USA > New Jersey > Union County > Elizabeth > History of Elizabeth, New Jersey : including the early history of Union County > Part 12
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62
THE negotiations for the transfer of New Jersey to the ju- risdiction of the Duke of York, though so nearly completed, failed of the expected result. Berkeley was made Lord Lieu- tenant of Ireland, of which Carteret was already Deputy Treasurer. Strengthened by the favor of the king, and cer- tain political occurrences of the day, the two lords retained possession of their charter, and Elizabeth Town remained the seat of government for the province, and the residence of the Governor and his officials .*
" The Concession and Agreement of the Lords Proprietors" made provision for the Survey and Patenting of all lands taken up in the Province by new settlers, and required of all such the payment of one half-penny per acre yearly rent, be- ginning with March 25, 1670. As the people of this town claimed to hold their lands, not by gift or lease from the
* Collins' Peerage, (Ed. of 1736), III. 250, 1. N. Y. Col. Doemts., III. 599. Pepys' Diary III. 275, 7.
132
THE HISTORY OF
Lords Proprietors, but by purchase from the native proprie- tors of the soil, and the warrant and patent of Gov. Nicolls, previous to Carteret's arrival, they had paid no attention to these provisions. No patents had been issued, or applied for, within the bounds of the town. This was true of the offi- cials as well as the people. Carteret, Bollen, Vauquellin, and Pardon, all had become Associates, and as such had shared in the assignment of house-lots, and in the first and second divisions of planting land and meadow, all which were duly entered, at the time, in the lost Town-Book. None of them, however, had taken out patents from the Lords Pro- prietors. The original purchasers and their American asso- ciates were utterly opposed to a proceeding, which might be construed into an acknowledgment of the invalidity of the titles, by which they had acquired, and hitherto held, their "purchased and paid-for lands." They would neither, there- fore, take out patents from the Governor, nor pay the yearly rent to be exacted in all other cases .*
As the time for the payment of this rent approached, let- ters were sent to the several towns, reminding them of these conditions. We have not the means of knowing whether the demand was formally made of the freeholders of this town, or, if made, what was their response. In the latter case, they must have made a response, not less firm and decided than that of the Newark people; who, at a town-meeting, held Feb. 3, 1669-70, after "the Governors Writing" had been read and debated, voted to make return as follows :
That they do Hold and Possess their Lands and Rights in the said Town, Both by Civil and Divine Right, as by their Legall purchase and Articles doth and May Shew. And as for the payment of the Half Penny per Acre for all our Allotted Lands, According to our Articles and Inter- pretations of them, You assuring them to us, We are ready when the Time Comes, to perform our Duty to the Lords or their Assigns.
Whether they received the assurance, or not, at the ap- pointed time they made a tender of the rent, in wheat, but not "in lawful money of England," as the Concessions re- quired.t
* Leaming & Spicer, pp. 23-5.
t Newark Town Records, pp. 29, 30. Stearns' Newark, pp. 43-6.
133
ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY.
Nothing of the kind, probably, was attempted or done here. It is not intimated, in any of the records or documents of the day, on either side, that the people of this town re- garded themselves as under any obligation whatever to pay rent for their lands to the English Lords. So many of the people as were of the Governor's party, doubtless, complied with the demand. The others disregarded it. The breach between the two parties, occasioned by the occurrences of November, 1668, was thus considerably widened. The rela- tions of the people to their townsman, the Governor, from this time forth, were any thing but pleasant-scarcely ami- cable .*
One occasion of this unpleasantness was the unwarranted interference of Carteret in the local affairs of the town- claiming, as he did, the prerogative of presiding, in person, or by proxy, in their town-meetings; of admitting whom he pleased as freeholders ; and of allotting the town-lands as rewards to his servants. The people could not but regard all such proceedings as unwarranted acts of usurpation.
Claude Vallot was one of the 18 servants whom Carteret had brought over with him in the " Philip." Having found him faithful and true, the Governor, without obtain- ing, or even asking, so far as appears, the consent of the town, determined to bestow on him the rights and privileges of a freeholder :
Glaude Valot of Champagne in the Kingdom of France having Lived in this Country for the Space of five Years time as one of my Menial Servants, and now being desirous to settle himself an Inhabitant within the said Province, (says the Record, Feb. 10, 1669-70), I doc hery Declare the said Glaude Valot to be a true Denizen of the aforesaid Province of New Jersey.
Twelve days after he puts him in possession, by deed of sale, of the property that, in Nov. 1668, he himself had acquired by purchase, for £45, from the widow of Capt. Robert Seeley-viz., a " house and home-lot, with all such lots and allotments of upland and meadow, as is and shall be thereunto belonging, according to the rate of a third
* Whitehead's E. J., p. 54. Mulford's N. J., p. 151.
134
THE HISTORY OF
lot;" thus giving him a place, as an Associate, among the third-lot right men."
A military company, in accordance with an Act of the General Assembly, had been organized in 1668; of which, Aug. 24, 1668, Luke Watson had been commissioned Lieu- tenant and Commander, and John Woodruff, Ensign. Wat- son and Woodruff were among the leading men of the town, and devoted to its interests. In some way not specified, but, probably, because of their zeal in opposing the arbitrary course of the Governor, these worthies had provoked his displeasure. On the last day of October, 1670, (possibly, one of the autumnal training days), he revoked the com- mission of Watson, and declared Woodruff's null and void. Such a proceeding did not tend in the least to conciliate the people, whose patience had already so repeatedly been tried. They understood the movement as designed to break up the military company, and so to deprive them of the power of self-defence. Against these imputations, he put forth, July 1, 1672, the following plea : It is reported, he says,
That I have, to the great discouragement of the Inhabitants, for- bidden, nay required them upon paine of death, not to trayne. In answer whereunto the officers of each Respective Town in this Province, being commissionated for that end and required thereunto, will suffi- ciently Cleer me; only for reasons which I am willing to give To my Masters, I did issue out my Summons to Luke Watson in Elizabeth Town, being before by me Commissioned Lieutenant under my Self, Calling in my Commission, requiring him upon pain of death at that time not to Call the Company into Field Nor Exercise them, the which notwithstanding he did Continue and Exercise them twice after. t
Language like this could not but exasperate. The people had never known, in this country, what it was to have a master. They had never been "in bondage to any man." This young stranger from a far land, whose unexpected com- ing among them, with such pretensions to dominion over them, they had barely tolerated, who had already set him- self above the Representatives of the people, and had exacted
* E. J. Records, I. 6, 7, 15.
t E. J. Records, III. 55.
135
ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY.
of them a galling tribute, as the price of lands fully and lawful- ly purchased before he came, now threatens one of their num- ber with the " pain of death," for simply giving a few lessons in the art and science of war. Who gave him this kingly power ? How did he propose to carry it into effect ? By whom was the penalty to be inflicted ? The refusal, too, to give the reasons for his course, save to his " masters," was not fitted to inspire his townsmen with confidence or esteem, but just the reverse. It was not the way to secure the hearts of the people and perpetuate his power.
The more thoroughly the matter is investigated, the more fully it appears, that the difficulties, with which the founders of the town had to contend, in respect to the Proprietary government, were of vastly greater moment than the pay- ment of the paltry sums that were demanded as " Quit- Rents." The grievances were of the most serious character. They had respect to the very foundations of government. The great question of popular rights was involved-the same question, that was continually coming up between the Amer- can people and their foreign rulers, and that issued in the conflict of 1776. This town and this province were not sin- gular in their disaffection. It pervaded the neighboring provinces. The people of Long Island, at this very time, were deeply agitated with similar grievances. All New England was filled with excitement and alarm, by reason of the efforts made by the Royal Commissioners to bring them under subjection. The Stuart dynasty had no sympathy with the democracy of the American people. The Colonies stood in dread of the imperialism of the two sons of Charles I., whose " taking off," by the people, these sons could never forgive .*
" All Causes are tried by Juries," said Gov. Lovelace, 1670, in respect to the Province of New York. The same rule, doubtless, prevailed in New Jersey. The first Jury trial in the town, of which any record has been preserved, took place in May, 1671. A special Court, consisting of Capt. Win. Sandford, President, Robert Vauquellin, Robert
* Thompson's L. I., I. 145-150 ; II. 826-S. Palfrey's N. Eng., II. 578-634.
136
THE HISTORY OF
Treat, and Wm. Pardon, was convened here, on the 16th, by order of the Governor, for the trial of Wm. Hacket, Capt. of the sloop "Indeavor of Salsbury in the County of Nor- folk in New England," for illegal trading in the province, mostly at Woodbridge. Gov. Lovelace claimed, that all ves- sels coming in and going out of Sandy Hook entrance should enter and clear at New York. Gov. Carteret opposed the claim so far as concerned the waters of New Jersey ; de- manding, that, in order to trade in these parts, entrances and clearances should be made at the custom-house in Elizabeth Town. Capt. Hacket had entered his vessel, and paid duties, at New York, but not here. A jury was empanelled, con- sisting of Benjamin Price, foreman ; Nicholas Carter, Wm. Pyles, George Ross, Barnabas Wines, Nathaniel Bonnel, Matthias Hatfield, John Wynings, William Oliver, Stephen Osburn, Wm. Meeker, John _Woodruff; all freeholders of this town, and the most of them leading men. Gov. Car- teret testified for the prosecution. Capt. Hacket argued his own cause, with much ability, presenting not less than four- teen points as grounds of defence. The case went to the jury, who
Went forth and, upon a second and third going forth, declared to the Court that the matter Committed to them is of too great waight for them and desires the Court to make Choice of other Jurymen.
On the 18th, the case came before another jury, two only of whom, Samuel Hopkins, and Capt. Thomas Young, were of this town, none of them from Newark, and the remainder from Bergen and Woodbridge. The prosecution succeeded, and the vessel was forfeited .*
It is quite probable, that the true reason for the failure of the first jury to pronounce a verdict, was the fact, that the Governor had acted without warrant, in constituting the Court; according to "the Concessions "-the fundamental Bill of Rights-it being the prerogative of the General Assembly, and not the Governor, "to constitute all courts." + The Assembly had not authorized the Governor to call and com-
* E. J. Records, III. 75-7.
t Leaming and Spicer, p. 16.
137
ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY.
mission this tribunal. Jealous, as the town had become, of the Governor, they could not but look upon this proceeding, as an additional act of usurpation ; and so the Governor must go out of town for a jury sufficiently compliant. Another serious grievance was thus added to the calendar.
A few weeks later, the two parties came into direct collision. Among the "menial servants " brought over by Capt. Car- teret in the "Philip," in 1665, was Richard Michell. He was " the son of Symon Michell, of Munden parva in the County of Hereford," Eng. Richard had married, Ap. 23, 1668, Ellen Prou, " the daughter of Charles Prou of Paris in the parish of St. Eutache, In France." She, too, had come over, doubt- less, in the " Philip," and was, also, a " menial servant," possibly a housekeeper, in the Government house. Michell, as well as Vallot, aspires to be a planter. Carteret, well- pleased with Richard's course, and willing to reward his faithful services, takes it upon himself, without consulting the town, or any other than his own pleasure, to make him a grant of land for a house-lot, bordering on " the swamp in common," and lying at the rear of the house-lots of Francis Barber and George Pack, S. of Charles Tucker, S. E. of Jonas Wood, and N. E. of Wm. Letts. This was in the spring of 1671. Michell fences it in, and leases a part of the ground to George Pack for a tobacco-crop. On the other part, he builds a house covered with clapboards, and lays out a gar- den. Pack sub-lets one half of his field to Wm. Letts, the weaver .*
All this was contrary to the fundamental agreements of 1663, made in town-meeting, and consented to by the Gov- ernor. None but the people, in town-meeting, could deter- mine who should be admitted as associates and freeholders. It was a clear case of usurpation on the part of Carteret. If tolerated in this instance, it might be followed by many others, and presently the town would be overrun by French- men, and other foreigners, claiming an equal share with themselves in the plantation. If not resisted, they might as well give up all thought of self-government.
* E. J. Records, III. 78-30.
138
THE HISTORY OF
The town was deeply moved by the occurrence. It was the common talk. The neighbors had occasion to meet at Goodman Carter's on the south side of the Creek. The mat- ter was warmly discussed. They agreed to give Pack warn- ing not to put a plow into the ground. He and Letts were greatly grieved at their prospective loss, but deemed it best to regard. the timely warning. A town meeting was called, at which the whole subject was gravely debated. Here is the record :
June 19th, 1671, it was agreed by the Major Vote that Richard Michel should not enjoy his lott given him by the Governor. Upon information June 19th 1671 It was agreed that there should some goe the next morn- ing and pull up the said Michel's fence.
The Governor must be taught, that it is not his to give away town-lots; it belongs to the people. Michel had "never asked the town for it," and, therefore, could not have the " lott given him by the Governor." It was "concluded to take the piece of land from him again, because it was not after vote of the town that he had it." What followed is thus related by George Pack : .
The next morning after the said town-meeting, the said Richard Michel came to my house, and I went with him up to the said lot, and going we came to the said Wm. Letts house, and lighted our pipes, and, when we had lighted, people came upon the said ground. Goodman Meaker, the young John Ogden, Jeffry Jones and Nicholas Carter, and we running down to them at the corner of said lot, the said Richard Michel fore- warned them of pulling down the said fence, and spake to them of a riot, upon that goodman Meaker put to it and began to pluck down the fence and then all the rest did the like and left not off till they had plucked down one side and one end.
Among those who aided in the work, as Letts, Michell, and Ronyon testified, were Joseph Meeker (the " eldest son" of Goodman M.,) Hur Tomson, (son of Goodman T.,) "old Mash," (Samuel Marsh, sen.), and Luke Watson, the Lieu- tenant. When Michel forewarned them,
Goodman Meeker answered, Do you forewarn me ? and with that went to pull it down. While they were so doing Mr Pardon came in, then they asked him whither he was come to help pull down the fence
139
ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY.
and Mr Pardon answered that he did not come to help pull down the fence but to take notice what you do, the said John Ogden said we do not care if a hundred such fellows as you are do take notice of what we do, and Mr Pardon answered you speak very sausily. Luke Watson did not put his hand to pull down the fence but said if I am in [the] place it's as good but after Mr Pardon came then he heaved one log off from the fence and said you shall not say but I will put my hands to it.
Awhile after, (says Letts,) being at my own house there came in Robert Moss and Mr Crayne of this town who asked for drink and I having none they went away presently, and presently after they were gone I heard a noise and looked out and saw the said Robert Moss and Mr Crayne beat- · ing down the claboards of Richard Michel's house and plucked up the pallasades of the garden and before I came the hoggs within an hours time had rooted up and spoiled all that was in the garden which was full of necessary garden herbs.
Pardon was one of the Governor's Council, and had been appointed, June 5, 167º, a Justice of the Peace. He was known to be the Governor's obsequious parasite. Morse and Crane were next door neighbors, residing on the West side of the Creek. It is probable, that not a few others, drawn thither by curiosity, especially of the boys of the neighbor hood, witnessed the transaction, and spoke of it in later years, as one of the memorable incidents of their pioneer life.
Warm work it was for a midsummer's day, (June 20) ; but needful work, unless they are prepared to succumb to the whims and dictates of the cavalier lordling, sent over the seas, by a brace of corrupt speculators, to exercise arbitrary rule over these honest and sturdy planters. It was a day to be remembered in the annals of Elizabeth; a day for the inauguration of an open and determined resistance to all usurpation, and a manly defence of their vested rights. They acted as one man, and were not to be trifled with. Carteret and his adherents are powerless to withstand the tide; and, however chagrined and vexed at the result, are compelled, for the present, to let the matter drop. Wm. Meeker, the chief actor in the drama, is chosen Constable of the town, to succeed Wm. Cramer, and receives, Oct. 13, 1671, a commission from the Governor .*
Another actor of some importance now appears on the
* E. J. Records, III. 47.
140
THE HISTORY OF
scene. Sir George Carteret has two sons, Sir Philip, and James. George, a third son, had died in 1656. James, the second son, had followed the seas from his youth, having been advanced to the command of a merchantman in the India trade, previous to the Restoration, and, subsequently, to the Captaincy of a British man-of-war. " Capt. Carteret " lad acquired considerable distinction in his profession, and was thought deserving of promotion. "He was administrator or captain general, of the English forces which went, in 1666, to retake St. Kitts, which the French had entirely conquered, . and were repulsed. He had also filled some high office, during the war, in the ship of the Duke of York, with two hundred infantry under his command."
His father, Sir George, was one of the eight proprietaries of Carolina. Ashley Cooper, the distinguished Earl of Shaftes- bury, was also a proprietor; and to him had been committed the task of preparing a Constitution of government for the province. Shaftesbury entrusted the work to his greatly- admired friend, John Locke, the well-known author, twenty years later, of the "Essay concerning Human Understand- ing." A most impracticable, but greatly lauded Model of Government, called the "Fundamental Constitutions of Caro- lina," was the result of his political lucubrations. It was therein provided, that each county should be governed by a landgrave and two caciques, the former ranking as Earls, and the latter as Baron's,-hereditary nobles,-to have possessions corresponding to their dignities, for ever inalienable. Locke, in compliment to Shaftesbury, and as a recompense for his literary services, was appointed one of the Landgraves ; Sir John Yeamans, afterwards Governor, was honored with the same title; and, in compliment to Sir George Carteret, the Landgraviate of the remaining County, was assigned to his second son, Capt. James Carteret. The Constitution was signed, March 1, 1669-70, and the appointments made in April of the following year .*
* Collins' Peerage, IV. 321-3. (Ed. of 1735.) Dankers' Journal of a Voyage to N. York, in 1679-80, p. 137. Graham's U. States, I. 343, 351-7. Bancroft's U. States, II. 129, 144-151. Hildreth's U. States, II. 30-4. "You are to take notice yt wee have made Mr James Carteret,
141
ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY.
Early in 1671, Capt. Carteret made ready to embark for America, to take possession of his newly-acquired domain and dignity. He was, probably, instructed by his father to take New Jersey in his way, and confer with Gov. Philip Carteret in respect to the affairs of this province, then getting to be quite complicated. He arrived here in the summer of 1671, and was graciously received as became his rank and relationship. He was the son of one of the Lords Propric- tors, and might become heir to his father's estate and dig- . nities. It was well to receive him with marked consideration.
Shortly after his arrival, Gov. Lovelace convened an ex- traordinary council at New York, Sept. 1671, in reference to the Indians on the Delaware. Gov. Carteret, and Capt. James Carteret, with the mayor (Capt. Thomas Delavall) and secretary of New York, and Maj. Steenwyck, (a previous mayor), constituted the council. As one of the results of the conference, it was concluded,
That the Governor of New Jersey, and Capt. James Carteret, (then present), should expeditiously order a General Assembly to be called in that government, (according to their custom upon all emergent occa- sions) to know the people's strength and readiness; and how far they were willing to contribute towards the prosecution of a war against the Indians.
These gentlemen must have regarded Capt. James Carte- ret as having, at least for the time being, something like co- ordinate, if not supervisory, authority with the Governor, either by commission, or as the representative of his father .*
Sr Jno Yeamans and Mr Jno Locke, Landgraves. White Hall, 1st May, 1671. Rivers' IIIs . Sketches of S. C., p. 368. His. Coll. of S. C., I. 45-7, 52 ; II. 292-6.
* Smith's N. J., pp. 69, 70. Great injustice has been done to the memory of Capt. James Carteret. The Bill in Chancery (p. 85) calls him "a weak and dissolute youth." He could scarcely have been less than 40 years old. Gov. Philip was but $2. Wynne calls him "a dis- solute son of Sir George," (I. 205.) Chalmers speaks of him as " a natural son of the Propri- etor," (p. 616). Grahame uses the same language, (I. 466). Gordon describes him as " a weak and dissolute natural son of Sir George," (p. 29). Whitehead makes him "an illegiti- mate son of Sir George," "a weak and dissipated young man," (p. 55). Mulford uses the same epithets, (p. 152). That he was the lawful son of Sir George and his wife Elizabeth, cannot be questioned. Dankers, the Labadist Journalist, who knew and met with him, at N. York , in 1679, calls him "a person of quality," and gives not the least intimation of his being other than the lawful son of Sir George, but much to the contrary. Dankers' Journal, p. 139. See this History, postea. Collins' Peerage (1735), III. 829; IV. 827-8. 1Iis morals at the time could not have been much worse than those which generally prevailed at court ; they may have been better
+
142
THE HISTORY OF
No Assembly had been held since Nov. 1668, greatly to the dissatisfaction of the people. An occasion had now oc- curred that called for such a convention. In accordance with the agreement at New York, the Governor issued his war- rant, and an Assembly convened here, Oct. 3, 1671. Newark was represented by Jasper Crane and Robert Treat; but who were the representatives of the other towns, and what were their proceedings is not known, as the records of the meeting were destroyed. It is very certain that Gov. Car- teret found but little encouragement in relation to the con- templated enterprise against the Indians. It is known, as stated by the Governor, in a document, dated Feb. 10, 167}, that the Assembly were in session in this town, on the 14th of December preceding, when an Act was passed constituting a Court of Oyer and Terminer, and another for the appoint- ment of a Marshal for the province. This must have been an adjourned meeting of the Assembly that met in October, 1671.
A court had now been lawfully constituted. A writ was issued, Feb. 10, 1672, authorizing and appointing "Capt. John Berry, President, Robert Vauquellin, Samuel Edsal, Gobert Bond, Capt. John Pyke, Capt. Robert Treat, William l'ardon, or any three of them to be a Court to meet together +nd sit upon Tuesday morning 27 Feb. at 9 o'clock at the town house in Elizabeth Town," &c. The object of conven- ing this court was the punishment of the so-called rioters of the previous June. All of the members, with the exception of Bond and Treat, were of the Governor's Council. Nei- ther Treat nor Vauquellin were present at the trial. Of the Jury, seven were from Woodbridge, and five from Bergen ; tone from this town, or from Newark.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.