USA > New Jersey > Gloucester County > Newton in Gloucester County > Sketches of the first emigrant settlers in Newton Township, old Gloucester County, West New Jersey > Part 11
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
Richard Heritage died in 1702, without a will, and such parts of his land as he had not previously conveyed to his children, passed to his oldest son John, as his heir at law.9 His children were John, who married Sarah Slocum in 1706; Joseph, who married Hannah Allen in 1697; Sarah, who married William Clark in 1687; and Mary.
John died intestate in 1716, leaving two daughters,10-Mary, who married Hasker Newberry, and Naomi, who removed to Blanden county, North Carolina, and died a single woman. He lived on the homestead property after his father's death and until his own decease, but his descendants never occupied it.
6 Lib. No 8, 358.
7 Lib. G2, 69.
8 Lib. G1, 141.
9 Lib. AL, 456. Io Lib. No. 2, 82.
1
JOHN GILL. I33
Joseph's father conveyed considerable land to him, much of which he sold.11 It lay on both sides of the creek, and, at the present time, it is divided into several valuable farms. The part which he occupied, was in Burlington county, and was bounded by the creek. He died in the year 1756, leaving a will.12 His children were Richard, who married Sarah Whitall and Sarah Tindall; Joseph, who married Ruth Haines; Benjamin, who married Kesiah Matlack; John, who married Sarah Hugg; Mary, who married John Gill and John Thorne; and Hannah, who married - Roberts.
John and Mary Gill had but two children,-John, who mar- ried Amy, a daughter of David Davis of Salem county, in 1741, and Hannah, who married Thomas Redman of Haddonfield in 1737. John Gill died in 1749, and his widow married John Thorne in 1750.
In 1728, John and Elizabeth Estaugh conveyed to John Gill two tracts of land, one in Haddonfield, and the other (meadow) lying in Waterford (now Delaware) township.13 The first named tract was bounded by the westerly side of the King's road, and extended from Cooper's creek nearly to the Metho- dist church and contained eighty-seven acres. Four years after, the same persons granted John Gill three other lots, the largest of which joined the last named on the southwest; it is now divided by Grove street into nearly equal parts.14 The second of these is owned by Rennels Fowler and the devisees of John Clement, deceased, on the front ; but nearly all the original lines have been obliterated. The third lot passed into the pos- session of his daughter, and upon it the old Thomas Redman mansion formerly stood.
These grants were "for love and affection," which the grant- ors bore the grantee. Part of this estate still remains in the family, and is now owned by John Gill, whose lineage can be readily traced to the first of the name in this region.
The first tract of land, as herein named, John Gill sold in a short time. He soon after came within the bounds of Newton township, where he made his permanent residence upon the
II Lib. G3, 182.
12 Lib. No. 3, 358.
13 Lib. E, 373. 14 Lib. E, 375.
5
I34
FIRST EMIGRANT SETTLERS.
estate conveyed to him for a nominal consideration by John and Elizabeth Estaugh, between whom and himself there existed the pleasantest social intimacy.
This tract of land, or a large part thereof, was an open field, covered with wigwams and cabins of the natives. Prior to 1720, John Gill had enclosed part of it, and had the land under cultivation ; for, in the description of the lot of land conveyed by John Haddon to Friends for the meeting-house lot, John Gill's fence is named as part of the boundary, which fence stood near where the turnpike road leaves the main street of Haddonfield.15 On this field, and perhaps at John Gill's house, were held the elections for members of the Assembly, annually. These elections were conducted in accordance to law, but they would appear strange to us of these latter days. By the act of 1682, the freeholders could meet at any place which they chose, and elect the members in any manner thought best at the time. The time, however, fixed by law, was the fourteenth day of the second month (being the 14th day of April) of each year. This law was changed, and the sheriff, or some other person appointed by the governor, was authorized to take the ballot box from place to place within the county, with two other persons selected by the candidates to act as officers of election. The consent of the candidates to remove from the place last selected, was required, but the rule gener- ally required two days; at the end of that time, the polls were changed to some other desirable locality, within the county and convenient for the people. To accomplish an election there- fore, several days were consumed, as the territory of Gloucester was large, Atlantic and Camden counties then being within the bounds of the old bailiwick.
Another curious feature of these elections was the few votes then polled. In 1737, there was but nine hundred and thirty white male persons above the age of sixteen, within the limits of the county; it may readily be seen how light the canvass was, and how few the inhabitants, even after some fifty years from the first settlement. The voting was done by voice, and not by ballot. as now; the name of the voter and that of the
t5, Sharp's Bock, 43, O. S. G.
I35
JOHN GILL.
person voted for, were recorded and copied for any person willing to pay for the same ; publicity thus being given to the act of each person,-a peculiarity that would not be allowed at this time. The penalties against bribery and corruption were severe; but it is supposable that chicanery and deception were winked at among the electors, and that every kind of expedient was used by one party to defeat the other, each arguing, no doubt, that, unless their opponents were defeated, the country would be utterly ruined.
George Fox, the founder of Quakerism, during his travels in America in 1672, in going from Maryland to New York, passed through West New Jersey, and was, on several occasions, enter- tained by the Indians. It is well known that the Indian trail, first traveled by the whites from Salem to Amboy, crossed Gloucester county near where Haddonfield now stands, and that the same trail was used for many years after the earliest settlements. Along that path George Fox and his associates must have traveled, and it is no stretch of fancy to say that they were entertained by the natives who lived at the "Great Fields," now the town aforesaid. In his journal he says:
" We came one night to an Indian town and lay all night at the king's house, who was a very pretty man. Both he and his wife received us very lovingly, and his attendants (such as they were) were very respectfull to us. They laid mats for us to lie on; but provisions were very short with them, having caught but little that day."
Whether the king, whose fine appearance and noble bearing attracted the attention of this remarkable man, resided here or not, cannot be known at this late day. It is, however, a pleas- ant incident in the early history of the village to associate his movements in this connection.
In the year 1740, John Gill, as attorney for the heirs-at-law of Joseph Elkinton, deceased, went to England to recover an estate claimed by them, and at that time remaining unsettled. This property was situated in Oxfordshire and Warwickshire, where suits at law were prosecuted for obtaining possession thereof; which, after several years of litigation, proved suc-
1
I36
FIRST EMIGRANT SETTLERS.
cessful. The children of Joseph Elkinton, who was a son of George, the first comer to New Jersey of that name, were Mary, the wife of David Stratton, of Evesham. Burlington county, N. J .; Ann; the wife of Stephen Brooks. of the same place; Elizabeth, wife of John Lippincott, also of the same place ; Frances and Amy Elkinton. Numerous affidavits were taken here and appear on record, showing whence and when George Elkinton emigrated to New Jersey, whom he married, and many other particulars necessary to connect the claimants here with the family remaining in England.16 The matter was fiercely contested in the courts, consuming much time and money before its conclusion. The account book of John Gill relating to this transaction, is still preserved in the family, showing the care and precision observed by him in rendering a statement of his proceedings in the premises.
During his absence, his wife Mary and son John, acting by letters of attorney, sold a lot of land in Haddonfield to Timothy Matlack (1744), and had general oversight of his affairs here- about. While living there (1746), he purchased a tract of land of . John Cox, also a resident of London, lying on the south side of the south branch of Cooper's creek about two miles from Haddonfield. The next year after the purchase, he deeded this survey to his son John, a part of which has remained in the family and name to the present day. The old Salem road passed through this tract, and the second John sold most of that which lay west of the same. Like many other such pieces of land, the old lines, owing to the division, sale and exchange of property, have become entirely unknown to this generation.
The account book before mentioned shows that John Gill, while residing in London, frequently paid his brother William for "diet and lodging," proving that there were others of the name and family in that city. He never returned to the land of his adoption, but died in London.
The children of John and Amy Gill were Mary, who married Jacob Roberts; Sarah, who married Job Whitall: Amy, who married Joab Wills; Elizabeth, who married Jacob Burrough ;
16 Lib. AAA, 229.
I37
JOHN GILL.
John, who married Anna Smith; and Mercy, who married Samuel Abbott.
Amy deceased, and, in 1767, he married Abigail Hillman, widow of Daniel and daughter of Samuel Nicholson. She died without issue, and, in 1781, he married Sarah Pritchett, widow of Josiah and daughter of John Cowperthwaite. There was no issue by the last marriage. John died in 1794. A noticeable feature in the genealogy of this family is that, for several generations, there has been but one son, to whom has always been given the christian name of the first comer, which has limited the surname of the branch of the family hereabout to but few persons.
Thomas Redman, who married Hannah, should be noticed in this connection. He was a son of Thomas, one of the first settlers in the city of Philadelphia, and one of the leading mechanics at that time. In 1712, he was a member of the city council, and participated much in the affairs of the colony during William Penn's residence there.
The son was apprenticed to a druggist, and, upon attaining his majority, removed to Haddonfield, and continued the same business. He was held in great respect among Friends, and traveled much as a minister in that religious denomination. Hannah, his wife, died, leaving three children,-Mary, who married Mark Miller; Thomas, who married Mercy Davis in 1747, of Salem county ; and John, who married Sarah Branson.
He married Mary -, a second wife, and died in 1766, leaving a will, in which he disposed of a large amount of real and personal property ; " the appraisement alone amounting to more than five thousand pounds, sterling. There was no issue by the last marriage.
The third Thomas Redman was also educated as a druggist, and continued the same calling, but was more of a public man, politically speaking, than his father. He was a careful business man, and, as a conveyancer, had the confidence of the entire community. Although he adhered to the detailed and elab- orate forms of English titles, yet plainness of penmanship and clearness of intention characterized all his legal papers. His
17 Lib. No. 12, 363.
.
138
FIRST EMIGRANT SETTLERS.
correctness in copying was proverbial, and Chief Justice Kirk- patrick of this State, on one occasion, paid him the compli- ment of not comparing documents prepared by him, saying that "papers from the hands of Thomas Redman needed no such scrutiny."
He was a valuable man in the society of Friends, and did much to sustain the church in this region of country. Many anecdotes are related of him, showing that he was an upright business man, plain of speech, consistent in his profession, faithful in his trusts, and scrupulous in all his dealings.
Among the several positions of public trust which John Gill was called upon to fill, was that of commissioner of loans, he being one of the three appointed for Gloucester county. The object of the law, and the duty of the commissioners, appear to have been to loan bills of credit issued by the State, to such persons as could give satisfactory security for the repayment of the same ; and this security had to be in the shape of mort- gages on real estate, of the value of which the commissioners were to be satisfied by personal view.
These commissioners were constituted bodies politic and corporate, in succession, in fact, and in law, to sue and be sued, and with various other powers in the act named. No greater sum than four hundred pounds, nor any less than fifteen pounds, could be loaned to one person for the space of twenty years, at five per cent. per annum. This system of supplying the country with money was in operation for several years, but at last fell into disuse, and the law finally repealed. While John Gill was thus acting as commissioner, and had charge of the securities during the revolutionary war, his house was pillaged by a party of British soldiers, and, among other things,. these were carried off and not recovered. By an act of the Legislature of New Jersey, in 1779, he was idemnified from any loss concerning the same.
Although many of this name may be found in New Jersey, yet they do not appear to have originated with the family herein mentioned.
LABOUR TRAYS
ARCHIBALD MICKLE.
T HIS man was an Irish Quaker. The records of Friends in Philadelphia indicate that he came from Lisbrun, a town in the southern part of the county of Antrim, Ireland, and that he arrived at that city on the second day of the sixth month, A. D. 1682.
He probably was among the adventurers that followed Wil- liam Penn to his new colony, bringing with him considerable estate and a full supply of implements to continue the business of a cooper, in which calling he had served as an apprentice in the land of his nativity. This was worth much to him among the settlers, who generally arrived with but little house- keeping material, and had to be supplied with their wooden ware of home manufacture, when a new establishment was to be set up. Coopers were also in demand along the sea coast, as whale fishing occupied much of the time of the people, and barrels were necessary to carry away the oil. This was the most lucrative business among them, and more capital was invested in it than in any other branch. In a letter from the West New Jersey Society to Jeremiah Basse, their agent, then residing at Cape May, dated December 24th, 1692, he is directed to secure the services of a French cooper at Plymouth, skilled in making casks. The letter further says: "In the season let him make a little wine and brandy, and send us the wine in casks and the brandy in bottles."' Much is also
I Lib. B2, 423.
140
FIRST EMIGRANT SETTLERS.
said about barrels for the fishing season, and the quantity required would certainly employ several persons, and among them it is possible that Archibald Mickle was one.
The next notice made of him was in 1686, when he married Sarah Watts, at the same meeting at which his certificate of membership and the date of his coming had been recorded.
Four years after that time, he purchased a tract of land of Robert Turner in Newton township, Gloucester county, con- taining two hundred and fifty acres.2 This survey was situated near the head of the south branch of Newton creek, adjoining lands located by Francis Collins. This tract afterward became the property of Joseph Lowe, who occupied the same.
At the date of this purchase, Archibald Mickle was still a resident of Philadelphia, but he soon after came to Newton township and settled, and there remained until his decease in 1706. In 1697, he made another purchase from the same man, of five hundred and ten acres, which survey fronted on the river Delaware and extended eastward towards Cooper's creek.3 This deed excepted several meadow lots, and is valu- able as showing the antecedent title of the grantor.
He did not make the first improvements there, for a man named Thomas Spearman lived in a house on the tract at the time of his purchase, which house stood near the river shore and near where the former residence of Isaac Mickle, deceased, is situated.
He was the owner of considerable other real estate in the neighborhood, and the inference is, therefore, that he was a man of more means than most of his neighbors, and, excepting William Cooper, of any other in the township. In the political affairs of the colony, his name does not appear, but the fact of his being a Quaker and a strict adherent to his sect, may be drawn from that clause of his will which directed that any one of his children marrying without consent of Friends was to only have one-half of his or her share of his estate. This is certainly a significant expression, and places his religious proclivities beyond a doubt.
2 Basse's Book, 119.
3 Lib G3, 133.
141
ARCHIBALD MICKLE.
His will was dated in 1706; in which he gave his real estate to eight of his children.+ His widow Sarah survived him, she being the mother of all his children. After the father's death, the estate was conveyed to the widow, and she, by her will (1718), gave the property to three of her sons, Archibald, James and Joseph," who divided the same by quit claim in 1727.
Seven sons and three daughters were the representatives of this couple, as follows: John, who married Hannah Cooper (daughter of the second William), in 1704; Samuel, who married Elizabeth Cooper daughter of Joseph, in 1708; Daniel, who married Hannah Dennis, in 1711 ; Archibald, who married Mary Wright in 1719; Isaac, who married Sarah Burrough, daughter of Samuel ; Joseph, who mar- ried Elizabeth Eastlack in 1723; James, who married Sarah Eastlack in 1732; Sarah, who married Ezekiel Siddon; Mary, who married Arthur Powell; and Rachel, who married Benja- min Cooper in 1718.
John Mickle, the oldest son, was an active man in the politi- cal matters of the colony in his day, and also dealt much in real estate. By Thomas Sharp, as his deputy surveyor, he located several tracts of land in different parts of West Jersey. In 1733, he was appointed one of the judges of the several courts of Gloucester county, and filled other offices of public trust and responsibility.
In 1703, " for natural love and affection," his father conveyed to him a farm containing one hundred and fourteen acres, bounded on the south side by the south branch of Newton creek, and being within the town bounds of Gloucester.6 On this farm he settled, and there remained during his life. He deceased in 1744, his wife and the following children surviv- ing him: William, who married Sarah Wright in 1732; John, who married Mary Stockdale, of Burlington county, in 1741,7 and deceased in 1765; Samuel, who married Letitia Matlack in 1742 (he having deceased in 1750, she married Thomas Hinch- man) ; and Hannah, who married John Ladd in 1732.
4 Lib No. 1, 149.
5 Lib No. 2, 95.
6 Lib. A, 184. 7 Lib. No. 5, 63.
142
FIRST EMIGRANT SETTLERS.
Samuel Mickle was one of the first settlers in the village of Haddonfield. He became the owner of a lot next adjoining the tavern property, lately belonging to John Roberts, deceased, and there he erected a dwelling. Timothy Matlack, his wife's father, owned the Roberts's estate and another lot to the east, fronting on the street. Timothy was a shopkeeper, and was so taxed by the township.
Of John Ladd, the father, and John Ladd, the son, much appears in the various records and traditions of their times, which proves them to have been conspicuous persons. They were prominent in the political and religious matters that sur- rounded them, and the subjects of much hard talk, for which some of their defamers appear in no very enviable position.
As early as 1690, Samuel Taylor puts himself on record, admitting that he had been uttering falsehoods about the elder John Ladd and Sarah his wife, but upon what particular subject these words originated, does not appear. He, however, made a clean breast, and admitted that all his assertions were slander, and, in the form common in those days, the retraction thereof has come down to the present generation. The entire record is copied here to show the manner of so doing,-a practice that has no· existence now. It runs as follows :
"This may certify all persons whom it may concern ; that, whereas, I, Samuel Taylor, of Gloucester river, within the Province of West Jarsey, Sawyer, have of late publicly reported several false, scandalous, reproachful and detracting speeches, of and concerning John Ladd, of ye same place aforesaid, Yeoman, and Sarah his wife, which were of infamous import, and tending to prove ye said parties to be of unjust dealings and evil and dishonest lives and conversations ; therefore I, ye said Samuel Taylor, being moved to ye said report by my precipitate and unadvised passion and anger against ye parties above said, do hereby certify that I herewith repent of, and am unfeignedly sorrowful for my speaking, declaring and publishing any report of such evil tendency aforesaid, and do freely and voluntarily own and acknowledge that I have grossly abused, traduced and wronged ye said John Ladd and Sarah, his wife,
143
ARCHIBALD MICKLE.
by means of ye false, slanderous and defaming reports and speeches above said.
" In testimony whereof, I have hereunto put my hand this 24th day of June, Anno Domini, 1690.
"SAMUEL TAYLOR.
" Recorded by order of Court, this ye Ioth day of August, 1690.
"JOHN READING, Recorder." 8
The father was a practical surveyor, and assisted in laying out the city of Philadelphia for William Penn. The compass and chain used by him in this work are now in the possession of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, at its rooms in Philadelphia; they are preserved as a valuable relic of those early times. In compensation for his services, the Patroon offered him thirty pounds, or a square of land, within the limits of his town, but John decided to take the money.
William Penn, surprised at this, said: "Friend John, thou art Ladd by name, and a Ladd in comprehension. Dost thou not know this will become a great city?"
In measuring the distances over the rough soil, and in mark- ing the lines of the streets upon the trees, John could not realize the assertions of Friend William, and concluded that his expectations had gotten the better of his judgment.
While wading about the swamps of Dock creek, and fixing the intersections of Market and Chestnut streets with those of Third and Fourth streets in that vicinity, our surveyor doubtless reflected much upon what had been suggested, and thought the whole scheme was a huge castle in the imagination of his employer.
Time, however, as in all similar cases, has shown which of these entertained the better notions; and, although the one was considered as hazardous in his ideas, yet the other acted as a prudent man, and was influenced by the opinions of those around him. But few of the men that accompanied William Penn to America comprehended the extent and importance of his undertaking. This may account for many of the hindrances
8 Lib. G2, 72.
-----
.
144
FIRST EMIGRANT SETTLERS.
which he met with in carrying out his proposed plans. Not understood in his purposes, he soon became the object of censure and abuse; but, as a Christian and a philanthropist, he has long since come to be appreciated. That he was actu- ated by the purest of motives and governed by the desire to promote the welfare of his people, at this day, is not questioned.
After the lapse of another half century, John Ladd the son, appears to have been traduced by one of his neighbors in some of their political or religious controversies, and, not resting very comfortable under the same, he required of William Ives a legal admission that he had said some ugly and untruthful things about him. This admission was spread upon the records over his own signature, done in open court, and witnessed by the judges thereof.
"A Knight of the Post" implied that John had been con- victed of some petty offence, and been punished at the whipping post, or set in the stocks, a means much in use at that time to vindicate the honor of the commonwealth and to preserve its dignity.
The insinuation that he could not be trusted as a sworn witness, perhaps touched John's pride quite as much as the first charge, and led to the arrest of William Ives and his admission to the falsity of the whole.
This means of the vindication of the character has passed out of use many years since, and to the present generation is unknown. Like the first, the entire record is copied that the reader may draw his own inference therefrom.
WILLIAM IVES'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT, MADE IN OPEN COURT AT GLO'STER.
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.