History of Union and Middlesex Counties, New Jersey with Biographical Sketches of many of their Pioneers and Prominent Men, Part 208

Author: W. Woodford Clayton, Ed.
Publication date: 1882
Publisher: Philadelphia: Everts
Number of Pages: 1224

USA > New Jersey > Middlesex County > History of Union and Middlesex Counties, New Jersey with Biographical Sketches of many of their Pioneers and Prominent Men > Part 208
USA > New Jersey > Union County > History of Union and Middlesex Counties, New Jersey with Biographical Sketches of many of their Pioneers and Prominent Men > Part 208

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).

" The wanie of the fruit cranberry is of Scotchi origin. It was called craneberry, from a real or fancied reseniblance of its stem to the ueck of the crane, sod was modified by dropping the 'e.' It was the emblem in Scotland of the Grant clao. The osme was undoubtedly given to the stream oo which our village stands from the fact that the berries were found upon its meadows. And when applied to a stream, or meadow, or prairie, the correct spelling is Cranberry. But there is no reasoo or meaning io that spelling as applied to a towo. The old Eng- lish custom, which our early fathers, of course, followed, was to call a district or town a borough, which was contracted into burg or bury, &c- cording to whichever they thought sounded best. Hence the ending of many names of towns, both in England and in this country, as Canter- bury, Woodbury, Danbury, Williamsburg, Jamesburg,-never spelled berry. When this village began to grow up the ostural method was to call it Cranberry borough or towa; the berry would be dropped, aod there would be Cranborough, or, coutracting it, Cranbury. Aod so the old documents and records which were written by those who knew how to spell or were careful in spelling have the name Craobury. The or- igin of the name, its proper meaning, and the best authority in spelling make it Cranbury. Cranberry enggested to strangers a low, swampy,

sandy country, which this is not. It is possible on some spots along the brook to raise the fruit, but the surrounding country is adapted to almost anything better than to that purpose. Let us have the correct, respectable, historical spelling."

While it is possible a very few scattering settlers may have located west of the site of Cranbury vil- lage, towards Plainsboro', prior to the beginning of settlement at Cranbury, it is not by those who have given the subject much investigation deemed very probable that such was the case.

The Wyckoff and Perrine families were early comers, and the latter is now very numerous in the township and adjoining ones.

The grist-mill property, as has been seen, was in possession of Thomas Grubbs from 1736 to 1741, and it is reasonably supposed that the mill was erected about 1737 or 1738. In July, 1739, James Rochead conveyed to Coert Van Voorhees and Thomas Storey a lot of ground adjoining the mill property, "to be for the use of the elders and deacons of the Presby- terian Church of Cranbury," for erecting a house of worship, in consideration of two pounds to him duly paid.

The settlement must by that date have contained several families, as a church had been formally or- ganized and officered. Voorhees and Storey immedi- ately conveyed the lot to Nicholas Stevens and Peter Perrine, elders, and John Brown and William Magee, deacons of the said church, which is thought to have been then only recently organized, and it is supposed there had been little preaching in the Cranbury set- tlement until the year before. At the first meeting of the Presbytery of New Brunswick, in 1738, appeared John Chambers, a commissioner from Cranbury, asking for a supply. Rev. Gilbert Tennent was ap- pointed to preach there and at Allentown.

At another meeting of the Presbytery, held in the autumn of the same year, Stephen Wagner presented a petition from the people of Cranbury and vicinity asking for advice in a matter of difficulty concerning a house of worship. It seems that Presbyterians and "people of the Church of England persuasion," as they were termed, had united in building a church on the spot now occupied by the "Old Church" school-house, in School District No. 62 in Monroe, east of Cranbury. When the house was built and how it was used it has not been possible to ascertain.1 Diligent search has not revealed one fact concerning it previous to 1738, nor can it be ascertained when it ceased to be used as a house of worship ; but it was long used as a school-house. All traces of the house have now disappeared except, it may be, a few tim- bers in some neighboring building, and the spot is only marked by a few neglected graves. But the trouble then concerned its use. Presbytery held an adjourned meeting at Cranbury to compose the diffi- culty, which was done by advising that one or the

1 Rev. Joseph G. Symmes, who supplied these facts, has laboriously but vaioly tried to learn more of the matters under consideration.

864

HISTORY OF UNION AND MIDDLESEX COUNTIES, NEW JERSEY.

other party should sell out their right. The record does not state the fact, but it was evidently the Pres- byterians who sold out, for they took measures the next year to build a new house; and for the site they came near the mill, as has been seen. Probably the settlers at Cranbury had not until then attained any numerical strength. Whenever and by whomsoever besides some persons supposed to have lived in Cran- bury the old church in Monroe had been erected, it must have been located there because its supporters in that direction outnumbered all others elsewhere, those at Cranbury included, for in such matters the majority generally ruled then as now.

PROMINENT MEN OF THE PIONEER PERIOD .- It has been seen that the leading spirits in the move- ment to establish a church at Cranbury were Coert Van Voorhees and Thomas Storey, who purchased the lot from James Rochead ; Nicholas Stevens and Peter Perrine, elders, and John Brown and William Magee, deacons, to whom they transferred it; and John Chambers and Stephen Wagner, who represented the Cranbury Presbyterians at New Brunswick; and these, with James Rochead, Peter Wyckoff, and Thomas Grubbs, the mill proprietor, may be fairly regarded as having been at the time among the most prominent residents at and near the Cranbury settle- ment, if, indeed, they all did live in that vicinity. John Collins, who bought the grist-mill and the four acres of land surrounding it of Grubbs in 1741, is reasonably supposed to have become a resident there, but whether Grubbs removed to some other locality or remained is uncertain. Except that Coert Van Voorhees was a descendant of the Van Voorhees who was the progenitor of the present family of Voorhees in America,1 and a later supporter of the church, nothing can be stated concerning him, save that he is believed upon reasonable ground to have been de- scended indirectly from some of the name living in Northı Brunswick, which included New Brunswick till 1860. Save what is above set forth, little of in- terest is known in reference to any of the others above mentioned. One John Storey was during the Revo- lution a resident of South Brunswick, of whose ter- ritory Cranbury was then a part, and is thought to have been a descendant of Thomas Storey, who, as was also John Storey, was later a supporter of the church. The names of Wyckoff and Perrine have come down to the present through several generations. Peter Perrine had two brothers named William and Elijah, who were also early settlers in the vicinity of Cranbury. They were without doubt descended from the brothers Henry and Daniel Perrine, Huguenot refugees, who with others of French nativity were stranded on the southeastern shore of Staten Island with the rickety old ship "Caledonian," whose tim- bers providentially held together long enongh to bring

1 This family is numerous in Middlesex County. See the history of North Brunswick for further information concerning the family and name.

her passengers to the land they sought, some time after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685.

Peter Perrine married a woman named Holman, and had several children. It is to be regarded as somewhat remarkable that five of his daughters mar- ried men named Dey, of some of the Dey families of South Brunswick, and many of their descendants are living in the county now. Two of the sons of Peter Perrine were named Enoch and Andrew, whose de- scendants have been numerous and many of them well known.

A considerable tract of land, embracing Cranbury Station, was the farm of William Perrine. It was cut in two by the construction of the railroad, the depot now standing about in its centre as formerly bounded.

William Perrine married Hannah Mount; his children were named Matthias, John, Peter, Hum- phrey, William, Daniel, Lydia, Ann, Margaret, Re- becca, and Hannah. (1) Matthias married Ann Knott and lived between Cranbury and Prospect Plains. He had children named David K., Ann K., Hannah, Lydia, Eliza Jane, Catharine, Rachel, Mar- garet, Susan, and Mary. David K. married Eliza- beth Tilton and lived near Prospect Plains. His chil- dren were Charles H., Mary E., and Elwood. (2) John lived and died in Cranbury. His wife was Betsy Riggs. Peter, William, John, Abraham J., and George were the names of his children, none of whom live in the vicinity. (3) Peter married Ann Duncan and removed to New York State before 1800. (4) Humphrey espoused Fanny Dodd, and his son, Dr. William Perrine, is a resident of Brooklyn, N. Y. (5) William married Sarah Voorhees and re- moved to Philadelphia, and thence to Somerville, N. J., where he died. He had two daughters. (6) Dan- iel and (7) Hannah died unmarried. (8) Lydia mar- ried Thomas Baldwin; (9) Anna, Israel Baldwin ; (10) Margaret, Maj. James Cook; and (11) Rebecca, John McMichael.

(1) Elijah Perrine married Betsy Perrine and lived on the Trenton road. Of what family of Perrines his wife was does not appear, though she is supposed to have descended from the same ancestors as the three brothers mentioned. The children of Elijah and Betsy Perrine were Peter, Henry, William, John, Ellen, Margaret, Lydia, and Sarah. (2) Peter mar- ried into the Rue family, and after the death of his first wife married Lydia Ward. His children were Alfred, Ward C., Mary, and Elizabeth. Ward C. has long been a prominent business man at South Amboy. (3) Henry married Jemima Healy, by whom he had children named Charlotte, Ann, Matilda, Lydia, Samuel E., John Henry, Rebecca, and Mary. (4) William espoused Mary Hunt. Their children were Sarah, Ann, Ellen, and Hannah. (5) John was twice married,-first to Miss P. Vinewright, then to Elizabeth Wilbur. His children were Elizabeth, Rebecca, Elijah, and Sarah, and two sons. (6) Ellen

865

CRANBURY.

married William Rne, and settled at Matchaponix in Monroe. (7) Margaret married Cornelins Suydam ; (8) Lydia, Peter Rue. Both removed to Matchapo- nix. (9) Sarah married Garret J. Snediker, of Cran- bury, and bore him children named Alexander, Jacob, Anna Elizabeth, Edward, John, and Henry.

Peter Wyckoff is supposed to have been the pro- genitor of Peter Wyckoff, who married Elizabeth Baird, and located at the locality known as Wyckoff's Mills, and had children named Peter, Jr., John, Jacob, David B., Mary Ann, Gertrude, and two others. Peter married a Miss Pullen, and died at Wyckoff's Mills. John died at Hight-town. Jacob married Arnelia Robbins, and located in the vicinity of Cranbury. David B. married Elizabeth Perrine, and settled at Hightstown. Mary Ann married Elias Conover, and resided and died in Monmonth County. Gertrude married Rev. James Maxwell, and lives at Hights- town. The children of David B. were Addison, Anna, John P., Elizabeth, Monroe, Virginia, and Josephine, who died young.

OTHER PIONEER FAMILIES .- An early settler in Cranbury was Thomas Duncan, and we trace his ge- nealogy as far back as scanty records, land titles, and well-founded traditions will permit. The Duncan fathers came from Scotland, and in a sectarian way were what may be termed Presbyterians. It appears that Jabez Duncan was a soldier in Philip's war, of Capt. Turner's company, in April, 1676. Joseph Dun- can was killed by the Indians June 27, 1689, with twenty-two others. Nathaniel Duncan, at Dorches- ter, in 1630 came, doubtless in the "Mary and John," with the other first settlers of that town, bringing with him perhaps his wife, Elizabeth, and his son, Nathaniel (who was connected with an artillery com- pany in 1644), and later had a son Peter. About 1641 he removed to Boston, and died about 1668. The last-named son also belonged to the artillery company in 1654. He removed to Gloncester, and had chiklren,-Martha, Elizabeth, Ruth, Peter, Pris- cilla, Margery, and Daniel.1 The tradition of one of the ancestors of the Duncan family having been killed by the Indians was handed down to later generations, and Stephen Duncan, who died aged eighty-three in 1867, often spoke of it. Little donbt is entertained that either Peter or Daniel Duncan above mentioned was the father of Thomas, the statements made years ago by several of the old men of the Duncan family sup- porting this theory. Thomas purchased a large tract of land on Cranbury Neck, lived upon it, and apportioned it out among his children. Two old deeds for lands, including the old farm of Stephen Duncan, dated Feb. 1, 1749, are in existence. They are from Thomas Duncan to his sons, William and John. The name Thomas Duncan is written in a good business hand, though evidently the signature of an old man. John (son of Thomas) had sons,-Daniel, John, Thomas

(for nearly thirty years a ruling elder in the First Presbyterian Church of Cranbury), and Stephen. John Duncan had two sons, Peter Duncan, Esq., and John I., and a daughter, the late wife of William Tindall, of Hightstown. The descendants of Elder Thomas Duncan are numerous and respectable. The Duncan descendants are still very generally Presby- terians in the old neighborhood. John I. Duncan, who died aged seventy-three in 1873, was highly esteemed, and was for many years a land surveyor and business man. He leaves a large, respectable family.

Among the early settlers was Isaac De Bow. Whether any one of the name of an earlier gener- ation was in Cranbury is unknown. (1) Isaac, the progenitor of later generations, was a blacksmith, and plied his avocation in Cranbury as early as 1750. His children were Garret, John, James, Daniel, and Isabel. (2) Garret married Elizabeth Gilliand and located in the village. His children were James and David. James married Matilda Dey, and removed to Allegheny County, Pa. David married Ellen Reed, and located in the village. His children were Jane, Elizabeth, Margaret, James, Sarah, and William. (3) John married and re- moved to New York State. (4) James died un- married. (5) Isabel married a Griggs, and removed to New Brunswick.

(1) Matthew Rue, who located in Monroe previous to 1750, buying a large tract of land partially in what is now Cranbury, had children named Joseph, Samuel, William, Matthew, Jr., James, Matthias, Jolın, Ellen, and Margaret. Bnt little is known of any of them ex- cept (2) Matthew, Jr., who married Catherine Voor- hees, settling on a portion of his father's property, which he intersected, lying on the Cranbury side of the present township boundary line, and had children named Matthew, Samnel, Margaret, Catherine, Ellen, and Charlotte. (3) Matthew went to Ohio, and there died. (4) Samuel married Anna Wyckoff, and located on the homestead. His children were John, Matthew A., Edmund S., William C., Alfred, Margaret, and Elizabeth. John died unmarried. Matthew A. mar- ried Emeline Anderson, and is a well-known business man of Cranbury village. His children are Alfred A., William H., and L. A. Rue. Edmund married Mar- garet Gilliand, and located on the homestead. Wil- liam married Rebecca Shreeve, and died on Staten Island. Alfred espoused Mary Ann Stulls, and lives in the village. Margaret married Henry Vandewater, and removed from the township. Elizabeth is the wife of James Heath, of Kingston. (5) Margaret married William Perrine, and removed to Ohio. (6) Catherine became the wife of John Dey, and (7) Margaret of Runey Dey. Charlotte married John Veighte. The latter three located in South Bruns- wick.

Among the old families of Cranbury may be ac- connted that of the Van Kirks. The first of the name

1 Savage's Genealogical Dictionary of New England settlers.

866

HISTORY OF UNION AND MIDDLESEX COUNTIES, NEW JERSEY.

who is known to have resided in the township was (1) John Van Kirk, who lived near the grist-mill in the village, and had sons named Oakley and Andrew. (2) Oakley died unmarried, and (3) Andrew married and had eleven children, named Gordon, Nancy, Lavinia, Ida, Jane, Mary, Catherine, John, Lucinda, Sarah, and Keziah. Gordon, Nancy, Lavinia, Ida, Sarah, and Keziah all died unmarried. Jane married and removed to Brooklyn, N. Y., and died there. Mary married Alexander Alexander, and died in New York, where Catherine removed with her husband, Henry Hathaway. John is living at Allentown, Pa. Lucinda married Abraham Voorhees, and after his death William Schenck, and is a resident of Cranbury.

All that it has been found possible to learn of those who have any claim to memory as pioneers in Cran- bury has been carefully set forth with all the detail the data has permitted. The names of many others, about whom the writer has been unable to learn any- thing in detail, will be presented farther on.

REV. DAVID BRAINERD AT CRANBURY .- In the journal of David Brainerd appears this record : " June 18, 1745. In the afternoon came to a place called Cranbury, and meeting with a serions minister lodged with him." This " serions minister," whose bearing seems to have favorably impressed the missionary, was Rev. Charles McKnight, pastor of the First Presbyterian Church of Cranbury from 1744 to 1778. Whether Brainerd had visited the place previous to the date of the above entry in his journal does not appear, but his mention of the locality as " a place called Cranbury" inclines us to believe that he was not at the time familiar with it. In 1746 he removed to this vicinity with some of his Indian followers. At the north end of the present village of Cranbury stood a majestic elm, under whose wide-spreading branches some of the forefathers of the present resi- dents there heard the devoted missionary preach to his wondering and at times greatly moved aboriginal congregation. A few years ago the tree fell before the progress of improvement, but some few relics re- main of the town of Bethel, which Brainerd began, a few miles away, and his brother John completed.1

Brainerd was full of fire and force, vividly pictor- ing in beautiful yet simple langnage to his red audi- tors the blessings of salvation. The following extracts from his journal will show the effects which followed his preaching :

" August 8th. In the afternoon I preached to Jodians. Their number was now about sixty-five persons,-men, women, and children. I dis- coursed from Luke xiv. 16-23, and was favored with uncommon free- dom. There was much concern among them while I was discoursing publicly, but afterwards when I spoke to one and another more partic- ularly whom I perceived under concern, the power of God seemed to descend upun the assembly ' like a rushing mighty wind,' and with an astonishing euergy bore down all before it.

"I stood amazed at the influence that eeized the audience almost uni- versally, and could compare it to nothing more aptly than a mighty torrent that bears down and sweeps before it whatever is in its way.

Almost all persons of all ages were bowed dowa together, and scarce one was able to withstand the shock of the surprising operation. Old men and women who had been drunken wretches for many years, and some little children, not more than six or seven years of age, appeared in distress for their souls, as well as persons of middle age. And it was apparent these children were not merely frightened with secing the general concern, but were made sensible of their danger, the badness of their hearts, and their misery without Christ. The most stubborn hearts were now obliged to how. A principal man among the Indians who be- fore thought his state good because he knew more than the generality of the Indiane, and who with great confidence the day before told me he had been a Christian more than ten years, was now brought under solemn concern for his soul and wept bitterly. Another man, consider- able in years, who had been a murderer, a pow-wow, and a notorious drunkard, was likewise now brought to cry for mercy with many tears, and to complain much that he could be no more concerned when he saw his danger so great.

" There were almost universally praying and crying for mercy in every part of the house, and many out of doors, and numbers could neither go por stand ; their concern was so great, each for himself, that none seemed to take any notice of those about them, but each prayed for themselves, and were, to their own apprehension, as much retired as if every one had been by himself in a desert, or rather they thought nothing about any but themselves, and ao were every one praying apart although all to- gether. It seemed to me there was an exact fulfillment of that prophecy, Zech. xii. 10, 12, for there was now ' A great mourning, like the mourn- ing of Hadadrimmon,' and each seemed to ' mourn apart.' Methought this had a near resemblance to the day of God's power, mentioned Josh. x. 14, for I must say I never saw any duy like it in all respects ; it was & day wherein the Lord did much destroy the kingdom of darkness among the people.

"This concern was most rational and just; those who had been awakened any considerable time complained especially of the budness of their hearts, and those newly awakened of the badness of their lives and actions, and all were afraid of the anger of God, and of everlasting mis- ery as the desert of sin. Some of the white people who came out of curiosity in' hear what this habbler would say' to the poor ignorant Indiane were much awakened, and appeared to be wounded with a view of their perishing state.

" Those who had lately obtained relief were filled with comfort ; they appeared calm and rejoiced in Christ Jesua, and some of them took their distressed friends by the hand, telling them of the goodness of Christ, and the comfort that is to be enjoyed in him, and invited them to come and give their hearts to him. And I could observe some of them in the most unaffected manner lifting up their eyes to heaven as if crying for mercy, while they saw the dietreas of the poor soule around them.

" August 9th. In the afternoon I discoursed to them publicly. There were now present abont seventy persons. I opened and applied the parable of the sower, and was enabled to discourse with much plain- ness. There were many tears among them while I was discoursing, but no considerable cry, yet some were much affected with a few words spoken from Matt. xi. 29, with which I concluded. But while I was diecoursing Denr night to two or three of the awakened persons a divine influence seemed to attend what was spoken, which caused the persons to cry out in anguish of soul, although I spoke not a word of terror, but ou the contrary set before them the fullness of Christ's merits and his willingness to save all that came to bin.

" The cry of these was heard by others, who though scattered before immediately gathered round. I then proceeded in the same strain of gospel invitation till they were all melted into tenrs and cries except two or three, and seemed in the greatest distress to find and secure an in- terest in the great Redeemer. Some who had but little more than a ruffle made in their passions the day before seemed now to be deeply affected, aod the concern in general appeared near as prevalent as the day before. There was indeed a very great mourning among them, and yet every one seemed to mourn apart. For so great was their concern that almost every one was praying and crying for himself, as if none had been near. 'Guttummaukulummeh, guttummaukalummeh !' i.e., ' Have mercy upon me, have mercy upon mel' was the common cry.

" It was very affecting to see the poor Indiane, who the other day were yelling in their idolatrous feasts, now crying to God with much impor- tunity for and interest in hie dear Son."

The most friendly relations existed between the missionaries and Rev. Mr. McKnight, and often they are said to have preached for each other.

1 In the history of Monroe will be found much of interest concerning this place.

867

CRANBURY.

PIONEER NAMES .- The names of subscribers to- wards the purchase of the parsonage property of the Cranbury Presbyterian Church in 1758 have been handed down to the present generation on a worn and faded document. A list of them is presented as con- taining among many others those of residents within the present township limits at the date mentioned. Some of those not residents there were residents of South Brunswick, Monroe, and perhaps other adjacent townships as the county is now divided, and doubtless a few lived in the contiguous portions of what are now Somerset, Mercer, and Monmouth Counties. To residents of the territory represented by them these names will be of especial interest, and as those of helpers in the early progress of Cranbury they are entitled to insertion here : John Hume, James Gaston, Eupha- miah Wilson, Jonathan Combs, Barney Karney, Na- than Davis, Leaford Haughhawout, Henry Swinler, Matthias Mount, John Stevens, Joseph Clayton, Eliz- abeth Clun, Peter Perrine, Charles Barclay, Eliza Swain, Samuel Bayles, Isaac Davis, Peter Covenhoven, Jolın Sutphen, Robert Davison, William Dorrance, Duncan Campbell, George Davison, John Thompson, Jr., Lucas Schenck, William Davison, Adam New- ell, John Muirhead, Andrew Davison, John Reed, Ram Vanderbeek, Cornelius Voorhees, John Carson, Stephen Voorhees, Coert Voorhees, David Gilliland, Peter Bonham, Zachariah Gapen, Nehemiah Sutten, Adrian Bennett, Samuel Kerr, Eleanor Gilliland, James Mulligan, Daniel Disbrow, Elizabeth Wright, William Chela, Richard Jewell, Joseph Storey, John Storey, John Gordon, James Peters, Joseph Wilson, Catorene Disbrow, Cornelius Carhart, Richard Sparks, Arthur Vankirk, Nicholas Britton, Thomas Storey, Albert Cortelyou, Thomas Mershon, Charles McLean, Barnet Griggs, John Chapman, John Jewell, Benja- min Griggs, Cornelius Wyckoff, John Soden, William Guest, James English, Barent Hagerman, Stephen Ketcham, Hugh McCullom, Robert Magee, Andrew Wilson, John Gaston, Matthias Vankirk, John John- ston, Thomas Mount, Arthur Wyckoff, Menke Peters, John Stephenson, John Thompson, John Kerr, Jr., William Cole, Tobias Nephews, John Faris, William Magee, Stephen Pangborn, Thomas Dier, Luke Smock, Richard Major, Lines Pangborn, John Weth- erell.

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.

History of Union and Middlesex Counties, New Jersey with Biographical Sketches of many of their Pioneers and Prominent Men, Part 208

Author: W. Woodford Clayton, Ed. Publication date: 1882 Publisher: Philadelphia: Everts Number of Pages: 1224

Author: W. Woodford Clayton, Ed.
Publication date: 1882
Publisher: Philadelphia: Everts
Number of Pages: 1224