because his name is listed among the dead in Francis Campbele's letter of April 17, 1756, written a few days after the battle and 5 months before the Battle of Kittanning. The earliest source I could find for the reference of John Leason being killed at Kittanning is "History of Butler County Pennsylvania", Robert C. Brown, 1895, p37 [ http://www.archive.org/details/historyofbutlerc00inbrow ]. It is not clear where he obtained his information. The only time John Layson is referred to as John Leason is in Conway P. Wings', "History of Cumberland County", where the casualtites at Sideling Hill are listed. Since Francis Campbele's letter seems to be the ultimate source for this list, it is then also not clear where Wings found his version of the name as John Leason.

In 2004, Michael Layson of Berkeley, California sent a query to the Cumberland County Historical Society in which he listed Mary's husband as John and her children as John, Robert, Mary and Hannah. I've seen no other documentation to support this claim. Hannah Layson is mentioned in the Middle Spring citation of 1744 as 'alias Woods'. She was therefore probably a wife of one of Mary's sons. Nick Hyslop spoke to Michael Layson in 2010, and was told that the Middle Spring citation refered to Mary the mother and daughter, but I don't read it that way. If true it would explain how one could be thought pregnant and the other senile. It would appear the Michael Layson assigned the children Hannah and Mary basedd on his interpretation of the Middle Spring records, and not on any other unknown sources.

It seems unlikely then that Ens. John Lesan could have been Mary's husband because
1. she appears to be a widow in Hopewell in 1744 and he flourished there in 1748
2. he was probably about the same generation as the John Layson who died at Sideling Hill.

It seems also unlikely that Ens. John Lesan could have been the same person as John Layson because
1. In the letter of Francis Campble dated April 17, 1756, he refers to John Layson as a private eight years after John Lesan was promoted to Ensign.
2. John Leason, probably Ens., is said to have been killed at the Battle of Kittaning in September of 1756.

If there is any relationship at all, then possiblty Pvt. John Layson and Ens. John Leason may be cousins, but again there is no known relationship or any particular reason to think there might be, other than a slight nomastic connection.