Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey: Caught in the Crossfire 9781978800212

Citation preview

Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

Lucia McMahon and Christopher T. Fisher, Series Editors New Jersey holds a unique place in the American story. One of the thirteen colonies in British North America and the original states of the United States, New Jersey plays a central, yet underappreciated, place in America’s economic, political, and social development. New Jersey’s axial position as the nation’s financial, intellectual, and political corridor has become something of a signature, evident in quips about the Turnpike and punchlines that end with its many exits. Yet, New Jersey is more than a crossroad or an interstitial “elsewhere.” Far from being ancillary to the nation, New Jersey is an axis around which America’s story has turned, and within its borders gathers a rich collection of ideas, innovations, people, and politics. The region’s historical development makes it a microcosm of the challenges and possibilities of the nation, and it also reflects the complexities of the modern, cosmopolitan world. Yet, far too little of the literature recognizes New Jersey’s significance to the national story, and despite promising scholarship done at the local level, New Jersey history often remains hidden in plain sight. Ceres books represent new, rigorously peer reviewed scholarship on New Jersey and the surrounding region. Named for the Roman goddess of prosperity portrayed on the New Jersey State Seal, Ceres provides a platform for cultivating and disseminating the next generation of scholarship. It features the work of both established historians and a new generation of scholars across disciplines. Ceres aims to be field-shaping, providing a home for the newest and best empirical, archival, and theoretical work on the region’s past. We are also dedicated to fostering diverse and inclusive scholarship and hope to feature works addressing issues of social justice and activism. Maxine N. Lurie, Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey: Caught in the Crossfire Jean R. Soderlund, Separate Paths: Lenapes and Colonists in West New Jersey

Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey Caught in the Crossfire

MAXINE N. LURIE

Rutgers University Press New Brunswick, Camden, and Newark, New Jersey, and London

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Lurie, Maxine N., 1940– author. Title: Taking sides in revolutionary New Jersey: caught in the crossfire / Maxine N. Lurie. Description: New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, [2022] | Series: Ceres: Rutgers studies in history | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2021046761 | ISBN 9781978800175 (paperback) | ISBN 9781978800182 (hardback) | ISBN 9781978800199 (epub) | ISBN 9781978800205 (mobi) | ISBN 9781978800212 (pdf) Subjects: LCSH: New Jersey—History—Revolution, 1775–1783. | United States— History—Revolution, 1775–1783. | American loyalists—New Jersey—Biography. | Quakers—New Jersey—Biography. Classification: LCC E263.N5 L87 2022 | DDC 974.9/03—dc23/eng/20211012 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021046761 A British Cataloging-in-Publication record for this book is available from the British Library. Copyright © 2022 by Maxine N. Lurie All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the publisher. Please contact Rutgers University Press, 106 Somerset Street, New Brunswick, NJ 08901. The only exception to this prohibition is “fair use” as defined by U.S. copyright law. References to internet websites (URLs) were accurate at the time of writing. Neither the author nor Rutgers University Press is responsible for URLs that may have expired or changed since the manuscript was prepared. The paper used in this publication meets the requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1992. www.rutgersuniversitypress.org Manufactured in the United States of America

To Jon Lurie, who has shared my life for over 50 years, and my sister, Carol Judith Neustadt (1944–2021), even longer. —Maxine Neustadt Lurie

Contents List of Illustrations Foreword Preface Note on the Text Chronology

ix xi xiii xvii xix

1

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey

1

2

Patriots Part I: The Adamant and Determined

31

3

Patriots Part II: In the Maelstrom

60

4

Straddlers, Trimmers, and Opportunists

85

5

The Society of Friends (Quakers): Pacifists and Participants

109

6

Loyalists Part I: The Irreconcilables

131

7

Loyalists Part II: Remained or Returned

158

8

Epilogue

181

Acknowledgments Notes Index

191 193 229

vii

Illustrations 1. County Boundaries in 1753 and at the time of the Revolution. Map by Michael Siegel. 2. Washington Crossing the Delaware, December 26, 1776, painting by Emanuel Gottlieb Leutze, 1851.

xviii 5

3. “Rivington Hanged in Effigy,” woodcut engraving from the New York Gazetteer, April 20, 1775.

14

4. First Presbyterian Church, Tennent, Monmouth County, NJ, HABS photograph, 1936.

20

5. Construction activities by the Continental army at Jockey Hollow, 1779–1780, painting by Donald Troiani, 1983.

25

6. Reverend John Witherspoon, painting after Charles Willson Peale.

38

7. Susan Livingston, Saving Governor William Livingston’s Papers, painting by Giselle Lindenfeld.

42

8. Reverend Dirck Romeyn, Bergen County, claims for damages done by the British, in November 1776.

48

9. Samuel Sutphen, former slave. Pension Claim for military service, 1833.

54

10. Benjamin Yard, Trenton, 1782 claims for damages done by the Patriots.

57

11. Richard Stockton, painting attributed to John Wollaston.

62

12. General William Howe and Admiral Richard Howe’s Required Oath of Allegiance to the King, July 14, 1776.

66 ix

x • Illustrations

13. Interior of the old Jersey prison ship in the Revolutionary War, 1855 print.

75

14. New Jersey Oath of Abjuration and Allegiance, signed December 22, 1777, by Richard Stockton.

81

15. John Bray, painting, artist unknown.

87

16. Isaac Lowe, sketch.

94

17. John Wallace, painting, artist unknown.

98

18. Van Horne House, Bridgewater, NJ, 2021, photograph.

103

19. Margaret Hill Morris, drawing.

115

20. Whitall House in Red Bank Battlefield Park, National Park, NJ, photograph.

117

21. Statement of Free Quakers July 9, 1781. Broadside.

122

22. “A view of the guard-house and Simsbury-mines, now called Newgate—a prison for the confinement of Loyalists in Connecticut,” London, 1781.

137

23. Reception of the American Loyalists in Britain, 1783. Engraving based on a painting by Benjamin West.

139

24. Reverend Jonathan Odell, ca. 1770, artist unknown.

143

25. Bernardus LaGrange, Loyalist Application submitted to the Loyalist Claims Commission, 1783.

146

26. Reverend Abraham Beach, painting by Ralph Earle, 1794.

159

27. Mrs. Anne Van Wickle Beach, painting by Ralph Earle, 1794.

160

28. Reverend Thomas Bradbury Chandler, painting, artist unknown.

166

29. “An Attempt to land a bishop in America” (London, 1768), anti-bishop cartoon.

168

30. Vought House in Clinton, NJ, 2021, photograph.

174

31. Von Steuben House, River Edge, Bergen County, NJ, photograph of the exterior, 1965–1966.

176

32. William Peartree Smith, painting by John Wollaston.

182

33. Map of Newark, NJ, in the 1790s.

187

34. The Horse America, throwing his master, cartoon of August 1, 1779.

189

Foreword On New Jersey’s state seal sits the Roman goddess, Ceres, a symbol of productivity and abundance. In commerce and politics, the image calls attention to the fecundity that makes New Jersey the Garden State, but as a metaphor, Ceres symbolizes so much more than the bounty of its land. Contained within this message of abundance is New Jersey’s role as an incubator for cultural and social bonds that helped transform the colonies into a nation; the richness of its people, whose diversity still serves as a national model; and its place as a conduit for the robust regional economy that scaled up America’s industrial growth. New Jersey holds a transformational place in regional and national history, and  Ceres: Rutgers Studies in History  seeks to capture the fullness of those stories. Ceres is a platform for cultivating and disseminating the next generation of scholarship that shapes the field. It provides a home for the newest and best work on the region’s past that is as diverse in its chronology as it is inclusive in the topics it covers. Maxine Lurie, a distinguished scholar in New Jersey studies, takes a bold look at what it took to make a British colony a state, and how a state could reflect the challenges of a nation. Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey reframes the American Revolution as a civil war, underscoring the violent, contested, and protracted nature of the nation’s struggle for independence. The constant presence and movement of troops across New Jersey left residents in a continual state of disruption. Through a series of compelling vignettes, Lurie illustrates how individuals made decisions about their loyalties and allegiances based on a number of factors, including familial, religious, economic, local, and political motivations. No matter what side individuals took during the Revolutionary War, the dangers and costs were high. Taking Sides reinforces New Jersey’s central place in Revolutionary America and the national story. —Lucia McMahon and Christopher T. Fisher xi

Preface The American Revolution in New Jersey lasted eight long years, during which many were caught in the middle of an at times vicious civil war. Residents living in this active war zone took stands that varied from “loyalist” to “patriot” to “neutral” and/or “trimmer,” “straddler,” “opportunist” (changing sides for a variety of reasons, including threats or experiences of violence). Whatever side they took they faced death, disease, losing all (family and property), and becoming refugees. Their stories are interesting, often dramatic, and help illustrate the ways in which this was an extremely difficult time and place to live. When taking sides, sometimes family was important, sometimes religion, or political principles, or economics (protecting property); the course of the war and location also mattered. The overall aim of the book is to illustrate the American Revolution’s messy complexity in New Jersey, to focus on people rather than battles, to indicate the great cost whatever side was taken, and to provide perspective for the difficult choices people make in our own times. The story of the Reverend Abraham Beach (1740–1828), the Anglican minister of Christ Church, New Brunswick, illustrates how New Jersey residents were caught in the middle of a war zone: in his case literally.1 Beach was born in Connecticut, attended Yale College, and then worked for several years before feeling called to the ministry. Rather than the Congregational Church of his college and colony, he chose Anglicanism, traveling to England for ordination. The Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts assigned him to New Brunswick. There he met and married Anne van Winkle, a local Dutch woman who had been orphaned as a child and had inherited a substantial farm three miles outside of town.2 July 7, 1776, the Declaration of Independence was read aloud near his church. When Beach next went to conduct services (Anglicans started with prayers for the health of the king, his family, and Parliament), a congregant warned him to xiii

xiv • Preface

stop or he would be arrested. He suspended worship until after the British arrived December 1, 1776, and then held services until they withdrew at the end of June 1777. While British and Hessian forces were in New Brunswick and across the Raritan River in Piscataway, the Continental Army and local militia were in Somerset, Bound Brook, and up into the Watchung Mountains. To get from home to church and back he had to go between the two. At one point, Patriot soldiers surrounded the farm, took fifty head of cattle and other livestock, and traded shots with the Hessians—he was in the crossfire. He wrote a friend that his “condition is truly distressing.” When the British left Beach stayed, although he did not formally conduct services again until 1780, after he was assured from London that he could leave out prayers for the king and Parliament. In the interim he traveled within a forty-mile radius through what was still a war zone, ministering to other Anglican congregations by marrying couples, baptizing their children, and burying the dead (both Black and white).3 When the war was over, he moved into New York City, but he stayed in the new United States. We will come back to him later in the book because, while his story noted here is about being caught in the crossfire (again for him literally), his later decision provides insight into the options Loyalists had at the end of the Revolution. Beach is just one of the examples given in this book of the New Jersey residents caught in the middle of this civil war. Remembering that this was a civil war is important. New Jersey historians have long emphasized this, but often scholars outside the state have either ignored New Jersey or simplified and misinterpreted its part of the story. Several years ago, while at a national conference, I listened to an international scholar explain that he was working on an “unknown” story about how the American Revolution in New Jersey was a civil war. That is not new to most state and local historians. In fact, in the middle of the war the Reverend Nickolas (Nils) Collin, a Swedish minister in South Jersey, used that term for what he saw going on around him. He wrote, “Everywhere distrust, fear, hatred and abominable selfishness were met with. Parents and children, brothers and sisters, wife and husband, were enemies to one another.” Noting, “From all this it is apparent how terrible this Civil war raged.”4 This book teases out how those who lived during the war divided through short biographies, accounts of some of their experiences, and quotes from their writings. What they said in documents, letters, essays, and poetry has been used to gain insight to the choices they made. An attempt has been made to select a wide variety of individuals, limited of course by the fact that sometimes the surviving information is scant. It tries to avoid simple lists of those on one side or another. Some of the stories have been pieced together from numerous sources, found by accident, or suggested by friends. Individuals have been divided into various categories discussed in different chapters. Some fit clearly in one place (labeled “adamant Patriots” or “irreconcilable Loyalists”), but others have been put where it seemed most appropriate. The author confesses to having moved

Preface • xv

people around because their stories, like the war itself, are complicated, and classifying some individuals proved difficult. Women, Blacks, and, when possible, Native Americans, have been integrated into the general discussion. When found, birth and death dates for individuals are included to clarify the person discussed. Often more than one person with the same name appears in the records—family names are repeated through generations. For similar reasons, at times diverse spellings are also noted. This is not a military history, it is about people, but of course the war had an impact on almost everyone. A chronology has been included at the end of the frontmatter to give context to the individual stories that follow. Readers are urged as they go through the book to flip back to the chronology as needed or desired. The book starts with an overview of colonial New Jersey and the pattern of the Revolutionary War, then includes two chapters on the Patriots, two on the Loyalists, one on the Quakers, another on those who tried to have it more than one way, and ends with a conclusion about patterns, damages, and consequences. The emphasis throughout the book is on how this was a civil war—particularly, but not only, in the Hackensack Valley (Bergen County, New Jersey, and extending into Westchester County, New York) and in Monmouth County. A guest editorial in the Newark Star Ledger during the fall of 2019 suggested the need to look back to the revolutionary generation when everyone agreed, learn a lesson, and escape the contentions of present-day politics. Hopefully, the reader of this book will learn from a past that was more fractious than our present, and thereby gain perspective for our own troubling times.5

Note on the Text The following list is provided as an effort to reduce repeating old versus new titles, and to clarify some cases where names have changed over time. The institutions include the College of New Jersey (now Princeton University), Queens College (now Rutgers University), Kings College (now Columbia University), Philadelphia College (now the University of Pennsylvania), and the College of Rhode Island (now Brown University). Places include Brunswick (New Brunswick), Elizabethtown (Elizabeth), Maidenhead (Lawrenceville), Little Egg Harbor (Tuckerton), New Barbados (Hackensack), English Neighborhood (Ridgefield, Englewood), Bottle Hill (Madison), Cohansey (Greenwich), Cohansie Bridge (Bridgeton), Raccoon Creek (Swedesboro), Second River (Bellville), Connecticut Farms (Union), Coryell’s Ferry (Lambertville), Bulls Ferry (Hoboken), Somerset Court House (Millstone), Paulus Hook (Jersey City), Coopers Ferry (Camden), White Hill (Fieldsboro), Middlebrook (Bound Brook), New Germantown (Oldwick), Monmouth Court House (Freehold), Spanktown (Rahway). There are undoubtedly more. There is also a map showing the then existing counties, a time when there were thirteen rather than the current twenty-one. As regards spelling, note that the original has been retained when in a quote, and that there were no consistent rules in the eighteenth century. The terms Patriot and Loyalist are usually used because they were preferred at the time. Rebel and Tory were then perceived as derogatory. Exceptions are of course when they appear in quotations.

xvii

FIG. 1 County Boundaries in 1753 (and during the American Revolution). At the time of the Revolution there were thirteen counties in New Jersey, not the present twenty-one. A result was that the boundaries of those that then existed were not the same as they are today. That and the changes in town names, and boundaries, need to be remembered when studying the war. (Source: Michael Siegel, cartographer, Geography Department, Rutgers University-New Brunswick.)

Chronology French and Indian War, 1755–1763. Built barracks in Trenton, Burlington, New Brunswick, Perth Amboy, and Elizabethtown. Sugar Act, 1764 Stamp Act, 1765 Townsend Acts, 1767 Tea Act, May 1773 Tea Parties: Boston, December 16, 1773; Greenwich, December 22, 1774 Coercive/Intolerable Acts, 1774 Lexington and Concord, April 19, 1775 Thomas Paine, Common Sense, January 1776 Arrest of Governor William Franklin, June 1776 British arrive in New York Harbor, June 29, 1776 New Jersey Constitution, July 2, 1776 Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776 Battle of Long Island (Brooklyn Heights), August 27, 1776 New Jersey invaded, Battle of Fort Lee, November 20, 1776 Battle of Trenton 1, December 26, 1776 Battle of Trenton 2, January 2, 1777 Battle of Princeton, January 3, 1777 Continental Army in Morristown, January 1777 Battle of Bound Brook, April 13, 1777 Battle of Brandywine, September 11, 1777 Philadelphia captured, September 26, 1777 Battle of Germantown, October 4, 1777 Battles of Saratoga (2), surrender October 17, 1777

xix

xx • Chronology

Battles over the river approach to Philadelphia: Battle of Red Bank (Fort Mercer), October 22, 1777; Fort Mifflin abandoned November 15, 1777; Fort Mercer abandoned November 20, 1777 Valley Forge, winter 1777–1778 Hancock’s Bridge, March 31, 1778 Battle of Monmouth, June 28, 1778 Continental Army in Middlebrook, winter 1778–1779; Pluckemin Artillery Cantonment, training facility Continental Army in Morristown, winter 1779–1780 Battle of Connecticut Farms, June 7, 1780 Battle of Springfield, June 23, 1780 Continental Army in northern New Jersey and parts of New York, 1781 Mutiny of Pennsylvania Line and then New Jersey Line, January 1781 March through New Jersey to Virginia—Rochambeau and Washington, August 19, 1781–September 17, 1781 Surrender at Yorktown, October 19, 1781 Joshua Huddy hanged April 12, 1782 Proclamation of Peace, April 19, 1783 (Congress meeting in Princeton)

Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

1

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey

In 1761 the news that George III was now king was celebrated with parades, speeches, fireworks, and “Demonstrations of Joy” in Perth Amboy and Elizabethtown.1 Soon after residents of New Jersey welcomed William Franklin as the new governor of the colony. In 1763 New Jerseyans were proud to be part of an empire that had defeated France in the French and Indian War/Seven Years War. This auspicious beginning of the 1760s began to change with the Stamp Act of 1765. Eleven years later, 112 years after its founding as a British colony, representatives at a meeting of the Third Provincial Congress at Burlington wrote a constitution creating a new government because the king had violated his “Compact.” He had refused to protect them, assented to acts of Parliament “that attempted to subject them to the Absolute Dominion of that Body,” and made war on them “in the most cruel and unnatural Manner,” all for “no other cause than asserting their just Rights.” The Declaration of Independence called him a “tyrant.” During the Battle of Princeton on January 3, 1777, Patriot forces fired a cannon at British soldiers in Nassau Hall, hitting a portrait of George II. Even if accidental, this was surely symbolic of changed perspectives (only heightened when after the war the College of New Jersey inserted a painting of George Washington into the same frame). Before the war was over Governor William Livingston wrote a former friend that he could only be loyal to one country and needed to oppose tyranny in whatever form or time it appeared.2 When the peace treaty arrived in 1783 residents celebrated even as they worried about what the future

1

2 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

would bring.3 Although this short description begins and ends with celebrations, the period between was fraught with danger and disagreements. Danger from the armies that marched back and forth through the state, disagreements between citizens who were Patriots, Loyalists, or tried to be neutral or to straddle the differences.

Historiography This book makes use of what was written by the Reverend Nickolas Collin and others during the Revolution and scholars since. This includes the products of a recent explosion of new books on the American Revolution, from specific works on individuals or events (such as the Boston Massacre and the Tea Party), to several on Loyalists in New York City and elsewhere, to oversized efforts to summarize the whole story.4 The last group includes Thomas Slaughter, Independence: The Tangled Roots of the American Revolution (2014) on the long-term origins; Alan Taylor, American Revolutions: A Continental History, 1750–1804 (2016) providing a global perspective; Robert G. Parkinson, The Common Cause: Creating Race and Nation in the American Revolution (2016) on the importance of racism; and Holger Hoock, Scars of Independence: America’s Violent Birth (2017) on propaganda and violence. Local scholars are filling in details about people (Revolutionary Neighbors, multiple books on General Charles Lee), places (Bergen, Monmouth, and Hunterdon counties), and battles (Trenton, Monmouth, Connecticut Farms, and Springfield).5 Recent scholarship informs the discussion of the difficult choices individuals made while living in a war zone, noting that there was no one reason why they ended up supporting (as “Patriots”) or opposing (as “Loyalists”) the Revolution, or tried to remain “neutral.” The long-standing division between scholars studying the American Revolution has been either an emphasis on imperial issues, ideological reasons (“no taxation without representation” meaning the right to self-government), or economic ones (the cost of those taxes and of imperial mercantile policies, plus class differences). Originally called imperial, whig, and progressive views, more recently they have been labeled neo-imperial, neo-whig, and neo-progressive. These have long been the standard divisions. New Jersey historians have usually followed the general patterns. Leonard Lundin’s Cockpit of the American Revolution (1940) is described by the series editor as a “Beardian” interpretation. He points to economic causes of the Revolution, begins by contrasting the wealthy clique in Perth Amboy with their opponents, and ends noting the “persistence of pre-war class antagonisms.” Neo-whig history is exemplified by Adrian Leiby, who, while he criticizes the Patriots at times, sees them as in the right and the Loyalists as awful/evil; Larry R. Gerlach, who, in Prologue to Independence (1976), emphasizes the ideological positions of the Patriots; and David Hackett Fischer, whose Washington’s Crossing (2004) is a story of heroism. Gerlach pictures New Jersey as a “reluctant rebel” that supported its “sister colonies” to “secure” the

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey • 3

“rights as Englishmen.” James Gigantino II, ed., Where the Battlefield Meets the Home Front, is part of newer social and cultural history.6 More recent literature presents a “dark” view of the Revolution, a “tragedy” with more a reason to weep than celebrate, seeing support for the war coming from racial fears of Black slaves and red Indians, and the desire for western lands and keeping slave “property.”7 Holgar Hoock sees the development of the press during the Revolution as producing the equivalent of “fake” news; for him promotion of the “common cause” was done for economic and racial protection not because of a belief in liberal ideology. Colin G. Calloway in The American Revolution in Indian Country: Crisis and Diversity in Native American Communities (1995) sees the war as a disaster for indigenous populations, no matter which side they took (and this included the Lenape/Delaware Indians in and from New Jersey).8 Andrew Jackson Shaughnessy, in The Men Who Lost America: British Leadership, the American Revolution, and the Fate of Empire (2013), argues that the British had lost the war four months before the Declaration of Independence. The best of its politicians, generals, and admirals underestimated Patriot support as well as the resources needed to defeat it, while they overestimated Loyalist numbers. He presents a devastating picture of Britain’s many difficulties. Matthew Lockwood, To Begin the World Over Again: How the American Revolution Devastated the Globe (2019), as the title indicates, goes even further in blaming the Revolution for multiple subsequent problems. In the texts of these authors the war was violent and extremely bloody, with few if any heroes. There is also a new emphasis on the complexity of the Revolution, as in the essays in Patrick Spero and Michael Zuckerman, eds., The American Revolution Reborn (2016), and the various stands that people at the time took, something that this book stresses. Robert G. Parkinson, in a 2019 review of five new books, compared their combined interpretations to a Jackson Pollock painting, messy splatters all over, an appropriate view.9 Surely the dark, complicated view reflects the period in which we live.10 This interpretation of the Revolution criticizes Patriots, who were, it is argued, at most 40 percent of the population and therefore a minority, for producing a nation for white men, while mistreating the Loyalists and all others who opposed them or even tried to sit on the sidelines. For example, Gregg L. Frazer, in God against the Revolution: The Loyalist Clergy’s Case against the American Revolution (2018), pictures the Patriots as tyrants who created illegal governments, violated the religious and political freedom of their opponents, confiscated property, spreading false (“fake”) news. The cost of the war “includes deceit, violence, perjury, blood, distress, misery, and ruin.”11 It is easy in New Jersey to find Patriots who said exactly the same about the Loyalists, British, and Hessian forces who paraded through their state during the war. For some recent authors, the war was indeed dark because violence led to retaliation, and disorder opened opportunities for those who were “banditti” and preyed on everyone else.12 In truth this was not a good time to be living in New Jersey, even after 1780 when

4 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

the war moved south to North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and other places, being nasty there as well, although for a shorter time. It is possible to look at the American Revolution in New Jersey and see all these divergent interpretations work. Some individuals took a firm stand (“adamant” Patriots as well as “irreconcilable” Loyalists) for ideological reasons, whereas others primarily had self-interest in mind. Quakers freed their slaves (although some slowly), while other owners were determined to hold on to what they saw as their property, even as they feared what escaped slaves would and did do when they joined the British. When in control, Patriots confiscated Loyalists’ estates using funds obtained from them to help finance their Revolution, and where the British held sway they occupied and condemned Patriot property. Homes and farms were burned, crops appropriated, churches desecrated and destroyed. Inflation was rampant, and to obtain money or scarce goods, some engaged in the illegal “London” trade with the “enemy.” While acknowledging the messy complexity of it all, one main conclusion is that in the end the war in New Jersey was dangerous and enormously costly in terms of property and lives, no matter what side individuals and families took.13 Neither in New Jersey, nor elsewhere, did this war end as a glorious victory won by a united people. In fact, some of the last, most bitter actions involved New Jersey figures (seen in the so-called Huddy Affair that will be noted in several contexts). It should also be remembered that the draft Peace Treaty that ended the fighting arrived while Congress met in Princeton (there to escape the unpaid soldiers converging on Philadelphia). And General George Washington wrote his Farewell Orders to the Armies of the United States while nearby at Rockingham. Residents of the state muddled through difficult times and then got to pick up the pieces and go on. With the war over they turned to arguing about other things, while living together as members of a new nation.

Why New Jersey Was Important Mark E. Lender has written that when it comes to real estate what is most important is “location,” and New Jersey’s experience in the Revolution was a consequence of “location.”14 It was caught in middle of the Revolutionary War because for most of the conflict British headquarters was in New York City, and the Patriot headquarters was in Philadelphia. The state was also between the northern and southern states (with the valley between the ranges of the Watchung Mountains providing a route between the two). Capture and keep it, and the Revolution would be cut in half. It contained areas with rich farmlands that produced food for people and animals desperately needed by both sides. The northern mountains and southern bogs contained iron ore, and the ocean to the east was a source of salt. The result was that the Continental army spent more time there than anywhere else, including three winters. The second winter at Morristown was the coldest, with the most storms, of any in the eighteenth century.

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey • 5

FIG. 2 Washington Crossing the Delaware (December 26, 1776), 1851 oil on canvas painting by Emanuel Gottlieb Leutze (1816–1868). This interpretation of the river crossing by General George Washington with soldiers and horses in the middle of a winter storm dramatizes the risky efforts that led to the Battle of Trenton, an important turning point early in the war. (Source: Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, ac.97.34. Gift of John Stewart Kennedy, 1897. Open Access for Scholarly Content.)

In addition, throughout the war, local militia forces faced repeated calls to turn out, leaving farms and families to fight.15 American privateers used small harbors along the Atlantic coast to prey on British shipping, making these places vulnerable to attack. In the Northeast, New Jersey was bounded by the Hudson River, and the west by the Delaware Bay and River; both also provided access for British naval vessels that were usually more effective than the new Continental or Pennsylvania navies. As a result of geography, and location, the war was fought longer in New Jersey than anywhere else, with more battles (including Trenton, Princeton, and Monmouth) and skirmishes (together estimated at over six hundred), resulting in greater loss of life and property than elsewhere.16 It is for good reason that New Jersey has been called the “cockpit of the revolution.” Lord Cornwallis acknowledged the significance of what happened in New Jersey when speaking after the surrender at Yorktown. He congratulated George Washington and stated that the general would “gather” his “brightest laurels rather from the banks of the Delaware than from those of the Chesapeake.”17

How New Jersey Was Different European settlement of the region that became New Jersey began in the seventeenth century when it was first part of New Sweden, then New Netherlands, and finally the lands granted to the Duke of York by his brother Charles II, King

6 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

of England. The duke granted a portion of his lands to John Lord Berkeley and Sir George Carteret, two English noblemen. By 1674 they had divided it into West Jersey and East Jersey, and then title passed on to other proprietors. Even though reunited into the single royal colony of New Jersey in 1702, differences between the two sections persisted through the American Revolution and contributed to the complex ways residents divided. More Quakers settled in the west, more Dutch in the east; there was one legislature but two treasurers and two capitols (Burlington and Perth Amboy) with meetings alternating between them. In some ways the war exacerbated the differences—although almost all sections were affected at some point, more of it was fought in the east, which as a result suffered more destruction and indebtedness. Limited in terms of territory, with a population of 130,000, New Jersey was among the smallest of the original thirteen colonies in size and population. It was overwhelmingly agricultural with few urban settlements and none of them very big: Elizabethtown was the largest, with an estimated 350 houses (or 1,200 people); Newark had 140 scattered in a “village”; Trenton, Perth Amboy, Burlington, and New Brunswick had about a hundred houses each; Princeton had 75; and Morristown 50, with Bordentown and Salem also small. There was no place comparable to Philadelphia (40,000 people), New York (25,000), Boston (16,000), Charleston (12,000), or Newport (11,000) (where large mobs could assemble), nor even to smaller colonial cities with populations ranging from 8,000 to about 3,000 residents.18 There was also no frontier, West Jersey having been settled in part by those moving across from Pennsylvania, and East Jersey initially by New Englanders moving south. Colonists spread out along the fertile river valleys, and population was sparse in the southern “pine barrens.” In addition, in West Jersey commercial and family ties tended to be with Philadelphia, while East Jersey’s were with New York City. Until 1776 the colony had no newspaper of its own and was dependent on those delivered from its neighbors for information and advertising.

Nature of New Jersey Society and Economy before the War Partially a reflection of its history and diverse population, new Jersey’s politics before the Revolution were characterized by factions rather than the nascent parties developing in neighboring New York and Pennsylvania.19 The governor and members of the council were royal appointees, while members of the assembly were elected by property holders possessed of 100 acres of land or personal estate worth at least £50 sterling, and needed at least 1,000 acres to run for office.20 The West Jersey Council of Proprietors and the East Jersey Board of Proprietors retained ownership of lands that had not been patented, a continuation from the seventeenth century. The two groups had considerable political power, but their overlapping land claims and titles produced much confusion and in the 1740s

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey • 7

and 1750s conflict between both the two proprietary groups and between them and the settlers. Despite the controversies New Jersey was described by Royal Governor Jonathan Belcher as “the best country I have seen for men of middling fortunes and people who have to live by the sweat of their brows.” Its farmers produced a wide range of produce from wheat, corn, rye, and other grains to fruits (peaches and apples, and from them cider), a wide variety of vegetables, as well as hay for cattle and horses. They also raised cattle for beef, pigs for pork, cows for milk and cheese, sheep for meat and wool, and a variety of poultry for eggs and to roast. Cape May County did not have a large human population, but there were over 30,000 cattle, enough to attract the attention of those who had to feed an army. The rivers and ocean supplied whales, fish, clams, and more, the forests lumber for boats and wagons, the swamps cedar shingles for houses and barrels. Along with Pennsylvania and New York this was a bread colony, producing a surplus that farmers sold to those in urban areas, and merchants shipped to the Caribbean and elsewhere. In return they imported cloth, and increasingly in the eighteenth century consumer products, including tea and sugar, and the cups, plates, and pots needed to fashionably serve them. By the mid-eighteenth century New Jersey was also producing iron from ore found in the northern mountains and southern bogs. Early industrialists in Trenton and Morristown were producing steel, and then cannon, guns, gun powder, and more needed by the military. Some of this was in substantial amounts.21

Diversity (Religious, Ethnic, and Racial) Religious differences were often a factor (in very different ways) for the Dutch Reformed, Scotch Presbyterians, Baptists, Quakers, Swedish and German Lutherans, French Huguenots, English Congregationalists, Moravians, and Anglicans who lived in a colony of notable diversity. Unlike the New England or southern colonies, New Jersey never had an established church. Most towns, even relatively small hamlets, had more than one church. There was also ethnic and racial diversity. The colony included those of British, Scotch, Scotch Irish, French, German, Dutch, African, and Native American ancestry. The term “Dutch” incorporated those whose ancestors were “Holland Dutch” but also “French or Scotch or Walloon or German or English or Polish” from a variety of areas in Europe, reflecting the mix of those who migrated from multicultural early Manhattan as well as later immigrants.22 Slaves were brought to the region in the seventeenth century, and by the 1770s were legally held throughout New Jersey, although in much higher numbers in the eastern than the western section (by 75 to 25 percent). Overall Blacks were close to 8 percent of the population. The number who were slaves slowly decreased from 80 percent in 1790 until by 1860 the census noted just eighteen slaves out

8 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

of 25,336 persons. In the colonial period they were more commonly held by Dutch, Anglican, and Presbyterian colonists, while Quakers moved toward abolition and after 1776 pressured members to free their slaves (and when that failed they read them out of the meetings).23 It has been estimated that about 12,000 Native Americans, the Lenape/Delaware, lived in the region when it was first settled by Europeans. As elsewhere the population was decimated by both disease and war. In 1758, during the French and Indian War, a group settled on the Brotherton Reservation, but by the Revolution two hundred or fewer were left there. Some had moved north to New York or Massachusetts, or west to the Ohio Valley, others in south Jersey merged into the general population. During the Revolution, the western Delaware at first tried to stay neutral, but then split as some joined with the British, while others sided with the Patriots. Thus, this also became a civil war for them. The United States signed a treaty in 1778 with the chiefs who sided with the Patriots, but White Eyes, the strongest supporter, was murdered, promised supplies were not delivered, and villages of friendly natives were attacked. In the end, the results were disastrous for the Delaware, whichever side they took, as well as for members of other Indian nations.24 While New Jersey did not have a Mohawk Valley or Pittsburgh within its own boundaries, its soldiers in the Continental army participated in the peace negotiations, and then the war against the Indians in the west. Joseph Bloomfield (1755–1823) served in the Third New Jersey during negotiations with the six nations in western New York in 1776. The young officer was fascinated by those he called “Savages,” even as he described their civilization—towns, customs, wampum, ball games, and dances. He noted the differences in languages and religions (Presbyterian, Anglican, Catholic, and “Atheistical”). The singing of psalms by the Christian Oneidas, in their own language, struck him with astonishment and awe. The efforts at peace that he observed did not hold, and in 1779 other soldiers from New Jersey marched with General John Sullivan through the Mohawk valley, bringing vast destruction to native villages.25

Path to War The French and Indian war changed the British Empire by enlarging the territory it held and greatly increasing the debt it owed. To cope with the first, it moved to change and tighten how the colonies were administered, and to deal with the second it tried to raise funds by taxing the colonists. Both efforts provoked a reaction that in the end destroyed this “first” empire and resulted in independence of thirteen of its thirty-three original colonies (a number in the Caribbean). What follows is a brief description of how New Jersey fit into this process.

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey • 9

Not as Conservative as Some Have Thought: Before and during the War New Jersey has been seen as a conservative colony, slow to join the Revolution, somehow different, although similar to the other mid-Atlantic ones (New York and Pennsylvania). Unlike Massachusetts and Virginia, it was not in the forefront of the early protest movement against British measures, nor like Rhode Island (destroying the Gaspee, a Royal ship) or New York City (tearing down a statue of King George III and turning it into bullets) the scene of radical actions. However, there were issues that rankled—the Mutiny/Quartering Acts requiring tax money to supply troops posted in the colony, currency legislation, then the Stamp Act, Townsend Acts, Tea Act, and the Intolerable/Coercive Acts. Enforcement of the Navigation Acts also became problematic. As noted, New Jersey was overwhelmingly rural, with no large cities. During the French and Indian War, the colony had built five barracks (in Trenton, Burlington, New Brunswick, Perth Amboy, and Elizabethtown) to house troops. Unlike Massachusetts, where after 1768 British troops were crowded into Boston, they were therefore spread throughout the colony, a less volatile situation. In fact, after the Boston Massacre the British units involved in that fracas were sent to New Jersey without much trouble. But the Mutiny Act of 1765 had made the colonies where troops were quartered responsible for providing supplies. While initially New Jersey welcomed the troops (good for business), with time the legislature objected that required provisions was an imposed tax. It refused at one point to pay, claiming the colony was too “poor,” but members also objected to hosting troops in peacetime. The problem abated in 1771 when the troops were moved elsewhere.26 The Currency Act of 1764 was important because more than any other colony, New Jersey had financed participation in the French and Indian War through the use of paper money. As a result, it ended up with the largest debt of any of them. The paper money was loaned out to farmers and others, then the interest on the loans helped finance the government, while the money in circulation helped an economy where hard coin was always in short supply. This system worked as long as it was possible to retire money that came in as payment for taxes, and then to issue new notes as loans that kept the economy going. However, the law’s prohibition of legal tender paper money made this problematic. On this issue Governor William Franklin sided with the colonists and urged authorities to change British policies, but by the time they did so in 1775, it was too late to matter.27 The Stamp Act of 1765. This provoked an unprecedented reaction in the American colonies, where it was seen as an unconstitutional effort by Parliament to directly tax by requiring “stamps” on legal documents, newspapers, diplomas, playing cards, liquor licenses, and more, having an impact on many. Protests were

10 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

held through the colonies, those in Boston (where a mob trashed the homes of Stamp Collector Andrew Oliver and Lieutenant-Governor Thomas Hutchinson) and elsewhere turning violent, while the men appointed to distribute the stamps were forced to resign. For the first time the American colonists called for a meeting of delegates, to be held in New York City in October. Nine colonies sent representatives, but several did not because action was blocked by their royal governors. The Stamp Act Congress passed a series of resolutions objecting to the act on constitutional grounds and sent a petition to England urging its repeal. There was widespread refusal to use the stamps; ports opened, and ships sailed without the required stamped papers, even courts began to operate as well, defying the law. In addition, the colonists boycotted British goods. In New Jersey William Coxe, the man appointed to distribute the stamps, resigned September 2, 1765, after being warned he would be unable to get insurance. Because the legislature was not in session, New Jersey did not initially act. But then, pushed by public pressure, Robert Ogden, speaker of the assembly, called together a rump group, which selected three to attend (himself, Hendrick Fisher, and Joseph Borden Jr.). Afterward, Ogden refused to sign the resolutions, and as a result was hanged in effigy in New Brunswick and other places. Lawyers in the colony resolved not to use the stamps or stamped paper, halting court proceedings. When it met at the end of November, the assembly passed its own strongly worded resolutions, modeled on those of the Congress, opposing the measure, including the following: “That his Majesty’s liege Subjects in this colony, are entitled to all the inherent Rights and Liberties of his natural born Subjects, within the Kingdom of Great-Britain. That it is an inseparably essential to the Freedom of a People, and the undoubted Right of Englishmen, that no Taxes be imposed on them, but with their own Consent, given personally or by their Representatives. That the People of this Colony are not, and from their remote Situation cannot be represented in the Parliament of Great-Britain.”28 Nearly a hundred years earlier some of their ancestors had made the same argument when opposing the efforts of the Duke of York, proprietor of New York, to tax them.29 Now, in 1765, widespread opposition made the new law unenforceable. The British government repealed it but passed the Declaratory Act of 1766, in which it insisted that it had the right to legislate for the colonies “on all matters whatsoever,” indicating that the basic issues had not been resolved. Meanwhile the repeal was celebrated in a number of places, including in Burlington, and in Woodbridge where there was a “feast” and bonfire at the “Liberty Oak.” There were now Sons of Liberty groups in the state, and committees of correspondence.30 Townshend Acts of 1767. Assuming, incorrectly, that the colonists objected to internal taxes only, Parliament passed the Townsend Acts in 1767, thinking that they would be seen differently than the Stamp Act given the resemblance to earlier trade regulations. The law placed taxes on glass, paper, paint, and tea. The

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey • 11

colonial reaction included objections to all measures designed to raise a revenue, voiced in pamphlets, newspaper articles, and legislative resolutions. Massachusetts sent a circular letter to other colonies asking for a coordinated response, but then the British government told colonial governors to dissolve assemblies that joined and sent troops to Boston. Once again, the colonists turned to nonimportation. Although boycotts were imposed, they slowly petered out; nonetheless, they led British merchants to push for repeal. In 1770 Parliament removed all the taxes except the one on tea, left as a reminder of British sovereignty. The New Jersey assembly responded to the Townshend Acts by sending a petition to the king through the colony’s agent in London, bypassing both its governor and Parliament. Declaring themselves “faithful and afflicted Subjects,” they asked the “Most Gracious Sovereign” to provide them with “Relief.” While striking a humble pose and abjectly appealing to the king they also clearly stated “that Freemen cannot be legally taxed but by themselves, or by their Representatives; and that they are represented in Parliament they not only cannot allow, but are convinced, that from their local Circumstances they never can be.” As the boycotts ended in other places, New Jerseyans were ironically more determined to continue them. A mass meeting held in Elizabethtown resolved that the “common cause” should be “firmly adhered to, until the said Acts of Parliament be totally repealed.” To avoid imported goods, the 1770 College of New Jersey graduates all dressed in “American Manufactures” for commencement.31 The Tea Act of 1773. In 1773 Parliament passed the Tea Act, the main purpose of which was to aid the financially troubled East India Tea Company. It allowed tea to be shipped directly to the colonies, making it cheaper than smuggled tea. The catch was that distribution was given to a few merchants (in Boston the family of Governor Thomas Hutchinson), and that the still existing Townshend tax was to be paid. This was seen by Samuel Adams and others as a deliberate effort to trick Americans into paying parliamentary taxes. It led to the infamous “tea party” in Boston, and then to Parliament’s passage of the Coercive/ Intolerable Acts in reaction to the destruction of the 342 chests of tea. New Jersey residents protested the newest measure as well. There were tea parties in Greenwich in south Jersey where a group of twenty-three local men burned tea from The Greyhound, a ship on its way to Philadelphia that had stopped there, and at the College of New Jersey where students burned the institution’s supply. In Greenwich many locals knew who had destroyed the tea but did not cooperate. The local sheriff (at least one of his brothers was involved), selected the grand jury and appointed a third brother as foreman. None were indicted. Governor Franklin unsuccessfully pushed for a trial and convictions. Sixteen of the tea burners later served in the Patriot military, and one, Richard Howell, afterward became a governor of the state. There is also the story (or legend) of Elias Boudinot’s daughter Susan, who, when visiting the Proprietary

12 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

House (the Perth Amboy home of Governor William Franklin), is supposed to have quietly tossed her tea out an open window in the parlor rather than drink the politically condemned brew.32 The Coercive Acts of 1774. In 1774, responding to the actions in Boston, Parliament passed a series of laws dubbed by the colonists as the Coercive or Intolerable Acts: the Boston Port Act, the Massachusetts Government Act, the Administration of Justice Act, the Quartering Act, and the Quebec Act. These closed the port of Boston until the tea was paid for, altered the 1691 charter of Massachusetts making members of the council appointive, made possible trials in England rather than in the colonies, and authorized housing troops in public buildings. The Quebec Act expanded the boundaries of that province into what would later become the Northwest Territories, created a government with no representative assembly and limited use of juries, and allowed the Catholic Church to continue as it had under French control. While most of these laws applied specifically to Massachusetts and Quebec, colonists in all thirteen colonies saw them as examples of what the British government might do to them, creating a “common cause.” To coordinate a response, they selected delegates to the First Continental Congress, which met in Philadelphia in September 1774. In addition to sending resolutions to England objecting to these measures, the Congress also agreed on nonimportation, a Continental Association to enforce it, and to meet again the following May. The war started on April 19, 1775, in Massachusetts, and then the Second Continental Congress met even as news of Lexington and Concord spread. Opposition to British measures after September 1774 resulted in the creation of a second layer of government within most colonies and as well as in the continuation of the Continental Congress. In New Jersey, the old royal government persisted, but its powers (to tax and wage war) were steadily assumed by “Provincial Congresses,” a new government, the first elected in May 1775. Troops and supplies were sent to join the army forming around Boston. In addition, local committees and associations enforced nonimportation, sometimes aggressively. In February 1775 an Elizabethtown mob, angry at Staten Islanders who violated nonimportation, beat James Johnson, then “dragged him and his small boat to the Liberty pole and gallows located in front of the town’s courthouse.” He was rescued by several Patriot leaders who disbursed the crowd and condemned the violence.33 In early January 1776, Thomas Paine, a recent immigrant from England, wrote Common Sense, a forty-nine-page pamphlet that quickly became a best seller. It argued in plain language that it was time for independence, while also ridiculing the very idea of a hereditary monarchy derived from William the Conqueror, “A French bastard landing with an armed Banditti and establishing himself king of England against the consent of the natives, is in plain terms a very paltry rascally original.” Britain had been waging war, hardly making it a good mother:

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey • 13

“Even brutes do not devour their young, nor savages make war upon their families.” He included a rousing call to “receive the fugitive [freedom], and prepare in time an asylum for mankind.”34 Paine helped shift the discussion from possible reconciliation to permanent separation. In New Jersey, the Reverend John Witherspoon of Princeton, and the Reverend Jacob Green of Hanover, both Presbyterians, were among the earliest advocates of independence. Green’s Observations on the Reconciliation of Great Britain and the Colonies . . . By a Friend of American Liberty (April 1776) more softly said much that Paine had written. On May 15, 1776, the Second Continental Congress urged the colonies that had not yet done so to formally create new governments. On June 15, New Jersey’s Third Provincial Congress arrested royal governor William Franklin as an “enemy to the liberties of this country.” On June 22 it appointed new delegates to the Congress (Richard Stockton, Abraham Clark, John Hart, Francis Hopkinson, and the Reverend John Witherspoon) and “empower[ed]” them to “join” “in declaring the United Colonies independent of Great Britain.” On June 24 it appointed a committee headed by the Reverend Jacob Green to write a constitution, which was adopted on July 2, 1776.35 Fourteen months after the war started in Massachusetts, New Jersey formally joined the move for independence. It did so as the British arrived at its front door—in massive force in New York harbor, 450 ships with 32,000 soldiers and sailors. It was the largest attack force mounted before World War II.

Mob Actions/Radicalism As this unfolded, despite the lack of large towns, New Jersey was not totally devoid of “mob” action. New Brunswick residents disliked James Rivington, the notorious Loyalist New York newspaper editor. They boycotted his newspaper (at a time when they had none of their own), and then on April 13, 1775, hanged him in effigy “describing him as a ‘notious exotick plant, incapable either of cultivation or improvement in this soil of freedom.’” The same day an unknown wag published a broadside containing a long poem titled The Last Words, Dying Speech, and Confession of J—s R—-g—, P—t—r, who Was Executed at New Brunswick . . . Supposed to Be Written by Himself the Night Preceding the Day of His Execution. My crimes, at length will fill each future page My name will be the curse of every age, . . . That tree on which my body hang’d will be, Which they once call’d by name of Liberty, A growing monument will there remain, Of my past, present, and my future shame . . . Old Satan has me now, for ever more.

In response, on April 20 Rivington published a drawing in his New-York Gazetteer, with his comments on the people of the town: “The printer has been

14 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

FIG. 3 “Rivington Hanged in Effigy,” woodcut illustration from New York Gazetteer of April 20, 1775. The image shows James Rivington, the newspaper’s editor, hanged in effigy in New Brunswick, New Jersey, on April 13, 1775. Before and during the war Rivington was seen as an obdurate Loyalist. The exchanges between him and local Patriots illustrate the ways in which differences could be both bitter and sarcastic, as well as showing local radicalism. (Source: New-York Historical Society, #52106.)

informed that a number of Bacchanalians, at Brunswick, flushed with . . . New England Rum, have lately sacrificed him to the Idol of Licentiousness.” Another effigy, this one of local Loyalist Bernardus LaGrange, was carted through the town. In July 1776 the Anglican minister, the Reverend Abraham Beach, was threatened when he attempted to start services with the usual prayer for the health of the king. A man was tarred and feathered across the river in Piscataway, while newly enlisted men on their way from south Jersey to

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey • 15

Elizabethtown coated a Tory who “abused” them and “made him give three hearty cheers for Congress.” About six weeks later marching through the Hudson Valley, some in the group, lacking proper materials, “daubed” a local Loyalist “with clay, mud & leaves & then ducked him making him Acknowledge the supremacy of the Congress &c. &c.”36 Future research will most likely show other protests in various parts of the colony, or by its soldiers elsewhere. Customs collections were another flash point, especially when locals felt the laws were applied unfairly. It led to conflict in places like Boston, Newport, and elsewhere, and also in south Jersey, where the collector, John Hatton, was intensely disliked, thought to prosecute local smugglers, but not those from Philadelphia because he accepted bribes from them. He was investigated several times because of complaints to royal authorities. In 1770 Cape May local officials arrested this representative of the king. He was indicted “for willful and corrupt perjury,” although actually for trying to enforce the Navigation Acts. Later he would be the only Cape May County resident to be condemned as a Loyalist and have his property confiscated.37 William Franklin, who had arrived in 1763 as the new royal governor, had been raised by his father in Philadelphia, and lived in London for a time. Schooled in both colonial and imperial politics, he remained popular—at least until matters unraveled after 1774. With a tendency to be arrogant and a stubborn streak, he tried to keep the colony within the British empire and came so close that the Continental Congress twice sent delegates urging the New Jersey legislature not to break ranks. Franklin held on longer than any other royal governor, but in the end he lost control and failed. Local militia surrounded his house briefly in January, then again in June 1776 when they arrested him. Then he was sent to Connecticut. New Jersey Patriots would at times struggle in the years that followed, but they had accomplished what became a regime change. Once he was removed, the royal government in New Jersey ended. Constitution of 1776. The constitution adopted on July 2 began with what was the state’s own declaration of independence, based on the Enlightenment concept of government being created by a compact. It starts, “Whereas all the constitutional Authority, ever possessed by the Kings of Great Britain over these Colonies . . . was, by Compact, derived from the People, and held of them for the common Interest of the whole Society, Allegiances and Protection are, in the Nature of Things, reciprocal Ties.” The king broke the compact and as a result, “all civil Authority under him is necessarily at an End.” The government had been dissolved, and a new one was “absolutely necessary” to “preserve order,” “unite the people,” and “provide defence,” therefore they now formed a government. New Jersey was one of only four colonies that did this before July 4, 1776 (the others were Virginia, New Hampshire, and South Carolina).38 The fairly brief document outlined the government providing for a governor, a two-house legislature, and continuation of the existing court system. Property

16 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

qualifications continued for holding office and voting. Required to sit in the upper house was £1,000 and the lower one £500 (proclamation money) in real and personal property, but the requirement for voting was £50 proclamation clear estate (repeating a change made by the Second Provincial Congress in February 1776). The valuations were in local paper money, which with war-time inflation was easier to meet. Also, it was all types of property, not just land, an important distinction. Although the basic form of government created by the Constitution looks like a continuation of the colonial government, there were a number of significant changes. The governor was to be selected by both houses of the legislature for a one-year term, not appointed by the king at “his pleasure.” The upper house was elected, also not royally appointed. In addition, a number of minor positions were also elected, including sheriffs and coroners. The governor had no veto and limited powers. The Constitution also included three provisions that were not supposed to ever be changed (requiring all future legislators to sign an oath promising just that): annual elections, religious freedom (religious toleration and no established church), and jury trials. Previously, there had been no set times for regular elections, while recent disagreements had threatened religious freedom as well as colonial jury trials. Finally, most radical of all it gave the franchise to “all Inhabitants of this Colony of full Age” not qualifying that with “white” or “male.” There is a debate whether this was deliberately included in the constitution or was a result of the haste with which it was written. The record does show, with recently found additional examples, that at least from 1790 through a legal change in 1807 some Blacks and women with property voted in New Jersey. This was radically different than in other places.39 The authors seemed unsure what to call this document, using “charter” rather than “constitution.” They also referred to New Jersey as a “colony.” That changed when on July 18 the Provincial Congress resolved that it should henceforth be called a “state.” The New Jersey constitution ended with the statement that the intent was “that if a Reconciliation between Great Britain and these Colonies should take Place, and the latter be again taken under the Protection and Government of the Crown of Great Britain, this Charter shall be null and void, otherwise to remain firm and inviolable.” This was adopted after a divided vote in the Provincial Congress, taken twice. It reflected the reservations of Quakers, and the fact that nearly half the members had left to protect their families. It was in effect abrogated by the oath of office required of those elected in August to the first state government, which absolutely denied allegiance to the king or government of Great Britain. At that time, the members of both houses selected William Livingston as governor. On August 11 the assembly issued a forceful appeal for militiamen to turn out: On you, our friends and brethren, it depends this day to determine whether you, your wives, your children and millions of your descendants yet unborn

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey • 17

shall wear the galling, the ignominious yoke of slavery; or nobly inherit the generous inestimable blessings of freedom. . . . You cannot be so amazingly degenerate as to lick the hand that is raised to shed your blood!—Nature and nature’s God have made you free!—Liberty is the birthright of Americans! the gift of heaven! and the instant that it is forced from you, you take leave of everything valuable on Earth!40

Today what strikes us is the use of the word “slavery,” a common trope in the dialogue of the Revolution. Rather than irony Patriots saw it as a way to convey forcefully the threat presented by British actions. There was general agreement in the American colonies, including New Jersey, that British efforts to tax after 1765 were unprecedented and unconstitutional. Nonimportation, and pressure to conform, to support the “common cause,” at times were divisive. But it was the Declaration of Independence that provided the crucial dividing line. This was the point at which many took firm sides. Loyalist Joseph Cogil of Gloucester County said that “he was as Good a Whig as Ever Sat on a pot till Independency Was Declared.” The opposite tack was taken by Joseph Barton, from Newton, Sussex County, who wrote a cousin, “For my part, I have been at a great stand: I could hardly own the King and fight against him at the same time; but now these matters are cleared up. Heart and hand shall move together.” Now “declared a free state” he and others were “ready to spend their lives and fortunes in defence of our country.” While he served on the committee that wrote the 1776 Constitution John Dickinson Sergeant wrote a letter to John Adams, then in Philadelphia, excitedly reporting that New Jersey was about to create a “republic.” As Cogil, Sergeant, and others realized the choice then was between a monarchy and a republic. To the Patriots it was a choice between slavery and freedom, to conservatives between order and chaos. For lawyers it was between the “triumph of constitutional rights or the betrayal of constitutional principles.”41

Reasons for the Sides Taken Economic issues. In general, “class” or economic status is not an easy explanation for the sides that were taken in the Revolution. Wealthy landowners and poor farmers were among those in all groups. Even the leadership of East Jersey Proprietors, large landowners, can be divided into the “thirds” John Adams long ago supposedly mentioned after the war. Among the Patriots were William Alexander/ Lord Stirling (one of George Washington’s generals) and John Stevens. Loyalists included Cortlandt Skinner and Oliver DeLancey (both prominent military leaders on the other side), while Walter Rutherford and James Parker moved to northwestern properties, where they tried to stay neutral.42 Ironically, as Carl E. Prince pointed out in discussing William Livingston, the wealthy had the most at stake, whichever side they took: “if the war had been lost and Livingston escaped with his life, he would have forfeited both his property and his place in society.”43

18 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

As an overwhelmingly agricultural society, New Jersey, with but a few small ports, was not as directly affected by British regulations and proposed taxes as were some other colonies. There were exceptions though. It was more affected by the Currency Act because of its extensive use of paper money. Cape May fishermen disliked regulations that required them to have legal documents, port clearance forms, for local trading. Some iron miners and manufacturers disliked the regulations limiting production of iron products and where they could be sold. Some merchants and farmers having financial difficulties blamed England.44 Ideology. As already noted, there was a general agreement about constitutional issues. Most in New Jersey saw British efforts to tax them as violations of their rights as Englishmen, especially “no taxation without representation,” until the move toward independence. Adherence to the “Whig” philosophy can be traced back to the seventeenth century. Even then settlers saw themselves as Englishmen entitled to the rights of Englishmen. This view appears in statements from Stamp Act resolutions through the Declaration of Independence. After 1765 colonists saw first Parliament, then king and Parliament, violating the British constitution and their rights. Lawyers on both sides were bothered by constitutional issues. However, for most in Britain, and Loyalists in the colonies, separating authority over regulation of trade from that over taxation (with Parliament responsible for the first and the colonial legislatures for the second) divided sovereignty. That was simply not possible (although it is today done between the federal and state governments).45 Throughout the war Patriots repeatedly stated that they were fighting for liberty. In February 1776 as he took up his commission in the Continental army and marched off with his men, Joseph Bloomfield, then a twenty-two-year-old lawyer, wrote the following in his journal: I have lost at least at the rate of £250 a Year, and this purely from Patriotic Principles. I trust of endeavoring to contribute my mite towards serving my Country, in defending her from the Invasions of Tyranny & Oppression. Actuated by this Noble Inducement, I hope I shall ever behave in such a Manner as to be worthy of the Post I fill, of the Confidence my County has reposed in me & my Company by Inlisting under my Command. God Grant that the United efforts of the Colonies may be crowned with success & that they may be made a free great and happy People.46

Family. Family was an important indication of what side might be taken in the Revolution, but it also does not provide a simple consistent measure. Some families divided, whereas others did not. Who the children married could be important, but this was a relatively small population with complex family networks, sometimes involving multiple intermarriages and connections. East Jersey ties tended to be with New York–based families (or some had homes and

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey • 19

businesses in both places), whereas West Jersey ties were most likely with Pennsylvania ones. There are examples of families that were predominantly Patriot (Stocktons), or Loyalist (Skinners), or divided (Ogdens). The most famous division was surely between Benjamin Franklin and his son William Franklin. They had long worked together in Pennsylvania and London but were bitterly divided after the Coercive/Intolerable Acts of 1774. That noted, many New Jersey families had someone on the other side. In some cases, they kept in touch and even visited, while the war was waged around them. This was true for Governor William Livingston’s family, although he tried to discourage such activities. Others, including the Franklins (but only after Benjamin’s death) reconciled after the war. There were also those who took different sides, including cousins with the same names, who remained estranged during and after the war (the two Garrett Leydeckers). Some stayed, others left. Sometimes who the children married helps explain the side taken and what happened afterward—particularly if they were British military officers. Examples are the families of Bernardus Lagrange and of Cortland Skinner. Husbands and wives usually took the same side in this war, but there are examples where they did not. Patriot Captain William Howard, whose wife was a vocal Loyalist, had a sign painted over their fireplace that stated, “No Tory talk here.” The results of such disagreements were inconsistent and sometimes surprising. Under the concept of “coverture” the political opinions of spouses were assumed to be the same, and her property was legally his and subject to confiscation. A Patriot wife, whose Loyalist husband left, faced difficulties. But so too did a Loyalist wife who remained behind to protect the family’s property. In a few cases this worked because he was then considered an alien and unable to own land, while she was not an alien, and after his death was entitled to a dowager’s share. This was further complicated because attitudes and the law changed in the aftermath of the Revolution.47 Religion. Particularly in New Jersey because of its diversity, religion was a factor in the allegiances people took, as was the impact of the Great Awakening. Some historians have dismissed or downgraded the importance of the Great Awakening (even questioned its existence) and its relationship to the American Revolution.48 But it did have consequences in this colony, where it led to the founding of three out of the nine colonial colleges, each by the evangelical factions within a denomination. The Presbyterians led the effort to establish the College of New Jersey in 1746, a Baptist Academy started in Hopewell moved and became the College of Rhode Island in 1764, and the Dutch Reform Coetus faction was behind the creation of Queens College in 1766. The founders, faculty, and students of these institutions were later most often supporters of the Revolution. The Dutch divided, especially in Bergen County, with the conservatives who had opposed the evangelicalism of the Great Awakening usually being Loyalists.

20 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

FIG. 4 First Presbyterian Church, Tennent, Monmouth County, New Jersey, also known as the Old Tennent Church. The congregation dates to 1692. The building was constructed in 1751–1753 and is named for brothers John Tennent and William Tennent Jr. The Tennent family were leaders of the Great Awakening in New Jersey. Presbyterians were most often supporters of the Revolution. During the Battle of Monmouth, this church served as a hospital for the wounded. (Source: Historic American Building Survey, R. Merritt Lacy, photographer April 1, 1936. Exterior—South West Elevation. HABS NJ, 13-TENT, 1–7. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division, Washington, D.C.)

Those in the Raritan valley were more likely to be Patriots. They had supported the Awakening, and the founding of Queens College to train and ordain ministers in New Jersey rather than Holland, and were more willing to hold services in English. The Presbyterians were overwhelmingly Patriots, as usually were the Baptists. In contrast the Quakers tried to be neutral; a few were Loyalists who left after the war, yet a larger number were read out of meetings (excommunicated) because of their support for the Revolution. They formed the short-lived community of nonpacifist Free Quakers. Anglicans, particularly the ministers, were Loyalists, but the congregation members could be more complicated in their stands, ending up on different sides. The College of New Jersey, founded in 1746 by Presbyterians, admitted students of other faiths, but the Reverend John Witherspoon, its president from 1768 to 1794, was born in Scotland, where he was influenced by the Enlightenment and evangelicalism. He was an early advocate of independence, then the only minister to sign the Declaration of Independence. A number of students gave orations on “liberty” at commencement talks preceding the war. In 1771

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey • 21

Hugh Henry Brackenridge and Philip Freneau presented their long poem, “The Rising Glory of America.” The college had the highest percentage of Patriots of any of the colonial institutions. Of the 673 men who graduated between 1748 and 1783 only thirteen were loyalists, fifty-two served in the Patriot military, and more served in local, state, and national rebel governments. Witherspoon sent the students home as the British approached in December 1776. Although classes later resumed there were no commencement ceremonies in 1776, 1777, or 1778. Witherspoon himself spent much time during the war serving in the Continental Congress, while others kept the institution going.49 As noted, the evangelical faction of the Dutch Reformed Church, the Coetus, was behind the establishment of Queens College, which obtained a charter in 1766. Originally including a grammar school as well as a college, the institution was very small, first getting organized in 1771 with few students, then by 1774 it had about twenty. That was also the year of the first commencement, when a single graduate, plus local townspeople, listened to an address given by the Reverend Jacob Rutsen Hardenberg. This ardent Patriot told the audience, “O! may America never want [for] Sons of consumate Wisdom, intrep’d Resolution and true Piety to defend her civil and Religious liberties, and promote the public weal of the present and rising Generation!” During the Revolution, the college suspended classes several times, while most of its leaders (Hardenberg, Frederick Frelinghuysen, and tutor John Taylor) served in the government and the military. Taylor (1751–1801) was a 1770 College of New Jersey graduate who was a colonel in the militia. The students were also militiamen. When the British were in New Brunswick, both faculty and students moved to North Branch, then Somerset Court House, before moving back to New Brunswick. There were no graduates in 1784, 1785, or 1786. Then the college grew very slowly, disbanding more than once, to emerge and really begin to grow only in the 1820s.50 With one exception all the Anglican ministers who served in New Jersey were ordained in England, at which point they took an oath of loyalty to the monarch, who was the head of the church. They were all supported at least in part by the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. Led by the Reverend Thomas Bradbury Chandler of Elizabethtown, and Reverend Jonathan Odell of Salem, they were strong advocates for the creation of an American bishop in the runup to the war. When independence became an issue all but one of the eleven Anglican ministers in the colony were Loyalists. Most left either for New York City or for London at some point; later at least five went on to Canada. Exceptions were the Reverend Abraham Beach, who alone tried to minister to members of his faith during the war, and Reverend William Ayres, who stayed but was inactive, pleading “insanity” (but was somehow cured when the war ended). Another, Urzal Ogden in northern Sussex County, initially left, but then returned. Members of Anglican congregations were more complex in the stands they took, and while many were Loyalists, they also included Patriots as well as

22 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

those who tried to remain neutral. Still, as will be noted later, many of the leading Loyalists in New Jersey were Anglicans.51 The fight over possible creation of an American bishop was also important, although support for the idea was limited to New Jersey, New York, and New England. In the southern colonies, where Anglicanism was the established church and locals retained control, the proposal was dismissed. While not a cause by itself of the Revolution it contributed to concerns about British power; bishops were seen as a threat to toleration, and questions about how they would be supported were a tax issue. There were fears that it would lead to conformity, end toleration, institute control over marriages, and more. Looking back at the Revolution in 1818, John Adams wrote that the bishop controversy contributed to a “universal alarm against the authority of Parliament” because “if Parliament could tax us, they could establish the Church of England with all its creeds, articles, taxes, ceremonies, and tithes, and prohibit all other churches, as conventicles and schism shops.”52 Evangelical religion also predisposed some to see British politics and society as corrupt, a view taken, for example, by such men as William Paterson and the ministers Jonathan Witherspoon and Jacob Green. A 1763 graduate of the College of New Jersey, and in 1775 a young lawyer, Paterson gave an “Address on the Rise and Decline of Nations,” to the Cliosophic Society in Princeton. He used history, philosophy, theology, and Enlightenment ideas to expound on the threat posed by moral decay. His audience knew he was referring to the king and British government. A little over a year later, on May 17, 1776, Witherspoon gave a fast day sermon (traditionally a time for parishioners to forego food and reflect on a crisis), also in Princeton, later published as The Dominion of Providence over the Passions of Men, in which he stated, “The best friend to American liberty” is the person “who is most sincere and active in promoting true and undefiled religion, and who sets himself with the greatest firmness to bear down [on] profanity and immorality of every kind.”53 Some who traveled to England saw extravagance in large houses, fancy dress, big parties with gambling and drinking, and a lack of religious piety. Before and during the Revolution they called on Americans to stop importing fancy goods and clothing and to forgo gambling, horse racing, and attending plays and other forms of entertainment. For these Patriots, there was a desire to separate from Britain and reform their own society at the same time. Of course, some New Jersey residents were descended from New England Puritans. Location and Time. Because armies repeatedly marched across New Jersey during the war, sometimes the side taken depended on immediate location—literally who was at the front door—or on time, the status of the war at that point (reflecting the ebb and flow of wins and losses), or the constant presence of fighting. The worst places were Monmouth and Bergen Counties, but at times the war was nasty elsewhere as well. Those in Cape May County were exposed to attack

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey • 23

from the water, but armies did not march through there, illustrating the difference place could make. Intimidation came from all sides. Patriots aroused opposition when they forced conformity; the British lost support when they were unable to protect Loyalists, and when they treated all with distain, plundering and killing even those who supported them or had taken an oath of allegiance in return for promised “protection.” One wrote of the Howes’s “protection” papers: “This magical mantle o’er property thrown / Secured it from all sorts of thieves but his own.”54 As will be seen there were adamant Patriots, and irreconcilable Loyalists, those who picked their side in this civil war and refused to change no matter what happened. Yet, by the time it was over, all were weary of the war.

Pattern of the War Historians have described the stages of the Revolutionary War in a number of ways. Here for New Jersey the discussion has been divided into a beginning, middle, and an end.

The Beginning New Jerseyans participated in the Revolutionary War from the end of April 1775, with local forces joining Patriots around Boston and then participating in the ill-fated attack on Canada. But the war came to the state on November 20, 1776, when Lord Cornwallis and his troops departed from their ships on the Hudson River and followed a Loyalist up a steep trail to the top of the palisades, dragging cannon with them. The fall of Fort Lee followed, as well as the loss of quickly abandoned supplies as General Washington and his army retreated through Newark, New Brunswick, Princeton, Trenton, and then across the Delaware River to safety on the other side in Pennsylvania. Washington was outraged by what he saw as a lack of support in New Jersey, even as he admitted that it was “due to the want of an army to look the enemy in the face.” General Lee, the former British officer seen as the second in command, was ordered to join Washington but diddled, enabling a British unit to capture him in Basking Ridge on December 12. All seemed lost, with Washington writing his brother, “I think the game is pretty near up,” and that it might be time to retreat to the west.55 An estimated 2,700, in fear and despair, took the General William and Admiral Richard Howe’s oath, pledging allegiance to the king in return for supposed pardons. In the midst of this Thomas Paine wrote the first of The Crisis Papers on December 19, famously calling for help: “THESE are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.” Yet New Jersey militia forces, while at first stunned, began to turn out and pick off small British and Hessian units. State military leaders remained in

24 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

contact with Washington. And then on December 26 he led an attack, through a snowstorm and across an icy river, on the exposed outpost at Trenton. In a brief forty-five minutes the American forces captured 981 Hessian prisoners and killed or wounded over 100, at the cost of three wounded and one dead. The army then returned to Pennsylvania only to cross the river again a week later.56 The second Battle of Trenton on January 2, 1777, lasted longer, with Washington and his army seemingly pinned against the Assunpink Creek, trading fire with British and Hessians led by Lord Cornwallis. Leaving their fires burning the Patriots escaped during the night, following a back path to Princeton. There, on January 3, another brief battle and an American victory followed, then the remaining exhausted troops moved on to Morristown for the winter. At the end of what has been called “The Ten Crucial Days” the Continental army, with state and militia forces from Pennsylvania and New Jersey, had dramatically changed the situation. It no longer looked as though the war was over and lost; British and Hessian forces pulled back to New Brunswick, and by the end of June to New York. New Jersey’s Patriot government, which for nearly six weeks appeared to have disbanded, had revived by mid-January, and then held on, despite numerous challenges. In the years ahead it was never again threatened in the same way.57

The Long Middle In the next stage of the war the important actions included a British army led by General John Burgoyne moving from Canada south down the ChampaignHudson corridor to defeat at Saratoga in New York, and another army led by General Sir William Howe resulting in successful capture of the rebel capitol at Philadelphia. Because the Continental army was perched in the New Jersey hills, with active local forces below, Howe took his forces by ship from New York to the head of Chesapeake Bay in Maryland and then overland. Patriot efforts to stop him led to defeats at Brandywine and then Germantown in Pennsylvania, while Fort Mifflin (on an island in the river) and Fort Mercer (at Red Bank on the Jersey side) plus naval ships in the Delaware River temporarily delayed British use of the river to supply the town they now held. It ended with the Continental army at Valley Forge and the British remaining in the city. For residents of New Jersey this meant active fighting, skirmishes, and the seizure of supplies (by both sides) in the southwestern section of the state. By June 1778, with Philadelphia difficult to supply, France now an ally of the United States and Spain an ally of France widening the war, the British departed. Now led by General Henry Clinton, an army with 12,000 troops and an enormous baggage train, marched out across New Jersey headed back to New York. The Continental army, joined by state and militia forces, followed behind, picking at the edges until both forces bumped into each other at Monmouth Court House. What followed was the largest one-day battle of the war, fought with

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey • 25

FIG. 5 “Construction activities by the Continental army at Jockey Hollow during the winter of 1779–1780.” Painted in 1983 for Morristown National Historic Park. The Continental Army spent several winters in New Jersey, including this one with weather described as the worst in the eighteenth century. While General Washington and his staff stayed at the Ford Mansion in town, the soldiers and their officers were located to the south, where they built huts and tried to stay warm. (Source: National Park Service, Harpers Ferry Center, Commissioned Art Collection, Artist Donald “Don” Troiani (1949–). The government owns all art and reproduction rights.)

extensive artillery, and in the extreme heat and humidity of a June 28 day. Sunrise showed the British had moved on during the night. While most historians have seen the Battle of Monmouth as a draw, the Patriots claimed victory because they were left in control of the field.58 The Continental army stayed in Middlebrook during the winter of 1778–1779 with an artillery training cantonment in the hills at Pluckemin, and then in Morristown during the awful winter of 1779–1780. Sporadic conflict continued through the period, including forage wars now up along the Hudson River. One American officer wrote of Bergen County in 1780, “The country between us and the enemy, and below him, has been pretty thoroughly gleaned by us of the little the enemy left here. We call this foraging, but it is only a gentle name for plundering.” Here the war was made worse because of the continued animosity between local Patriots and Loyalists.59 At this point both sides appeared ensconced in their places, unwilling to make large direct attacks, until rumors of Patriot difficulties with supplies and soldiers

26 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

reached the British. Then twice in 1780 they sent armies into New Jersey to try and access the pass up into the Watchung Mountains, to catch Washington and his army. The first time they were forced back at Connecticut Farms and then about two weeks later at Springfield. Continental soldiers, joined by a significant turnout of state and local militiamen, blocked the efforts. In revenge, as they pulled back the British torched sections of those towns as well as of Elizabethtown.

The End While the war did not totally leave New Jersey, after 1780 it moved south as the British tried to recoup their losses in Georgia and South Carolina, where they captured Savannah and Charleston, and then moved into North Carolina and Virginia. Washington and his army were camped in northern New Jersey and southern New York when the French landed in Rhode Island. While he really wanted help to push the British out of New York City, advisers warned that would be extremely difficult, when a different opportunity opened with news that the French fleet in the Atlantic was suddenly available to meet in Virginia. The Continental army under Washington and the French forces under General Rochambeau quickly marched south through New Jersey and on to Virginia. With Admiral de Grasse offshore they caught General Cornwallis and what remained of his army after a long slough through the south, pinned down at Yorktown. He surrendered on October 19, 1781. This was the last major battle of the war. Having lost two armies, now fighting a world war against France, Spain, and Holland, the British were not interested in fielding another. But it would be nearly two years of a twilight light like time in which conflict continued, including in New Jersey, before a peace treaty was signed. That real peace remained elusive for those in the state and along its fringes until the bitter end is illustrated by the Joshua Huddy affair, when, on April 12, 1782, the Associated Loyalists captured and summarily hanged a Patriot militia captain (they said in retaliation for his actions against local Loyalists). When a British court martial failed to convict Captain Richard Lippincott, the officer in charge during the execution, General Washington threatened to execute Captain Charles Asgill, a young British officer held as a prisoner. It took the intervention of the French King, at the request of Asgill’s mother, to end the matter. Picked by lot for execution he was saved by long-range diplomatic efforts.60 The very last action of the war occurred in the state with an incident involving a Loyalist near Little Egg Harbor on April 3, 1783. Peace was officially proclaimed on April 19, 1783. Members of the Confederation Congress and others celebrated with a dinner at Nassau Hall in Princeton, where they drank thirteen toasts to Generals Washington and Greene, the Marquis de La Fayette, those who had died, the French King for his help, and “All whigs and patriots. May they ever enjoy that freedom which we have acquired by the revolution.”61

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey • 27

Also of Note Besides the length of involvement, the Revolution in New Jersey is notable for the repeated conflict over forage (supplies for men and animals); the “London Trade” (trade with the enemy); the extraordinary level of violence, particularly in Monmouth and Bergen Counties, but also in several infamous massacres; and, because for a small state it had an extensive coastline, the naval fighting, extensive privateering, and attacks on salt works. The fight over supplies was especially important early in 1777, when the British were in New Brunswick; in 1778 when they were in Philadelphia and Washington’s Continentals were at Valley Forge; and then in 1780 in north Jersey up along the Hudson River. But it was also constant in some places as both sides conducted raids. The forage wars cost the British soldiers picked off in repeated skirmishes, kept supplies from them, made New Jersey dangerous, and forced the British to bring what they needed for men and animals from a great distance. Supply ships that came all the way from Ireland also needed escorts for protection from French and Spanish ships, as well as American naval ones and privateers. Early in the war the forage war also provided important experience in fighting for new, untrained soldiers.62 In addition to conflict over forage there were also disputes over the London Trade and exchanges with the enemy. Despite being illegal, and the efforts of both General Washington and Governor Livingston to prevent or stop it, this only increased as the war continued. Inflation, the decreasing value of state and Continental money, meant a desire to receive higher prices and specie (hard coin) for farm products sold to the British. It was also fueled by the craving for goods otherwise not available (from tea to imported fabric).63

Extraordinary Level of Violence Just how bad violence became at times is illustrated by the actions of retaliation groups from both sides, particularly the Associated Loyalists and the Monmouth County Retaliators, including plundering, kidnappings, apparently murders, and more. There were over fifty Patriot leaders captured, imprisoned, murdered in Monmouth County, and probably an equal number in Bergen County. At the same time Loyalists were roughly treated in Monmouth County by General David Forman, Captain Joshua Huddy, and others.64 The excessive use of force though appeared early in the war. After a brief skirmish in February  1777, between Continental forces and British foragers, an American Sergeant reported that “the men that was wounded in the thigh or leg, they dashed out their brains with their muskets and run them through with their bayonets, made them like sieves. This was barbarity to the utmost.” Then there were several massacres, resulting from the actions of British forces, which took place in different parts of the state, all interestingly in 1778. Perhaps the timing reflects the frustration of British officers at being unable to put a

28 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

quick end to the war, the French and American alliance, and rejection of the Peace Commission’s proposals. In each case they attacked in the dark, suddenly, without warning, stabbed with bayonets, and refused quarter to those who were surrendering. This includes the so-called Hancock House Massacre of local militiamen at Quinton’s Bridge on March 18, 1778, the Baylor Massacre at Old Tappan (today’s River Vale) in Bergen County on September  28, 1778 (the Continental troops killed were an elite dragoon unit from Virginia), and the attack on a Continental force led by General Count Pulaski at Little Egg Harbor on October 16, 1778. British orders were to “skiver him,” “skewer him,” to “take no prisoners.” At Tappen there were initial reports of some 250 Dragoons killed and wounded in a slaughter that went on for over an hour. After an investigation, the official toll was seventy Patriots killed and wounded, but only one British death. At Little Egg Harbor thirty to fifty were killed.65 Of course, the British were not alone in such actions during this war. When Washington ordered an attack on the Paulus Hook garrison on August 19, 1779, it was conducted at night with bayonets. Fifty were killed, and 158 captured at a cost of two American lives and three wounded. The commander reported that the troops did not burn the compound because sick soldiers, women, and children were present.66 In contrast Patriot forces have been condemned for their actions during General John Sullivan’s 1779 campaign against Indians in the Mohawk Valley, as well as other actions further south and west. New Jersey troops in the Continental army participated in some of these engagements, and they included the murder of women, children, and the elderly. Native villages were deliberately razed, and the crops burned. Also, on March 8, 1782, ninety-six Christian Delaware who had joined a Moravian settlement at Gnadenhutten, in what is now Ohio, were murdered by Pennsylvania militiamen.67 Then as the war was ending, New Jersey Patriots massacred a group of Black Loyalists near Long Branch.68 The massacres that occurred in New Jersey provide background on the refusal of Patriot forces to give quarter on October 7, 1780, at King’s Mountain in South Carolina. Captain Patrick Ferguson who led the attack on Pulaski’s men, died at the Battle of King’s Mountain. Savagery provoked “pay back.” Or perhaps, as modern times can illustrate, it is what happens in war when opponents are too well or too little known, when rage takes over. War through time has also raised the specter of rape, and the Revolution in New Jersey is not an exception. From the British and Hessian incursion in the fall of 1776 through the war there were accusations that local women, the very young and quite elderly, were subject to attacks. The Reverend Alexander MacWhorter reported attacks in Newark in 1776, and Governor William Livingston and the Continental Congress investigated a number of other cases. Accusations, though apparently less frequently, have been lodged against Patriots as well. According to MacWhorter, when the British were in Newark, “Three women were most horridly ravished by them, one of them an old woman near seventy

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey • 29

years of age, whom they abused in a manner beyond description, another of them was a woman considerably advanced in her pregnancy, and the third was a young girl.” Six victims in Hunterdon County provided descriptions of their experiences in early 1777. Historians have tended to treat these reports as propaganda, but it is increasingly difficult to do that today in the time of “me too.”69

Naval Aspects of the War During the Revolution there were over a hundred naval confrontations in New Jersey rivers and along its Atlantic coast. The Pennsylvania navy operated in the Delaware River; the British operated there as well as along the coast, inside New York harbor, and up the Hudson River. The British had superior forces but the feisty privateers sailing out of New Jersey’s small ports were important. They made shipping expensive for the British, and they drained manpower and supplies that could have been used elsewhere. Captured vessels provided supplies, and money, to those who engaged in the dangerous business. In an effort to destroy the posts the British raided Toms River and Little Egg Harbor, and also destroyed salt works that were built along the shore. Salt was in short supply, essential for both humans and animals. The Patriots set out to obtain it by boiling sea water or leaving it out to evaporate. The works then also became targets.70 Who Fought Patriot men from New Jersey severed in the local militia, state troops, and the Continental army, some for a variety of times in more than one. They went off to war with neighbors, friends, and family members (at times also true of Loyalist forces). As the war continued more subject to the draft paid for substitutes, while towns and the state offered bounties and promises of land for service. This brought in soldiers who were poor, propertyless, farmhands and laborers, the young. This was particularly true as service in the Continental army moved from short commitments to three years and then for the duration of the war. Although disgruntled at conditions and lack of pay, while some deserted or attempted mutiny, most formed a bond, and they became a professional force and endured.71 Refugees. The shifting pattern of the war produced refugees in New Jersey as it did elsewhere. First those Patriots who fled when the British advanced into their neighborhoods, then those who left New York City, Staten Island, and then Philadelphia when the British were in control. Loyalist refugees resorted primarily to New York City. New York state’s Patriot government had a resident royal military government in the city to contend with from the end of August 1776 to the end of 1783 as it coped with trying to aid Patriot refugees (so the term there became synonymous with them). However, New Jersey authorities regained control by mid-January 1777. Even though people moved to avoid armies throughout the war, the term “Refugees” also specifically referred to British soldiers and Loyalist bands (with Blacks and whites) who held out at Paulus Hook and Sandy

30 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

Hook, in small enclaves. This included the infamous Colonel Tye, who led raids into Monmouth County. While the term “refugee” could refer to different groups, displacement was a consequence of this war as it is of wars down to the present.72 Destruction. With armies marching through, local Patriots and Loyalists in frequent contention, there was an extraordinary amount of destruction in New Jersey during the war. This included that from foraging expeditions as well. Repeated examples of the damage suffered by residents, no matter what side they took, will appear in the chapters that follow, along with a discussion in the final conclusions at the end of the book. It can be noted here that no one has ever added it all up, an impossible task at the time, and even more difficult at the distance of nearly 250 years.

Conclusions This chapter has briefly described the nature of colonial New Jersey, recounted British measures and colonial reactions in the years after 1763 that led up to the Revolution, and then summarized the war years. The war itself was long, often bitterly contested with armies marching back and forth across the state, and local places repeatedly caught up in the contest between Patriots and Loyalists. In this civil war neighbors turned against one another. The sides that families and individuals took as this happened were based on economics, ideology, personal ties, religious affiliations, location, and time. In a society marked by diversity from the early seventeenth century such divisions are not surprising. Put simply New Jersey was not a good place to be during the American Revolution. But it was an important place. The fact that the Patriots gained control in 1776 and managed to hold on until the peace was a significant accomplishment for the state and the nation. If it had not done so the new nation would have been divided into two or more parts, and the outcome could have been quite different. It is important to remember that the war was long and difficult, with the outcome never certain. During it, individuals divided in complex ways. Learning about those divisions and the reasons for them can help us understand our own complicated times. As will be seen, most of those who lived through the war, no matter what side they took, paid a price. This included the wealthy and prominent members of the colony, then state, who risked and at times lost much, as well as middling and poor residents.

2

Patriots Part I The Adamant and Determined In November 1776 as the British and Hessians overran New Jersey, Isaac Arnett, a trustee of the First Presbyterian Church in Elizabethtown, called a meeting of his friends. The purpose was to discuss General Sir William Howe and Admiral Lord Richard Howe’s offer of protection for all the rebels who would give up their fight, swear allegiance to the king, and accept a letter of “protection.” At this point the group and many others considered the war lost. Even George Washington was contemplating the need to give up the fight and seek safety somewhere in the west. As the meeting was about to end, apparently with an agreement to accept the offer, his wife, Hannah White Arnett (1733–1824), made an impassioned plea for them not to give up so easily. She supposedly threatened to leave her husband and shamed the men into continuing their support for the Revolution. A nineteenth-century source quoted her as saying, “What greater cause could there be than that of country? I married a good man and true, a faithful friend and loyal Christian gentleman, but it needs no divorce to sever me from a traitor and a coward. If you take the infamous British proclamation which a treacherous enemy of your country offers, you—you lose your wife and I—I lose my husband and my home.” While these may not have been her precise words, memory of her action led the local Daughters of the American Revolution chapter in 1909 to erect a marker in the church’s cemetery noting, “Her patriotic words, uttered in the dark days of 1776, summoned discouraged men to keep Elizabethtown loyal to the cause of American Independence.”1

31

32 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

There are several important aspects to this story, in addition to it bringing women into the discussion. It occurs at the most significant crisis point of the Revolution in the state and shows how many Patriots, rather than giving up, dug in their heels and became more determined. And it took place among trustees of the Reverend James Caldwell’s church, one of the Presbyterian ministers who so strongly supported the cause that British officers described the war in New Jersey as a Presbyterian one. The membership of this church included, besides the Arnetts and Caldwell, William Livingston, Abraham Clark, Elias Boudinot, Robert Ogden Sr. and his sons (Robert, Mattias, and Aaron), Stephan Crane, Elias Dayton and his son Jonathan, William Peartree Smith, Francis Barber, and Oliver Spencer. At least eighty-three men from the church supported the Revolution with military and/ or political service. As will be seen, individual members of the congregation were among the Patriots who paid a price for their stand, but so did the church itself. The parsonage was destroyed during a raid on February 24, 1779, and the church, the academy it supported, as well as the nearby courthouse were burned on January 25, 1780. A member of the congregation memorialized the destruction of the church in a long poem that reflected Patriot anger and determination; three excerpted verses follow, including the last one: Why has the Lord indulg’d a Band of Ruffians to infest our Land? Near Midnight they approached the Town, To burn our House of Worship down. . . . Alas! The Building all has fell, The Pulpit, Pinnacle & bell, And Rows of Beautious Windows round, Are melted and lye on the ground. . . . Most gracious Lord, ride conquering through, The stoutest of thy foes subdue, May all our Allies learn thy Name, And humbled Britain say Amen.2

Probably in 1783, with the arrival of the Peace Treaty, the author believed his prayer had been answered. In the end the church, along with many others, was rebuilt after the war. The congregation, diminished in numbers and resources, nevertheless managed to pay for the construction. There was no insurance that covered the cost of damages resulting from the war. The story of the Arnetts and the First Presbyterian Church illustrates that religion, and family ties, played a role for those who took the Patriot side in this civil war. And that it was a civil war is illustrated by close location to it in Elizabethtown of St. John’s the Anglican church led by the Reverend Thomas

Patriots Part I: The Adamant and Determined • 33

Bradbury Chandler. Apparently, he and Caldwell were not on speaking terms. Others, as the membership of the First Presbyterian Church also indicates, who were likely to become Patriots, included lawyers and local officials angered by British measures for political and economic reasons. Some were moderates while others were radicals who wanted by 1776 to establish a republic. Included were several graduates of the College of New Jersey. As noted in chapter 1, the College of New Jersey had a much higher ratio of Patriots than any other colonial college. Of the 673 men who graduated between 1748 and 1783 only thirteen (or approximately 2 percent) were Loyalists.3 This was connected to the teaching of its president, Reverend John Witherspoon, and to the political and religious beliefs of faculty, students, and many others in the state who supported the Revolution. They believed the actions of the British government, from the Stamp Act through what they called the Intolerable Acts of 1774, to be constitutionally wrong and a violation of their rights initially as Englishmen, and then as men. Influenced by evangelical religious beliefs (whether Presbyterian, Dutch Reform, or Baptist) they thought Britain and its leaders were immoral tyrants. They were often among those strongly opposed to a colonial bishop, fearing the consequences for the religious toleration of the colony. This can be seen in the documents quoted in chapter 1: the Stamp Act Resolutions, the state Constitution, and the assembly letter to the militia of 1776, and others that will follow. Once British and Hessian troops arrived in the colonies, and then particularly on New Jersey soil, Patriots were offended, even horrified, certainly angered, by the actions and destruction this enemy brought as it marched through the state, and then conducted repeated raids from New York City, Staten Island, and Pennsylvania. For some Patriots these actions increased their determination. This is reflected in the poem quoted earlier, and in many of the brief biographical accounts that follow.4 They are stories about both the “adamant” Patriots and what their determination cost them.

The Adamant Costs for Patriots Everyone knows that in the end the Patriots won the war, and the United States gained independence. But this was a costly victory, even for many of those who ended up on the “winning” side. Examples of those from New Jersey who paid a price for the stand they took include both political and religious leaders. The British deliberately targeted the signers of the Declaration of Independence, members of the rebel legislature, and other leaders of the Revolution. This included all five signers, Abraham Clark, John Hart, Francis Hopkinson, Richard Stockton, and John Witherspoon; members of the Continental Congress, Jonathan Dickinson Sergeant and John Fell; and state government—especially Governor William Livingston. Also included were Presbyterian ministers, such as

34 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

Alexander MacWhorter and James Caldwell, Dutch Reformed ministers of the Coetus faction in the Hackensack and Raritan valleys, and others, including local militia leaders and their families. Both John Witherspoon (a signer) and Jonathan Dickinson Sergeant (member of the Continental Congress) had their homes in Princeton occupied by the British; Sergeant’s was burned to the ground. Francis Hopkinson (also a signer), who married into a Bordentown Patriot family, had his home there damaged and then returned to his native Pennsylvania. Richard Stockton (another signer) was captured in Monmouth County after fleeing Princeton as the British advanced across the state in November 1776. Most of his story will be recounted in a later chapter, but it can be noted here that he was imprisoned, and his house was occupied and ransacked. At one point, John Hart (a signer and cousin of Stockton) supposedly hid in a Sourland Mountain cave to avoid capture. John Fell, who represented New Jersey in the Continental Congress, was captured and imprisoned for a time in New York City. Sometimes the children of rebel leaders were captured and targeted. One of Witherspoon’s sons, a surgeon on a privateer, was taken to London and treated harshly, while two of Abraham Clark’s sons were imprisoned. Witherspoon also lost his oldest son, Major James Witherspoon, at the battle of Germantown. These are the well-to-do and well known, but the same was true for individuals in all classes and segments of society who also took a stand for independence and maintained it. Inflation took a toll, as did British, Hessian, and Loyalist soldiers and sailors, plus the roving bandits who plundered. Sometimes the damage was done by Patriot soldiers, for strategic reasons, or because they were hungry or ill disciplined. Leaders and others fled, or tried to flee, from the fighting and destruction of the war, becoming refugees, some temporarily, others permanently. Of course, there were also those (both Continental and militiamen) who died of their wounds, or notoriously rotted in the British prison ships berthed in New York harbor, as well as those interned in prisons in Britain. In addition, they and civilians died from smallpox, cholera, and other diseases spread by armies, whether marching or in winter encampments. Total estimates on loss of life during the Revolution are 25,000 to 36,000 Patriots from military engagements, possibly another 25,000 were wounded and disabled. The lower number of deaths would be about 1 percent of the population. This is the highest for any American war except the Civil War. The number of civilian, Loyalist, British, Hessian, and Native American deaths is not known. While an estimated 10,000 to 12,000 “citizen soldiers” from New Jersey served with national, state, and local forces, the number of deaths specifically from the state are not clear. That said, because the war lasted so long in the state, estimates are that it had the highest number of deaths.5

Biographies of the Adamant Abraham Clark (1726–1794) was a farmer, surveyor, and politician who lived in Elizabethtown. He married Sarah Hatfield/Hetfield (ca. 1728–1804), and

Patriots Part I: The Adamant and Determined • 35

together they had ten children. Not wealthy, without formal legal training, and in that a contrast to William Livingston and many discussed in this chapter, he was known as the “people’s lawyer” for defending others. Before the war he served as a clerk of the colonial assembly, high sheriff of Essex County, and then in the Provincial Congress. Described by his biographer as an early and steady supporter of the Revolution, a “radical republican,” he was elected to the Second Continental Congress, where he voted for the Declaration of Independence. Yet, even as he did so, Patriot losses in Canada and the arrival of the British fleet, which put “the Enemy at my Door at home,” gave him pause. From Philadelphia on July 4, 1776, he wrote his friend Colonel Elias Dayton, serving with New Jersey forces in New York, that they had “embarked on a most Tempestuous Sea, Life is very uncertain.” In a subsequent August letter, still clearly worried, noting that they could all end up on “the Gallows,” he said, “If we continued in the State we were in, it was evident we must Perish; if we declared Independence, we might be saved, we could but perish.” An “Interposing providence . . . Necessarily led us to what we are—I mean Independent States.” Only God would in the future determine whether it would “make us a great Empire, or make our Ruin more compleat.” His was an accurate pessimistic assessment of the status of the war at that point (and it would get worse), but also an expression of his conviction that it was necessary to separate from the empire. Despite his fears Clark persisted, going on to serve in several sessions of the wartime Congress. He and his family paid for their support of the Revolution. Elizabeth, a fourteen-year- old daughter, died of smallpox in 1776. Three sons served in the military, and as noted two were captured and imprisoned. Thomas Clark (ca. 1753–1789) in the Sugar House; Andrew Clark (1759–?) on the notorious Jersey (a British prison ship), where he, along with many others, was harshly treated, and apparently died. In January 1777 Clark noted, “All my Property is destroyed by the Enemy.” Yet he continued serving the national and state governments. When the war ended, he advocated help for those hurt by the recession that followed, and strongly supported the use of paper money. In 1786 he represented New Jersey at the Annapolis Convention, and later in the 1790s in the House of Representatives, where he sided with what became the Jeffersonian Republicans.6 John Hart (1711–1779) was a prosperous Presbyterian farmer in the Hopewell valley. While sometimes described as Baptist, that reflects his donation of land to a town group. He served as a local judge and, starting in 1761, for ten years in the colonial assembly. Labeled “Honest John,” and described as an “ardent Whig,” he then represented New Jersey in the Second Continental Congress, signing the Declaration of Independence. Local legend has him hiding in a cave when the state was overrun in the fall of 1776. During the war he served in the assembly, on the Council of Safety, and in the loan office (signing the notes it issued). Later in the war, as the British evacuated Philadelphia and marched

36 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

across the state, he sent Jessie and Nathaniel, two of his sons (Edward, the third was serving in the militia), to find the Continental army and offer help. The family and neighbors then hosted the army while it was headed to what became the 1778 Battle of Monmouth. When the estimated 12,000 troops left, any crops that had been planted were destroyed. He died in 1779 before the war ended, in reduced circumstances. He and his wife Deborah Scudder had eleven children. Afterward all the sons, with their families, left for the west. He and his family had gone out of their way to support the Revolution, and the financial cost was high. His will listed debts that could not be paid because he was unable to collect from others. What was sold by the sheriff and his sons was paid for in depreciated money. With little left for them to inherit they departed the state.7 Francis Hopkinson (1737–1791), the son of recent British immigrants who were Anglicans, was born in Philadelphia, graduated in 1757 in the first class of the College of Philadelphia, and then studied law with Benjamin Chew, who was at the time the attorney general of Pennsylvania. He was a talented musician, poet, and painter. In 1766 he traveled to England where he visited his mother’s uncle, the bishop of Worcester, and through him met important men. Returning in 1768 he married Ann (Nancy) Borden of Bordentown, also from an Anglican family, and they moved there in 1773. His father was important in Pennsylvania and hers in New Jersey politics (where he served as a representative in the Stamp Act Congress and then in the New Jersey Provincial Congresses). But it was through her mother’s connections that Francis Hopkinson was appointed to the royal council of New Jersey in 1774. However, he soon resigned and became a strong supporter of the Revolution. He signed the Declaration of Independence, created the New Jersey state seal, and claimed a role in designing the first American flag with red and white stripes and white stars on a blue background. Hopkinson, like Livingston, used his pen to satirize the British during the war, most famously in “The Battle of the Kegs” of 1778, which was set to music. In it he poked fun at British soldiers firing at kegs floating down the Delaware River toward their ships, fearing they were packed with explosives, a new diabolical weapon. In the poem a soldier and sailor see the kegs and comment: These kegs, I’m told, the rebels bold, Pack’d up like pickled herring: And they’re come down t’ attack the town, In this new way of ferrying. The soldier flew, the sailor too, And sacred almost to death, sir, Wore out their shoes, to spread the news, And ran till out of breath, sir. . . . The cannons roar from shore to shore, The small arms make a rattle;

Patriots Part I: The Adamant and Determined • 37

Since wars began I am sure no man Ever saw so strange a battle. . . . The fish below swam to and fro, Attack’d from every quarter; Why sure, they thought, the devil’s to pay, ’Mongst folks above the water. . . .

The poem was based on an event that Hopkinson surely knew about as fighting in the Bordentown area directly affected him and his relations. When the Hessians occupied the town in December 1776, he and his family quickly left. He wrote to Benjamin Franklin: “I have suffered much by the invasion of the Goths and Vandals. I was obliged to flee from my house in Borden Town with my family and leave all my effects in status quo. The savages plundered me to their hearts’ content—but I do not repine, as I really esteem it an honor to have suffered in my Country’s Cause in support of the Rights of Human Nature and of Civil Society.” When the Hessians withdrew, Hopkinson and his family moved back. His father-in-law Colonel Joseph Borden II (1719–1791) and brother-in-law Captain Joseph Borden III (?–1788) served with the Patriots, the first as a Quartermaster, the second in the Continental Army, resulting in his being wounded at the Battle of Germantown. They were among the 111 men from the area who enlisted in Patriot forces. Local workers filled twenty kegs produced at Colonel Borden’s copper shop with gun powder. They set them into the river hoping to hit British ships. One did explode killing four. So there really were kegs packed with powder, but Hopkinson’s poem poked fun at the excessive reaction that followed, the panicked response. Not humorous was the retaliatory British raid of May 7, 1778. The Patriots quickly destroyed their own vessels in the area to prevent their capture. The town was fired upon, and a local woman was killed. Soldiers destroyed the Bordens’ house, store, stables, and other buildings. His mother-in-law, Elizabeth Borden, was home when British forces appeared and watched their actions. When a British officer offered her his sympathy, she reputedly replied, “I assure you that this is the happiest day of my life, for I feel assured you have given up the hope of conquering America, or you would not thus wantonly devastate it.”8 The British dined in Hopkinson’s house and departed the town leaving four local men dead. Elizabeth Borden and her family then moved in with her son-in-law. The next year Francis Hopkinson with his wife and children returned to Pennsylvania, where he went on to a career as an Admiralty court judge during and after the war. A supporter of the Constitution and then a federal judge afterward, he continued to write poetry and music, with a political purpose. Hopkinson survived and prospered, but he and his Borden relatives, adamant Patriots, all had paid for their stand during the war.9 The Reverend John Witherspoon (1723–1794) was a Presbyterian minister, a product of the Scottish Enlightenment who had been educated at the University

38 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

FIG. 6 Reverend John Witherspoon (1723–1794). A Scottish Presbyterian minister, Witherspoon arrived in New Jersey in 1768, where he became president of the College of New Jersey. An early supporter of the Revolution he signed the Declaration of Independence and served on numerous congressional committees during the war. The students he taught were overwhelmingly Patriots. (Source: Oil painting, unidentified artist after Charles Willson Peale (1741–1827). Princeton University Art Museum, gift of friends of Princeton University.)

of Edinburgh. He was convinced in 1768 by Richard Stockton and Benjamin Rush, both graduates of the College of New Jersey, to move to the colonies and accept the presidency of the institution. He was accompanied by his wife Elizabeth Montgomery and their surviving five children. Witherspoon became one of the earliest supporters of independence, the only minister to sign the Declaration of Independence, and was later described by British general Sir Guy

Patriots Part I: The Adamant and Determined • 39

Carlton as a “political firebrand, who perhaps had not a less place in the revolution than Washington himself. He poisons the minds of his young students and through them the Continent.” He certainly had an impact as a scholar, teacher, and minister on those who attended, as more of them were Patriots than from any other colonial college. Witherspoon helped revise the curriculum of the college to provide a broader education, attract students from other colonies, obtain greater financial support, and widen its mission to include the preparation of statesmen as well as churchmen. Gideon Mailer, a recent biographer, has credited his evangelical religious beliefs for his support of the Revolution. Others have emphasized the impact of Scottish moral sense philosophy. He thought government was formed by a contract, and under certain circumstances Revolution was justified. In the spring of 1776, he wrote down his thoughts on the “independent controversy,” arguing that it was time because “Petitions on petitions have been presented to king and parliament, and an address sent to the people of Great Britain, which have not merely been fruitless, but treated with the highest degree of disdain.” It was necessary because otherwise “the misery of the people of America, if they must submit in all cases whatsoever, to the decisions of a body of the sons of Adam, so distant from them, and who have an interest in oppressing them,” would be followed by “total and absolute ruin.” The words he emphasized were in the Declaratory Act of 1766. Supposedly when Witherspoon signed the Declaration of Independence, he said it was “overdue.” Believing in a republic, he served in Congress through most of the war on at least 120 committees, supported the Articles of Confederation, and later in 1787 sat in the New Jersey Convention that unanimously ratified the Constitution. When the British and Hessians marched through New Jersey in the fall of 1776 Witherspoon dismissed the students and sought refuge with a married daughter in Pennsylvania, later returning to deal with the damage to his home and to Nassau Hall, which housed the college. The British destroyed his papers, a soldier son died, but the president’s house still stands as does the Hall. It had been used by both armies to house soldiers and then the wounded suffering as a result. It was also in the line of fire during the Battle of Princeton on January 3, 1777. After the war he moved to Tusculum, a “country” house on the edge of town, and continued as president of the college until his death. Witherspoon is important because of the early and strong stand he took on independence, his participation in Patriot government, and especially the education of fifty-two Presbyterian ministers, as well as future members of Congress, state governors, and a president (James Madison).10 Jonathan Dickinson Sergeant (1746–1793) was the son of Jonathan Sergeant, treasurer of the College of New Jersey, and Abigail Dickinson, a daughter of the first president of the institution. He graduated from the college in 1762 and then studied law with Richard Stockton. An early Patriot he served on local

40 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

committees of correspondence, married Margaret Spencer, a daughter of the Reverend Elihu Spencer, minister of the Presbyterian church in Trenton. They built and briefly settled into a “fine house” in Princeton. In 1776 he represented the state in the Continental Congress but resigned to serve in the New Jersey Provincial Congress, and there on the Committee that wrote the Constitution of 1776. A friend of John Adams from his time in Philadelphia, he wrote to him that New Jersey was about to vote for a “republic” in adopting the document. He then served a second brief time in the Continental Congress, before resigning in 1777 and moving to Philadelphia. Sergeant and his family paid a price for their Patriotism. When in Princeton during December 1776, the Hessians plundered his father’s house, and then burned his down. He later estimated the loss at £620. His wife, infant daughter, and sister-in-law all joined their father/grandfather, an active Patriot, and took refuge in St. George’s, a village in Delaware where he had previously served. Sergeant  Sr. remained in Princeton and died of smallpox in 1777, having been infected by the troops in the town. The son went on to serve from 1777 to 1780 as the attorney general of Pennsylvania and to be involved in politics there. After his first wife died, he married Elizabeth Rittenhouse (1767–1836), daughter of David Rittenhouse. An Anti-Federalist in the debate over the Constitution Jonathan Dickinson Sergeant died during the yellow fever epidemic of 1793. Sergeant was a Presbyterian, a republican, with strong ties to the college and the town. While his fellow College of New Jersey graduate William Paterson was attorney general of New Jersey, he held the same position across the Delaware River. Both participated in efforts to suppress the Loyalists.11 John Fell (1721–1798) was a New York City merchant who moved to Bergen County before 1769 and established an estate called Petersfield, now in Allendale, near the New York line. He was an early and firm Patriot, serving on the local committee of correspondence, and then as a judge (earning him the label of a “great Tory hunter”). On April 22, 1777, he was captured by a Loyalist raiding party consisting of twenty-five armed men. He recorded in a journal that he was taken from his home to Bergen Point, and then into New York City and placed in the Provost jail. Unlike some other prisoners he had a daughter nearby, Elizabeth Fell Colden, who had married a Loyalist. She managed to have food and clothing sent to him, and he was housed in a room with only nine others (rather than many more). Still he was held for eight months, and his treatment during the cold winter was harsh enough that he never forgave the British. The one positive note he reported was that when the prisoners learned of the surrender at Saratoga, they all cheered over what he called the “Glorious news from the Northward.” The next day they were given beef, bread, and butter. In January 1778 he was paroled in the city, and then that May exchanged for “Governor Skene” (Philip Skene/Skeen, 1725–1810, who had earlier been lieutenant governor of forts at Crown Point and Ticonderoga).12 Fell was just one of the many

Patriots Part I: The Adamant and Determined • 41

residents of the Hackensack valley captured when neighbors betrayed them. Released as the committed Patriot that he was, Fell went on to serve in the Congress from November 1778 until 1780, and on the State Council from 1782 to 1783. But he was wary of being captured again, writing to a friend in July 1779: “I really wonder that you venture to lie in Monmouth as I have always thought that county was as bad as Bergen. For my part, I dare not go home while the enemy continues in that neighborhood, indeed I imagine I have little left to go to.” But he did return at least until 1793, when he moved to the Coldenham, New York, property left by his deceased son, where he helped his grandchildren. Peter Renaudet Fell had died at age 37 from rheumatism, the result of exposure during his militia service in the war.13 William Livingston (1723–1790), the youngest son of a wealthy prominent Hudson valley family, a 1741 graduate of Yale, a lawyer and political polemicist, and a Presbyterian, “retired” from the heated political conflicts of New York to the supposed peace and quiet of the Elizabethtown area.14 He had married Susannah (Sukie) French (1723–1789) of New Brunswick in 1747. With numerous children (thirteen, nine of whom survived) they purchased a 180-acre farm in 1772 and built a large house on it. In New York he had been involved in the intense struggle between two major political factions (Livingston and Delancey), and in the dispute over the establishment of King’s College as an Anglican institution as well as opposition to the push for an American bishop. As a Presbyterian he argued for a nondenominational college in New York and became a trustee of the College of New Jersey. Livingston wrote political essays, satires, and poems, using pseudonyms (as was the custom at the time), before, during, and after the Revolution. During the Stamp Act crisis, he thought the law unconstitutional, but disapproved of the violence with which it was opposed. In New Jersey he continued to practice law and began to serve on local committees. A  moderate as the Revolution approached, he was selected to represent New Jersey in the Continental Congress, serving from 1774 to 1776, but then was replaced over doubts as to whether the delegation would support independence. Once it was decided, he accepted command of the Patriot militia, and then served as the first state governor from August 1776 until he died in 1790. What followed was far from the peaceful existence he anticipated. As governor, Livingston encouraged and aided Isaac Collins in establishing the New Jersey Gazette to counter British and Loyalist newspapers and propaganda. He himself was also the author of numerous essays and poems in that and other publications (again using a pseudonym). Like Hopkinson he poked fun at British pompous pretensions. In a June 20, 1777, proclamation, General John Burgoyne, as his army marched south from Canada through New England and New York, warned all Patriots to stay at home or face the horrors of famine and devastation as he loosened Indians against them. He started with his multiple titles: “By John Burgoyne Esq’r; Lieut Gen’l of His Majesties Armies in

42 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

FIG. 7 “Susan Livingston, Saving Governor William Livingston’s Papers.” When the British raided the Livingston family home in Elizabethtown in 1779, tradition says his daughter distracted them with unimportant papers. This preserved his letters with other Patriot leaders, and their security. (Source: Painting by Giselle Lindenfeld (1905–1986). Image courtesy of the John Kean Collection at Liberty Hall Museum.)

America, Col. of the Queens Reg’t of Lt. Dragoons, Governor of Fort William in North Britain, one of the Representatives of the Commons of Great Britain in Parliament, and Commanding an Army and Fleet employed on an expedition from Canada &c &c &c.” Livingston replied with a long poem from “A New-Jersey Man” using sarcasm to rouse Patriot determination: And all my titles to display, I’ll end with thrice etc cetera. . . .

In the proclamation, supposedly, having impressed with his titles, Burgoyne then promised to save Americans from the awful rebels, but then the poem notes that he threatened them: I will let loose the dogs of Hell, Ten thousand Indians, who shall yell, And foam and tear, and grin and roar,

Patriots Part I: The Adamant and Determined • 43

And drench their maulesins in gore; To these I’ll give full scope and play, From Ticonderoga to Florida. . . .

And if his warnings are ignored: “I swear by George and by St. Paul/I will exterminate you all.” After the surrender at Saratoga Livingston facetiously proposed exchanging Burgoyne for “one Esquire, two Major-generals, three Colonels of light horse, two Governors, one member of Congress, the Admiral of our navy, one Commander-in-chief, in a separate department, and six privates.”15 A later example was written in August 1780, after Lafayette led soldiers on a foraging mission within sight of Manhattan. In this poem two women comment as follows: WE’ve almost, sweet sister, been frighten’d to death, Nor have we, as yet, quite recover’d our breadth An army of rebels came down t’other night Expecting no doubt—that the British would fight Next morning we saw them parade at the Hook And thought for sure, this was too much to brook. . . .

The women waited for the British response: Each moment expecting to see them pass by The officers bowing, the drums in a clatter, Their heads rising up, like ducks out of water. . . .

But nothing happened: The Generals all met, as grave as magicans, The magi of law, or the sagest physicans But all that was done, tho’ they sat till near night, Was to keep at their bottle—and not go to fight. . . . 16

During the war Livingston also churned out numerous letters and memos, as while governor he spent the war years coping with the dangerous situation he and the state faced, while also helping to create a new government. No one is sure where he sought refuge when the British overran the state in December 1776, but he had returned by mid-January. His wife and two daughters went to the Basking Ridge home of General William Alexander, Lord Stirling (her brotherin-law) and remained there for a number of months. To cope with the emergency situation, in the spring of 1777 the legislature created a Council of Safety, with Livingston at its head, to bring Loyalists to task and restore order. He then moved

44 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

from place to place to escape capture, at one point claiming he had not slept in the same bed for years; historians have said he became “an executive on horseback.” In 1779 New Jersey Loyalist General Cortlandt Skinner offered 2,000 guineas for him—dead or alive; he was not the only one to do so. Several attempts were made to kill or kidnap him. In response to threats against him Livingston wrote to Henry Laurens (1724–1792), from South Carolina and at the time the president of Congress, making light of them by saying, “I hope they will never succeed in the last [killing me], as I should by that means most certainly lose the honor of being hanged in Company with some of you more illustrious Rebels.”17 His house was invaded and damaged, his family intimidated, but a daughter managed to save his papers, and the building was left standing. Yet Livingston worked throughout the war to pull together resources to defeat local Loyalists as well as the British and Hessians who moved in and around New Jersey. Although praised by Patriots, Loyalists were critical of Livingston. The most hostile was Judge Thomas Jones, who, in his History of New York during the Revolutionary War, wrote that he was a “cunning, shrewd fellow,” but also “a very indifferent speaker” and a “satirical” writer, which were true. But also “violent in his conversation; a bigot in religion; wanton, cruel, and unfeeling in his temper; ungenerous in his sentiments; uncouth in his manners; impatient of contradiction; and of a savage, persecuting spirit.” In contrast President Dwight of Yale in 1788 described him as “brilliant,” witty, and “refined.” “Of freedom, both civil and religious, he was a distinguished champion,” and noted that he was also pious.18 After the war Livingston suffered financial losses when he was unable to collect money owed him, or it was paid in depreciated currency due to inflation, and then he lost claims to family lands in what became Vermont. His home and farm suffered from lack of maintenance. Livingston also paid a heavy personal price. His youngest son, John Lawrence Livingston (1762–1781), was lost at sea while serving the Patriot cause. Another son, Brockholst Livingston (1757–1823), worked as a clerk for envoy John Jay in Spain (married to daughter Sara Livingston Jay) and was captured in 1782 on his way home. With the war almost over, he was released quickly. Livingston continued to be reelected governor throughout the problems of the Confederation period, serving a total of fourteen annual terms. He attended the Constitutional Convention in 1787 where, although seldom speaking, he served on two important committees. Afterward he supported ratification. Overall, at considerable personal cost, he left a legacy of determined support for the Revolution and exemplary executive leadership despite a Constitution that did not provide for a strong governor. He did not view Loyalists, “sculking neutrals,” or straddlers, in this nasty war kindly. Of course, for eight years some of them were trying to kill him. He tried to limit passes into enemy territory, and also the “London trade” there (even trying to enforce rules, though not

Patriots Part I: The Adamant and Determined • 45

always successfully, when they were breached by his own relatives), but he did exhibit a measure of religious toleration, particularly toward Quakers.19 Alexander MacWhorter and James Caldwell are two of the best known (but not the only) examples of Presbyterian ministers seen as leaders of the rebellion. The Reverend Alexander MacWhorter (1734–1807), born in New Castle, Delaware, to parents from Ireland, was a 1757 College of New Jersey graduate and the minister of the Old First Presbyterian Church in Newark. He married Mary Cummings, and they had five children. An early supporter of the Revolution when the British marched through in November 1776, he and his family fled, and the parsonage was among the many places plundered. He wrote a scathing description, stating that “the murder, robbery, ravishments [rapes], and insults, they were guilty of are dreadful.” The town had been left in “ruin.” They treated even known “Tories,” the elderly, and the ill harshly. The “destruction of fences, barns, stables, and other outhouses, the breaking of chests of drawers, desks, tables, and other furniture, the burning and carrying away of carpenters and shoemakers tools are intirely beyond description.” He joined Washington’s soldiers as they crossed the Delaware River into Pennsylvania, then served as a chaplain with General Henry Knox’s forces. He went through Newark in 1777, observing the devastation. When he returned in 1778 (because his wife was ill), his congregation had lost so much property that they had trouble paying him; in addition, he feared capture by nearby British or Loyalist forces. MacWhorter then left for North Carolina, where he had earlier preached, and where he had family. But during the British invasion in 1780, that area was subject to plunder. A refugee for the third time, he returned with his family to Newark, and they rebuilt. By 1791 a new church had been erected, and he was both a religious and a political leader in the region.20 Reverend James Caldwell (1743–1781), the fighting Presbyterian minister from Elizabethtown, was born in Virginia to Scotch Irish parents. Another College of New Jersey graduate (1762), he and his wife Hannah Ogden Caldwell both paid with their lives for their support of the Revolution. He led a church rapidly growing in membership (to 345 subscribers), influenced by continuing revivals, with whig sympathies. As noted at the beginning of this chapter, at least eightythree members served with Patriot forces during the war. In 1776 Caldwell became a military chaplain and then also served as an assistant commissary general. When the British marched through, the family took refuge in the Watchung Mountains. Later, the parsonage having been burned, they lived in Springfield, then Connecticut Farms (today’s Union). She was killed during the Battle of Connecticut Farms in 1780, he later by a sentry in Elizabethtown (perhaps a spy as the man was subsequently executed for murder). Her death sparked Patriot outrage. Today a lurid version of her

46 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

“murder” appears on the Union County seal. It shows her outside a house as a British soldier deliberately takes aim and shoots her. In fact, she was inside and upstairs, caring for a newborn. It is not clear if she was deliberately targeted or caught in a crossfire. His subsequent death left nine orphaned children from age sixteen to the infant, Maria, whom she was caring for when shot. Patriot leaders, friends, and neighbors helped some of these children. John Edwards Caldwell went to France with Lafayette, Joseph F. Caldwell was adopted by General Benjamin Lincoln, Elias Boudinot Caldwell was taken in by his namesake Elias Boudinot (Richard Stockton’s brother-in-law), and Maria (plus probably others) by a Mrs. Noel, a wealthy local woman.21 The Caldwell family paid much for the stand they took in the Revolution. Nathaniel Scudder (1733–1781) was an early and active supporter of the Revolution. His parents, Abia Rowe and Jacob Scudder, moved to Monmouth County in the year he was born, where his father built and operated a mill. Scudder graduated from the College of New Jersey in 1751, studied medicine, and then practiced in Freehold. He was a founder of the New Jersey Medical Society, active in the Presbyterian church, and served on the Board of Trustees of the college. Two of his sons were also graduates (in 1775 and 1778). From 1774 on he was involved in the Revolution. He rode through the night of July 1–2, 1776, to warn the New Jersey Provincial Congress, meeting in Burlington, that the British in New York harbor had begun their invasion. He then served several times in the state legislature, and in the Continental Congress for a year. While in the Congress he strongly supported ratification of the Articles of Confederation, writing to members of the legislature that only when this was done would other countries take Americans seriously. He wrote to then New Jersey Speaker of the House John Hart that without ratification, “we are ipso facto unconfederated, and consequently, what our enemies have called us ‘a rope of Sand.’” After they agreed to ratify, he and the Reverend John Witherspoon both signed the document for the state. However, he declined another term in Congress, saying that between travel and housing, serving was expensive, and his fortunes had “contracted.” But Scudder continued his support of the Revolution. In 1780 he was elected to the state assembly, and he remained active as a militia colonel. When on October 15, 1781, a group of Loyalists raided Colt’s Neck and captured six locals, he led a rescue party from Freehold. In the skirmish that followed he was shot and killed, becoming the only person who had served in the Continental Congress to die in battle. One of his college friends, Benjamin Prime, wrote an elegy expressing appreciation for his efforts: In med’cine skilled & in warfare brave, In council steady, uncorrupt, and wise. It was thy happy lot, the means to have, To no small rank in each of these to rise.

Patriots Part I: The Adamant and Determined • 47

Because he had stopped practicing medicine to participate in the Patriot government and military Scudder left little for his family. He lost his life and his fortune while supporting the Revolution.22 Reverend/Dominie Theodore (Dirck) Romeyn (1745–1804) of Schraalenburgh, Bergen County, born in that part of the Hackensack valley, was a 1765 College of New Jersey graduate. A member of the Coetus party of the Dutch Reformed Church, historian Adrian Leiby described him as a very determined Patriot. He first served churches in Ulster County, New York, but then moved to his home area in 1775. In November 1776, as the British and Hessians chased the Continental army through North Jersey, his house was sacked, and hay, grain, and milk cows were taken. Also removed were furniture, bed linens, curtains, dishes and cookware, clothes, his books, the family’s food, and even the brass locks on the doors. He was not alone—every Patriot home in the area was plundered, and as the war continued this was repeated numerous times. Romeyn took his ill wife and eight-year-old daughter to New Paltz, New York, in the Hudson valley, where her brother Louis DuBois, a Huguenot Patriot, lived. He reported that they left with “nothing of our property, but a [riding] chair and Horse and the cloathes we had on our bodies.” While his family stayed there, he went back and forth, fifty miles though contested territory and despite the danger, to minister to his congregations in Schraalenburgh and Hackensack. With his home destroyed he rented rooms in local houses. When one of these was raided in March 1780, he escaped capture by hiding in the chimney, while some fifty to sixty others not so successful were seized. Warned by Patriots, including his brother-in-law, Colonel John Cantine and General George Clinton, both of New York, that he should leave what was the “most dangerous place on the continent,” he persisted. Loyalists tried to ambush and capture him, but he carried a firearm and was accompanied by two armed soldiers from his congregation. Like Caldwell’s church in Elizabethtown, it had a core of committed Patriots. After the Peace Treaty he returned but “found a shattered Parsonage, Doors and Windows broken, 80 panes of Glass broken, &c and spent a solitary disagreeable twelve month at this place.” At the end of the year Romeyn left for Schenectady, New York, where he served the Dutch Reformed Church there and helped establish Union College. He preached in both Dutch and English, and the membership in his church grew to 2,500 parishioners.23 Romeyn is just one of the Dutch Reformed ministers from the Coetus faction of the church, and members of their congregations, who were stubbornly Patriots as they suffered through the war. Their homes, barns, crops, and churches were destroyed by British, Hessian, and Loyalist forces (often neighbors), as well as appropriated by foraging Patriots. Those who lived in the Hackensack valley close to British headquarters in New York were also repeated targeted in raids that captured and carted them off to prisons in the city and ships in the harbor. Some (for example, John Fell) were exchanged, others died. Romeyn lost his

FIG. 8 Inventory of Goods of Reverend Dirck Romeyn Taken by the British Army, November

1776. A Dutch Reformed minister in the Hackensack valley in northern New Jersey, Romeyn was a Patriot living in an area where the war pitted neighbor against neighbor. His claims were for damages done when the British marched into and through New Jersey in the fall of 1776. (Source: Legislature, Inventories of Damages by the British and Americans in New Jersey, 1776–1782. New Jersey State Archives, Department of State.)

Patriots Part I: The Adamant and Determined • 49

home, and his family became refugees, but they all survived and then moved out of state to a place where there had been less destruction. David Forman (1745–1797), son of a shipping merchant, Presbyterian, and Monmouth County landowner, was an early and adamant supporter of the Revolution. He served in 1774 on the Committee of Observation, in the militia, and then the state and Continental armies, including at the battles of Long Island, White Plains, Germantown, and Monmouth. As a militia general he was so persistent in efforts to suppress Loyalists that he earned the name “Black David” for his actions, supposedly even holding the rope when one was hanged. In 1780 he led the Monmouth County Committee for Retaliation, “whose purpose was to make retribution to such friends of their country as may hereafter have their houses burned or broke to pieces, their property destroyed or wantonly plundered, their persons made prisoner while peaceably at their own habitations, about lawful business and not under arms.” This vigilante group was the Patriot version of William Franklin’s Loyalist Associators. Both organizations have been accused of excessive and illegal use of violence. The New Jersey legislature declared the Retaliators “an illegal and dangerous combination.” It refused to legalize the group, but also failed to eliminate it, or to remove Forman who also served as a local judge. Living and serving in Monmouth county, exposed to numerous raids with many Loyalist neighbors, according to Michael Adelberg, Forman was part of a Monmouth County group that “coerced elections, manipulated the legal system, rigged the auctions of confiscated Loyalist estates, engaged in a series of collusive privateering and salt-making ventures and perpetrated an unending string of harassments against perceived enemies.” He represents the Patriot who wanted an “eye for an eye.” Not surprisingly at the end of the war he opposed the return of Loyalists. After the war he concentrated on his landholdings in New Jersey and beyond, some fraudulently obtained in the purchase of confiscated estates. In 1794 he moved to Maryland, and went west to Natchez, Mississippi, to look after property there. He had a stroke, then was captured by a British privateer on his way home and died on board. Forman has been described as a “furious whig,” a profiteer, and a vindictive man.24 Francis Barber (1750–1783), a 1770 graduate of the College of New Jersey, taught at the academy in Elizabethtown before the war. Probably his most famous student was Alexander Hamilton, whom he prepared for admission to Kings College. Barber joined the Second New Jersey Regiment and served in the Continental army throughout the war, rising through the ranks to colonel. A respected leader, he has been described as an “officer of force and judgment.” He was wounded at the Battle of Monmouth (most seriously), and at Newton, faced down the mutineers at Morristown, and then was wounded again at Yorktown. Ironically, while participating in the encampment at Newburgh, he

50 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

died when hit by a tree that was being cut down on an afternoon when he and his wife, Anne (Nancy) Ogden Barber, were scheduled to have tea with Martha Washington. Besides his wife he left behind three young children.25 Ephraim Anderson (1740–1777), from Maidenhead, served in the Continental army. He died at the battle of Short Hills, leaving a wife and two sons. David Mulford (1748–1777) of Greenwich died in a skirmish at Haddonfield, leaving a wife and three children. Joseph Murray (?–1780) of Monmouth County was attacked while home working in a cornfield, leaving a wife and son. These are just a few examples of the many small farmers, tradesmen, and others who mostly have been lost to history. In his often-quoted account of the war, Private Joseph Plumb Martin, whose service included several stints in the state, observed in 1777 that “Great men get great praise; little men, nothing. But it was always so and always will be.”26

Disease and Other Factors In the Revolutionary War for every soldier killed by bullets, cannon balls, or bayonets, ten died from disease.27 Early in the war Patriot soldiers, including those from New Jersey, died in large numbers—while conducting the siege of Boston after Lexington and Concord, during the unsuccessful attack on the British in Canada, and in military camps in and around New York City, due to the lack of knowledge about sanitation. It took a dreadful toll until the Patriots began to learn lessons that the British knew from years of experience: dig pits for latrines away from tents, other structures, and sources of water. Failure to do so meant numerous cases of “camp fever.” Contributing factors were also the primitive surgical techniques, lack of anesthesia, and nonexistence of antibiotics. Other diseases took a toll during the war. Exposure resulted in pneumonia, lack of food in scurvy and starvation, close quarters “the flux” (dysentery, typhus) and probably also TB. Particularly deadly was smallpox, including in and around Morristown the first time the Continental army wintered there in 1777. Nearly a third of the residents died that winter. When the army returned in 1779–1780, in far greater numbers, it is not surprising that the locals were not as welcoming. Smallpox was particularly devastating (as the figures for Morristown indicate)—more for Patriot than British forces, who had acquired immunity either through bouts with the disease or through inoculation. Washington, who had survived smallpox while young, wisely began the inoculation of the troops early in 1777, but unfortunately not all local civilians. He did want those in whose homes soldiers were quartered to be inoculated. Some protested, but he convinced the Reverend Jacob Green (1722–1790) that this needed to be done. Green’s Presbyterian church in Hanover was one of those then used for this purpose. The concern expressed was connected to the real danger the procedure

Patriots Part I: The Adamant and Determined • 51

presented. Patients were scratched and then a thread with pus from an infected person was inserted, resulting in a hopefully mild case of the disease. Because the patient was then contagious, they were quarantined until deemed fully recovered, otherwise they could spread the disease. After the Battle of Trenton, the barracks there was used as a Patriot hospital and place for inoculation. Several churches in the Morristown area, in addition to the Reverend Green’s, were also used as smallpox hospitals. Theodosia Ford’s father, the Reverend Timothy Johnes, was the minister of the First Presbyterian Church in Morristown. The church was used as a smallpox hospital in 1777, and that year he went to 205 funerals; 68 had died from the disease. His son, Theodosia’s brother, was a surgeon in the militia. Both citizens and soldiers succumbed to the disease, as did some of those who tried to help them. Dr. Jonathan Horton (?–1777) died while treating smallpox patients in Morristown that winter. He left a wife, Elizabeth King Horton (1749–1823) with four small children (the youngest born shortly after he died), and no support. His father, a Presbyterian minister who assisted in caring for the ill, died as well from the disease.28 Reverend Philip Vickers Fithian. An example of a Patriot lost because of the conditions in the camps is Philip Vickers Fithian (1747–1776), a farm boy from Greenwich, Cumberland County, in south Jersey, where his family raised grain and fruit crops. The oldest of seven children he underwent a conversion experience in 1766 during a local revival, and then convinced his father to provide an education first at an academy and then the College of New Jersey from which he graduated in 1772. He then served as a tutor on the Virginia plantation of Robert Carter III, keeping a diary of his experiences that has long been used by historians for the insights it provides into southern life (from slavery to socializing and politics) on the eve of the Revolution. Fithian returned to New Jersey and was soon licensed as a Presbyterian minister, praying on the day he passed the exam for “wisdom, Fidelity, Zeal, Prudence & Perseverance.” He also asked God to “Furnish me with a uniform & unbiass’d love for my Country; & give me courage to engage in every method that has a tendency to save her from Ruin, even if my life should be in Danger in the Competition.” He married Elizabeth Beatty, and then joined Patriot forces on Long Island in 1776 as a Continental army chaplain. He barely escaped when George Washington evacuated his army to Manhattan, wrote his wife, describing events and blaming “Cruel George” (George III) for the war and keeping them apart. Then he died at Fort Washington on October 8, 1776, of “camp fever” (dysentery) contracted while he was ministering to other soldiers. Historian John Fea sees Fithian and his friends as part of a rural enlightenment, absorbing ideas that inclined them to discuss literature and politics, participate in protests that destroyed tea, and then to join the Patriot forces. Thus Fithian’s religion, education, friends, and family all contributed to his becoming an ardent Patriot. But it was the lack of proper

52 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

sanitation that produced contaminated “vile water,” and insufficient housing that left him and others sleeping on the cold ground amid crowding, that spread disease. He paid with his life.29 Jacob Ford Jr. (1738–1777), Morris County iron master and militia officer, while out in cold weather came down with pneumonia and died at age thirty-nine. His father, mother, and two-year-old daughter Phebe also died that winter, of smallpox. His wife, Theodosia Ford, was left behind with three children. Washington took over her house (large for the times) during the winter encampment of 1779–1780. She and the children crowded into two rooms, while he, his wife Martha, staff members, and guards occupied all the other rooms or areas outside. For a while thirty-five occupied the property. Washington paid for the use of the house but in depreciated money.30 At times those who survived military action and imprisonment suffered loss of limbs and impaired health. Hendrick Kuyper of Bergen County, a member of Romeyn’s congregation, a founder of Queens College and local government official, lost $5,000 worth of property, including two houses, two barns, and then his leg in militia action.31 Another example is William Crane (1748–1814) of Elizabethtown. He was the son of Stephen Crane (1709–1780) who owned a ferryboat that connected Elizabethtown and Staten Island, until the British burned both boat and ferry house. The son served as a soldier during the Revolution despite being wounded at the Battle of Quebec in 1775. His ankle never healed properly, and he died many years later from surgery to amputate that leg.32

Black Patriots Alan Gilbert’s recent book on Blacks who fought in the Revolutionary war argues that they did so in larger numbers than historians have realized, and for both sides, Patriots and Loyalists. Ironically, because the British recorded those Loyalists who were evacuated from New York and taken to Canada, they are easier to trace. In the case of the Patriots, George Washington was initially reluctant to have Blacks serve as soldiers but changed his mind when he observed those in Rhode Island units. States then varied in their legal rules and actual practice so that there are examples of free and slave Blacks who fought for the Patriots, were wounded, imprisoned, and died. New Jersey’s Militia Act of 1777 permitted “all effective men between fifteen and fifty” to serve. This was later changed to exclude slaves, then back again in 1779 to “all able bodied.” Blacks participated as soldiers, waggoneers, couriers, spies, and more. Recent estimates are that 10 percent of those in the Continental army were Black, coming from all states except South Carolina and Georgia. This means that there were an estimated 350 at Morristown during the winter of 1779–1780, possibly 20 to 40 of them New Jersey men. Often slaves expected freedom in return their military service—some were successful, others were not.33

Patriots Part I: The Adamant and Determined • 53

Free Blacks who served included Oliver Cromwell and William Stives. Cromwell (1752–1853), born in Columbus, New Jersey, was a farmer before and after the war. He served in the Continental army crossing the Delaware in 1776 with Washington to fight at Trenton, and then at Princeton, Brandywine, Monmouth, and eventually Yorktown. He died in Burlington City after a very long life. William Stives (1760–1839) served in the New Jersey Continental Line, first as a fifer at Valley Forge and then as a private, for a total of over five years, before being honorably discharged at Newburgh. He had been in the battles at Monmouth, Newtown, Springfield, and Yorktown as well as the campaign against the Indians. He then lived out his life with his wife Catherine Vanois and ten children on a small farm on Sourland Mountain, in Hopewell, where he became a member of the Old School Baptist Church. In 1827 Stives’s service was recognized when he qualified for a military pension. Descendants are still present in the area.34 The slaves who served included Caesar (1702–1806), owned by the Drake family of Plainfield, who served as a waggoneer in the war. He was freed by the will of Isaac Drake ten years after Drake died. A member of the Scotch Plains Baptist Church, he served as one of its deacons.35 Jack Cudjo of Newark, who substituted for Benjamin Coe, his master, fought and was freed. He later owned land on High Street. Cyrus Bustill (1732–1806), the son of a white master who was a Burlington County Quaker, was sold after his father’s death, then apprenticed to Christopher Ludwig a baker. Bustill bought his freedom and produced bread for the Continental army. After the war he moved to Philadelphia, where he was an important leader of the local Black community. Two slaves, Peter Williams and Cato, part of confiscated Loyalist property, were freed by the state legislature for their services during the war. More complicated is the story of Samuel Sutphen/Sutphin (1747–1841). His original owner was the Loyalist Bernardus Lagrange (whose claim for compensation mentions a slave named Sam worth £80). When the war started, he was the slave of Guisbert Bogart of Somerset County. Bought by Casper Berger, he was promised that if he served in Berger’s place he would receive his freedom at the end of the war. Sutphen served with the local militia in a number of actions in New Jersey 1776–1778 and was present at the Battle of Monmouth. He joined Continental forces for the western campaign against the Indians, then was wounded in a skirmish at West Point. At the end of the war, instead of the promised freedom he was sold first to Peter Ten Eyck of North Branch, second to Reverend Duryea, and then to Peter Sutphen. This master’s wife promised him freedom if he would pay her £92.10, which he managed to save and was then freed in 1805. He later moved to Liberty Corners, where he purchased a small farm. Several times he applied for a pension and was denied (as were most Black applicants). In 1834 he again applied for a pension, saying that he was eighty-seven and could no longer work. This time, when his application was denied, several

FIG. 9 Samuel Sutphen was an enslaved Black man who served in the Revolution expecting to be freed at its end. Instead, he was transferred to other owners, and later permitted to buy his freedom. Impoverished in old age he unsuccessfully applied for a federal veteran’s pension but was then provided with state assistance. (Source: Abstract Federal Pension Claim, 1833. Department of Defense, Adjutant General’s Office, Revolutionary War, Abstracts of Federal Pension Claims, 1810s–1840s. New Jersey State Archives, Department of State.)

Patriots Part I: The Adamant and Determined • 55

of his important friends in New Jersey, including the then governor, helped get a law through the 1836 state legislature giving him a $50 annual pension. He died in 1841, aged ninety-four.36 There are more names, but few stories as detailed as Sutphen’s. Clearly, he fought hoping to gain his freedom, but it is not always clear why others did so.

Loss of Property The loss of property in New Jersey during the war was massive, documented in letters, records collected, and even poems such as the one about the First Presbyterian Church of Elizabethtown, but they have never been added up. For eight years soldiers from both sides marched through the state, fought battles, conducted raids, encamped on the land. Homes, churches, public buildings (courthouses) were damaged and destroyed, and trees were cut down to build fortifications and huts for soldiers, as well as for firewood to keep them warm. Crops, farm animals, and wagons were consumed. Some property was targeted to eliminate the ability and willpower to continue fighting, or to keep from the hands of the enemy. There are many descriptions and a contemporary effort to obtain information, but there are no totals. Recognizing the damage that had been done Congress asked the states to collect information. New Jersey responded and on December 20, 1781, the state legislature passed a law to “Procure an Estimate of the Damages Sustained by the Inhabitants of the State from the Waste and Spoil Committed by the Troop in the Service of the Enemy and their Adherents, by the Continental Army, or by the Militia of this or the Neighboring States.” The legislature wanted reports so that it could provide for the “relief of those who have suffered.” Three appraisers per county were to be appointed to evaluate what was submitted. Claimants needed to provide inventories, “a List of the specified Goods, Chattels, or Property of what Nature or Kind so ever, so damaged, wasted, spoiled, plundered, burned or destroyed, expressing the time when and the troops by whom the same was done.” The claims were to be evaluated at prices current in 1775 and needed to be confirmed by witnesses. Some counties did a better job of collecting the information than others; there are returns from seven of the then existing thirteen counties (Bergen, Burlington, Essex, Hunterdon, Middlesex, Morris, and Somerset) that survive and are now housed in the collections of the New Jersey State Archives. It is not known if the remaining six counties’ reports have been lost or were never collected. Surely there was damage in Monmouth, but perhaps not in Cape May, where, although exposed to water attacks, armies did not march through. Middlesex filed the most reports, 655 out of approximately 2,000, with an estimated £80,000 in losses there blamed on the British.37 The reports did not help those who experienced the losses. The state had good intentions, but neither it nor the central government had the resources to pay for what had been destroyed. There was no insurance to cover damages from fire,

56 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

certainly none for acts of God, nature, or an enemy or the equivalent of “friendly fire” during wartime. Instead, those who sustained the losses had to make replacements on their own, slowly, and as best they could. On this matter Loyalists who filed claims with the British government, and collected anything, did better than their Patriot neighbors. Specific examples of damages done during the war have been mentioned in this chapter and are scattered through the rest of this book, but it is worth looking at a few examples of Patriots who suffered at the hands of the enemy and of their “friends.” In the Hackensack valley “no known patriot escaped” damage done by the British; they lost “much or little, as they had much or little.” The Reverend Dirck Romeyn’s claim, a detailed six-page list, totaled £387.11.7. As previously noted, it included household and personal items, one page devoted to his lost books (religious and political texts), intriguingly also a thirty-two-pound cheese, eight pounds of tea, and two gold rings. Although damaged the house survived. David Bonnel Sr., a Connecticut Farms, Essex County, farmer, reported damage done in June 1780, of £218.7.3. Included, and accounting for more than half the amount, was his house, then also a barn, tools, furniture, dishes, pots, pans, bedding, clothing, food, several books (including Watts’s sermons—he most likely was a Presbyterian), fruit trees, and fence materials. Not a wealthy man, given the list he probably lost everything he had.38 Two examples come from Trenton, which was a site of early industrialization before, during, and then long after the Revolution. During the war particularly important were efforts to construct iron and steel products for the Patriot military, making it a target for attack. Born in Connecticut John Fitch (1743–1798) is remembered for his work on an early steamboat that was tested on the Delaware River in 1787. But during the war he, like Benjamin Yard, worked in Trenton on early metal production. In his case it was the production of guns and buttons for the Patriots’ forces. In December 1776, the British burned his shop with all its contents, the estimated value was $3,000. He then served briefly in the New Jersey militia, worked repairing arms in Trenton, moved to Kentucky, and did surveying. After the war he was in Philadelphia for a time, developing his steamboat, then traveled elsewhere but ended back in Kentucky. Beset by legal and financial problems he apparently committed suicide. Fitch might have failed anyway, but the losses during the war probably did not help.39 Benjamin Yard (1718–1808) was the son of William Yard and Mary Tindall, early Trenton settlers and inn keepers. In 1774 he married Ann Pearson (?–1772), and they had eight children who survived. In 1745 he purchased a plating mill on Petty’s Run from Isaac Harrow, and by 1750 had built a steel furnace, one of the first in the colonies. He sold the furnace in 1762 to Timothy Matlack and Owen Biddle, two Philadelphia Quakers originally from Burlington County, but kept the mill while also operating a fishery from an island in the river. A Presbyterian and a strong Patriot, the notice of his death referred to him as “one of the

FIG. 10 Benjamin Yard’s 1782 Claims for Damages by the Patriots. During the Revolution, property of New Jersey residents was destroyed by friends, enemies, and sometimes just rascals. Yard’s Trenton property was damaged by Patriots who were trying to keep it out of the hands of the British. (Source: RG Legislature, Inventories of Damages by the British and Americans in New Jersey, 1776–1782, Box 4—Damages done by the Americans, #34 bound volume, New Jersey State Archives, Department of State.)

58 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

early and inflexible revolutionary patriots, who never wavered in his principles nor varied in his conduct.” During the war he served as a recruiting officer and a justice of the peace, and among other things produced small arms (guns and swords). In September 1777, with the British now across the river in Philadelphia, Continental forces “In the Service of the United States” raided his property and destroyed the facility to keep it out of the hands of the enemy. On October 22, 1782, he filed a claim for damages, including to his stable and barn, as well as for a large boat, two fish houses, six barrels of herring, and a canoe. The total claim was for £231.9.3, nearly half of it for the plate mill. York and his family remained and rebuilt, and in 1786 he remarried, Jean West/Wert (?–1795). He survived her and lived a long life.40

Summary and Conclusions The adamant Patriots discussed in this chapter, as well as many not mentioned, reflected the diversity of the colony and state. They were white and Black, free and slave, male and female. While the number of Presbyterians stand out there were also Anglicans (Francis Hopkinson and his Borden in-laws, as well as William Alexander/Lord Stirling and members of the Stevens family), Dutch Reformed, Baptists, and as will be seen some Quakers. They included those with much (William Livingston) or little to lose. Legend has it that as members of the Second Continental Congress signed the Declaration of Independence, Benjamin Franklin said, although they then stood together, they might well later all hang together. New Jersey’s adamant Patriots knew this was a possible fate. Several discussed in this chapter specifically mentioned it, including Abraham Clark and William Livingston. They understood the danger the Revolution posed, especially in New Jersey. They and their families often paid a heavy price in terms of lives lost and property destroyed. Also, as opposing forces, whether British, Hessian, or Loyalist, repeatedly moved through the state, they relocated. Usually when historians write about refugees in the Revolution it is regarding the Loyalists. But Patriots also fled from New York City and Philadelphia to New Jersey when the British occupied those places—New Jerseyans to Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware, and farther when forces moved through their state. For some, including William Livingston, Reverend John Witherspoon, Reverend Alexander MacWhorter, and others this proved temporary—they returned. But there were also those who left and never came back, including talented men and their families—John Dickinson Sergeant, Francis Hopkinson, and others. Historians have also noted the financial costs to Loyalists whose property was confiscated. Patriots paid a heavy price in the destruction wrought by the war throughout the state. While they could and some did document their losses, they could not collect from state and federal governments that had little to spare

Patriots Part I: The Adamant and Determined • 59

during and after the war. Ironically, some Loyalists did collect from the British government. Also, it must be noted that some benefited from the war. Caesar obtained his freedom, increasing the number of free Blacks in the years after the Revolution. William Paterson, an immigrant from Antrim, Ireland, attended the College of New Jersey, became a lawyer, and married a well-placed woman. He purchased confiscated property with money earned during the Revolution and rose in wealth and status. He later served as governor, and then as a member of the U.S. Supreme Court. David Forman and other radical “retaliators” in Monmouth County, as well as unscrupulous men elsewhere, profited.41 At the end as the British and Loyalists rushed to evacuate New York City in 1783, some of their goods were sold or confiscated, at times to profiteers. When the war ended, even those adamant Patriots who had made it through and worried about the future, celebrated their victory. They welcomed the peace with prayers and, in places like Bordentown, with bonfires.

3

Patriots Part II In the Maelstrom On November 30, 1776, while trying to escape the advancing British army, Richard Stockton (1730–1781), one of the New Jersey signers of the Declaration of Independence, fled his home in Princeton and went into Monmouth County.1 While that area is remembered by historians for its significant Loyalist population, he was headed for Freehold, a Presbyterian and Patriot center. But Stockton and his companion John Covenhoven (an area farmer and member of the state legislature) were both captured by local Loyalists when Covenhoven’s home was raided. Separated from their families they were turned over to the British at Perth Amboy and taken into New York City where they were imprisoned in the notorious Provost jail. Stockton was housed there through December, without heat, blankets, or much in the way of food or clothing. Reputedly treated roughly, at the time when it looked as though the Revolution would collapse, he took an oath of loyalty to the king and was paroled/released. By mid-January, after the British had retreated to New Brunswick, Stockton was back in Princeton. His story enables us to ponder the experiences of Patriots caught in the maelstrom of the Revolution. It provides an opportunity to discuss the oaths required by both sides, the treatment of prisoners of war, the provisions made to help them, and to consider what it took to survive and the numbers who did not. To note the “get out of jail” options including release, parole, exchange, escape, or a confusing combination of all four, but also going over to the other side. It raises the question of how independence, and the rigidity with which it was viewed by both

60

Patriots Part II: In the Maelstrom • 61

the British government and the American Congress complicated matters and made pawns out of prisoners. Stockton has been disparaged as the only signer, out of fifty-six, “to take it back.”2 Assertions made that he was ill when released are true, but claims that he died soon afterward as a consequence of his treatment are false. The actual story is much more interesting. It suffices to note here that he picked up the pieces of his life, took a formal oath of allegiance to the Patriot government, resumed his law practice, and then in 1781 died from cancer of the mouth. Meanwhile, the larger Stockton family, overwhelmingly Patriots, was involved in helping prisoners of war, and in serving the state and national government. Richard Stockton and his family paid a price for being Patriots, but then so did others who were captured, British, Hessians, and Loyalists as well as Patriots. Many died, either as prisoners or afterward, as a result of the conditions they endured. They died of malnutrition, disease, neglect, and mistreatment. That could have been Stockton’s fate as well.

Background on Stockton Richard Stockton came from a Quaker family that had arrived in the New World in the seventeenth century. By the 1730s they were well-to-do landowners and involved in New Jersey political affairs. His father, John Stockton, assisted in establishing the College of New Jersey by pledging funds and by helping to locate a site in Princeton, one of several towns competing for the honor.3 By this time, the 1740s, the family had become Presbyterians, the religious affiliation of the college’s founders. Richard Stockton was the fourth generation of his family to live in the colonies, and was a member of the first graduating class, in 1748. Afterward he studied law with David Ogden, a leading lawyer in the colony, and married Annis Boudinot (1736–1801), an educated young woman who came from a less prominent family of French Huguenot background. Stockton prospered as a landowner and a lawyer, eventually becoming one of the five most prominent attorneys in the colony. In the 1750s they built Morven, an elegant house on the outskirts of Princeton.4 He was hardworking, perhaps too much so, because his health suffered. In 1766 he went to England to recover, leaving his wife and young children behind. In many ways the trip was typical of well-to-do young men of his status, and he used his time there to make the acquaintance of a number of English officials (including Lord Dartmouth), even obtaining an introduction to the king. While abroad, Stockton took on some business for the college. He journeyed to Scotland in an attempt to persuade John Witherspoon to accept the position as president of the institution. At first unsuccessful, he enlisted the aid of Benjamin Rush, who was studying medicine there. Like other young Americans who made the trip “home” about this time, Stockton was impressed by what he saw in

62 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

FIG. 11 Richard Stockton (1730–1781). An early graduate of the College of New Jersey, he was a successful lawyer, judge, and member of the royal council. Supporting colonial rights in 1776, he represented New Jersey in the Second Continental Congress, where he signed the Declaration of Independence. Captured in November and imprisoned in New York City, he was among those who took an oath of allegiance to the Crown. Released, he went on to help the college and the Patriot cause. (Source: Oil painting attributed to John Wollaston (ca. 1710–ca. 1767). Princeton University Art Museum, bequest of Mrs. Alexander T. McGill.)

England, and he impressed those he met. Rush wrote a friend that “Stockton did honor to his country here in Scotland. Everyone was charmed with him. His truly polite address, his benevolence of temper, and his great attachment to the civil and religious interests of America can never be sufficiently extolled.”5 Stockton returned to New Jersey in 1767 and soon assumed an important role in the

Patriots Part II: In the Maelstrom • 63

colonial government. He was appointed a member of the royal council in 1768, and in 1774 a judge on the Supreme Court of the colony.6 In 1764, before he went to England, Stockton had suggested Americans be represented in Parliament, and the fact that they were not appears to have influenced his reaction to British policies. The following year, when the New Jersey legislature failed to select delegates to the Stamp Act Congress to be held in New York City, he urged that this be done. If not, he said, “we shall not only look like a speckled bird among our Sister Colonies, but we shall say implicitly that we think it no oppression.” Rather “the Representatives of the People ought not to be silent. They ought to complain constitutionally. They should complain to the King; not to Parliament whose Authority they do not and ought not to acknowledge.” Also, he has been credited as the possible author of “Ceasariansis,” an essay that appeared in the New York Gazette of September 12, 1765. It stated that Parliament had no more right to tax colonists than the “inhabitants of the moon.”7 Given his statements in 1765, it was appropriate that before he returned home from England in 1767 Stockton delivered an address from the College of New Jersey to the king, thanking him for repealing the Stamp Act.8 While in England Stockton wrote a letter to a British merchant expressing his loyalty, while objecting to British limitations on paper money and trade and opposing internal taxes. He referred to the idea of “independence” as “absurd,” yet he maintained that the colonists would resist, and a resulting war could only lead to disaster for both England and the colonies. In 1774 he repeated the prediction of war: “a civil war the most obstinate awful and tremendous that perhaps ever occurred since the Creation of the world.” Now he offered a proposal aimed at avoiding that by suggesting the equivalent of commonwealth status, described as “self-government . . . independent of Parliament” with continued “allegiance to the Crown.” To end the impasse, he suggested that a joint conference be held in England with representatives sent by the king or Parliament, and by each colonial legislature, and that it should create “One general System of Government for all the Colonies on the Continent, similar to the British, Or . . . [make] some material alteration in the present mode of provincial Government.” He maintained that whatever system would be devised it must provide “for the adequate support of the American Government by the Americans themselves.” In addition, the Boston Port Bill should be suspended while the changes were worked out.9 His views at the time of the Stamp Act were quite radical; his writings of 1774 show him suggesting changes in government structure to avoid war, not agreeing to parliamentary taxation. There is no question that in June and July 1776 Stockton threw his hand in with those supporting a new nation. Elected to the Second Continental Congress, he voted for independence. His commitment to the cause was further evident in August 1776 when the first state government organized under its new constitution met; the two houses of the legislature sitting in joint session elected the governor. William Livingston (head of the state militia) and Stockton (still

64 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

a member of the Continental Congress) tied on the first vote. Although initially willing to be considered, Stockton now stepped aside (he either agreed to or was maneuvered into this course). Offered the position of chief judge in the state he declined. Instead, he returned to his duties as a member of the Continental Congress.10 Prior to this Stockton had been elected to several congressional committees. His first appointment, on July 11, 1776, was to investigate a plot to release prisoners in Philadelphia; on July 15 he was appointed to a committee on the “flying camp”; and on August 9 he was to encourage Hessian soldiers serving the king to “quit that iniquitous service.” Returning from New Jersey in the fall of 1776, he increasingly served on committees dealing with military matters, all directly involved in furthering the war effort. On September 24 he was appointed to a committee of five directed to find ways to help the northern army; it reported the next day, suggesting members be sent to Ticonderoga to consult on how to encourage reenlistments, obtain supplies, and improve the hospitals. On September 26 Stockton and George Clymer of Pennsylvania were selected to make the trip.11 The two traveled to northern New York to see firsthand the condition of the troops who had returned from the defeat at Quebec, and to examine Fort Ticonderoga, which the Patriots had captured the previous winter. In addition to sending reports to Congress, Stockton wrote to Abraham Clark, saying that he had left a resolution with the New Jersey legislature recommending that they appoint “persons in every county” to help raise supplies for the army, and he wanted Clark to follow up and see that this was done. The greatest need was for “shoes and stockings” as “many are bare footed & bare legged.” Stockton continued, “my heart melts with compassion for my brave country men who are thus [venturing?] their lives in the public service.” If there was a “single Shoe or stocking to be had in this part of the [world?] . . . [I] would purchase them with my own money.” After this trip Congress clearly expected him to continue furthering the war effort. On November 23 it appointed him to a committee of five to help Washington obstruct “the progress of General Howe’s army,” but he did not serve.12 Ironically, he was captured the same day the New Jersey legislature, meeting in Burlington and unaware of his fate, had reappointed him to a second one-year term in the Continental Congress.13 Apparently on December 2, 1776, while in prison, he resigned.

The War of Oaths Oaths were commonly required in Britain, its American colonies, and elsewhere in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (and earlier). They were required in court proceedings (even today witnesses in legal cases “swear to tell the truth”), of government officials, and to indicate loyalty to one’s monarch. Quakers objected to taking oaths, which made it difficult for them to participate in early New Jersey and Pennsylvania governments and then during the Revolution. But

Patriots Part II: In the Maelstrom • 65

some of them would “affirm” rather than “swear,” and even before the Revolution New Jersey had made provisions for this. In New Jersey, and most but not all other states, women were not required to take oaths of allegiance. Married women, under the concept of coverture, were assumed to share the adherence of their husbands.14 The Patriots countered British demands with their own oaths, and local Committees of Safety demanded signatures (also with threats of imprisonment and execution). The New Jersey Constitution of 1776 provided that members of the legislature had to take an “Oath or Affirmation” to maintain provisions of the document. In August, the first session of the legislature also required the following oath or affirmation of all its members: “that I do not hold myself bound to bear Allegiance to George the third King of Great-Britain; that I will not, by any Means, directly or indirectly, oppose the Measures adopted by this State or the Continental Congress against the Tyranny attempted to be established over these States by the Court of Great Britain; and that I do and will bear true Allegiance to the Government established in this State under the Authority of the People.” A similar oath was later required of all officeholders, lawyers, and teachers, as well as those whose allegiance was questioned. To refuse was to forfeit the rights of citizenship, and to be unable to vote or hold office. It also meant the person’s property was subject to confiscation, and the person to possible exile. On July 14, 1776, shortly after arriving in New York harbor, British brothers Admiral Richard Howe and General William Howe issued a proclamation stating that the King would generously grant “free and general Pardon to all those who, in the Tumult and Disorder of the Times, may have deviated from their just Allegiance” but were now willing to sign an oath and return to their duty. If “dutiful Representation is received” (emphasis added) they would be given a pardon. The British-required oath appeared repeatedly (at least on August 23, September  19, October  7, and November  30, 1776, plus March  15, 1777, and later) as Patriots failed to give up the fight for independence. Later versions were more demanding and specific, becoming more threatening over time for those who refused to come in and declare their allegiance to the king. Consequences of refusal were also arrest, loss of the rights of citizenship, and confiscation of property.15 As noted, one version was published on November 30, 1776, the date Richard Stockton was captured. It promised a pardon to “all persons speedily returning to their just allegiance.” It stated that “every person who within sixty days . . . will declare to remain in a peaceable obedience to his Majesty, and will not take up arms, nor encourage others to take up arms in opposition to his authority” may obtain a “free and general pardon” for “all treasons and misprisions of treasons, by him heretofore committed or done, and of all forfeitures, attainders and penalties for the same.”16 In response to British demands an estimated 2,700 residents of New Jersey, as well as many in New York, signed an oath of loyalty to the crown in the fall

66 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

FIG. 12 General William Howe and Admiral Richard Howe’s oath of allegiance to the king,

July 14, 1776. After they arrived in New York harbor the Howe brothers, British commanders, issued a series of proclamations requiring that local residents sign an oath of allegiance to the royal government. That fall and winter several thousand who were Loyalists, as well as Patriots who were convinced that their cause was lost, did sign. (Source: Broadside, Evans #14783, Early America microforms.)

of 1776. Some Patriots signed because they believed the war would soon end in a British victory, and others did so under pressure (including the threats of imprisonment and execution). Reflecting this difficult time William Paterson later wrote that he wished “the Months of November and December 1776 could be erased out of the Calendar of Time.”17 This can be compared to what happened in Philadelphia when it was captured in 1777 and an estimated 6,000 defected to the British and took the oath (many of those who were Loyalists later leaving when the British evacuated), the 1,400  in Georgia in 1778, and

Patriots Part II: In the Maelstrom • 67

then in Charleston in 1780, when some 2,000 of the 3,400 soldiers who had surrendered were paroled (although within a year nearly half of local militia had rejoined the Patriots).18 In many places others kept quiet or tried to. At least one brave, or foolish, Morris County woman refused any compliance. Anna Kitchel objected that accepting British protection (in return for loyalty) was not “womanly seeing I have a husband, father, and five brothers in the army.”19 General Washington, in response to the Howe brothers as the deadline in their offer approached, issued an order from Morristown on January 25, 1777, that all those “influenced by inimical motives, intimidated by the threats of the enemy, or deluded by the Proclamation” who had taken the oath or accepted protection needed within thirty days to report and take an oath to the United States. Abraham Clark, at that time one of New Jersey’s representatives in Congress, objected that it should not interfere with actions by the states. This was referred to a committee, which reported on February 27, 1777, that it “does not interfere with the laws or Civil Government of any State, but considering the situation of the Army was prudent and necessary.”20 Thus both the state and national governments could require oaths of loyalty, which they did. In June 1777 New Jersey passed an Act for Free and General Pardon, requiring an oath of loyalty to avoid confiscation of property. Afterward some captured Loyalist soldiers were threatened with execution unless they took an oath and agreed to serve in the Continental Army (many who did so then deserted). Although no copy has ever been found, it can be assumed that Richard Stockton took an oath of allegiance to the king to gain his release. Evidence is in the comments of the Reverend John Witherspoon, notes in the records of the Continental Congress, and statements of Benjamin Rush (his son-in-law). Witherspoon wrote his son David, “Judge Stockton is not very well in health and is much spoken against for his conduct. He signed Howe’s Declaration and gave his word of Honour that he would not meddle in the least in American affairs during the War.”21 In early February, Abraham Clark, representing New Jersey in the Continental Congress, wrote to John Hart, who was back in New Jersey and serving as speaker of the Assembly, that the state needed to appoint a replacement for Stockton who “by his late procedure cannot Act.”22 In March 1777, the New Jersey Council of Safety started to call in those who had taken a British oath, or when there were questions about their loyalty. There is clear evidence that Stockton was called in and took an Oath of Abjuration and Allegiance on December 22, 1777, because the document he signed still exists. It is a list signed by those called in to take an oath of allegiance to the Patriot government from August to December 1777. It represents a reversal of the oath to the king, and a declaration of allegiance to New Jersey. Richard Stockton was among those who pledged the following: “I____ do Sincerely profess and Swear that I do not hold myself Bound to bear Allegiance to the King of Great Brittain [sic]. So help me God. I____ do Sincerely profess and Swear that I do and will

68 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

bear true Faith and Allegiance to the Government Established in this State under the authority of the People. So help me God.”23 Richard Stockton was not the only signer of the Declaration of Independence captured during the war, but he is the only one accused of having “taken it back.” The four include George Walton (ca. 1741–1804), of Georgia, who was serving with the state militia when wounded and captured at the Battle for Savannah in 1778. He was held in Sunbury Prison until exchanged in October 1779 and was then elected governor. Three from South Carolina, Thomas Heyward  Jr. (1746–1809), Arthur Middleton (1742–1787), and Edward Rutledge (1749–1800), were among those at Charleston who surrendered in 1780 and then were imprisoned at St.  Augustine, Florida. Heyward and Rutledge were lawyers serving as artillery officers in the militia, Middleton was a wealthy plantation owner involved in local politics who had succeeded his father as a delegate to the Continental Congress in 1776. They were among the political leaders in South Carolina exiled in an effort to prevent them from resuming their efforts to aid the Patriot cause. After about a year they were transported to Philadelphia and exchanged.24 None took an oath of allegiance to the king, but then it was later in the war, France was an ally, and Britain was now fighting across the globe. Several issues need to be considered when looking at Stockton’s action. How seriously were oaths taken at that time? There were Loyalists who downplayed or laughed at oaths. William Smith Jr. (1726–1793), a lawyer and an ally of William Livingston in New York in the 1760s, said on July 4, 1776, that oaths “will in general be rather Masks to hide than Tests to discover the real Opinions of such as are not embued with an undaunted Integrity.” In the end his conscience led him to align with the king. While he was sincere, and went to Canada after the war, historian Michael Kammen, when writing about oaths in New York during the Revolution, concluded that there “are grave problems involved in trying to determine the sincerity of the oath-takers.” This was certainly the sense of a British officer serving in New York City who wrote home, “I should be very sorry to trust any one of them out of my sight. They swallow the Oaths of Allegiance to the Kings, & Congress Alternately, with as much ease as your Lordship does poached Eggs.”25 Ephraim Drake, a Sussex county Loyalist, said he had taken the Patriot “Oaths but I don’t regard them more than a fart.”26 Yet there were those who were very serious about taking an oath, accepting a parole, and then feeling honor bound by it. An example is Lambert Cadwalader, cousin of Philemon Dickinson, who felt he could not return to the Continental army unless formally released from his parole.27 He was not the only one with questions about following the rules of a parole, which came before Washington and at special meetings of officers. They judged cases individually, looking at the circumstances, at times urging parole violators to return for reasons of honor and

Patriots Part II: In the Maelstrom • 69

to facilitate the exchange of others.28 Military officers could accept a parole (and promise not to fight until exchanged), without signing an allegiance to the king. There was a discounted importance of oaths when taken under duress. Rawlins Lowndes, a former governor of South Carolina, signed the oath of allegiance to the king after British soldiers raided his plantation, “harassed his wife, and seized his slaves, horses, and poultry.” He and others thought they “had little choice but to submit.” Many in South Carolina also discounted such actions when they felt that the British had gone back on their promises at the time of the surrender.29 Michael Kammen concluded in his study of New York that there was a “widely” held view that “one oath, no matter how solemnly sworn, could be renounced in favor of another—even a contradictory oath.” Often Patriot authorities were glad to take someone back into the fold.30 This could also be true of Loyalists as well as Patriots. William Franklin felt no obligation to fulfill the terms of his parole, signed under duress. While being held prisoner in Connecticut, despite the terms of his parole, he encouraged Loyalist opposition to the Patriot governments. Over time rules of what prisoners can do have changed. Today it is worth noting that directions given to those in the U.S. military were altered after Vietnam, based on the experiences of John McCain and others held in prisons there during that much later war. Instructions then became to do what was necessary to survive, and thereby live to fight another day. Did it matter at the time that Stockton was a signer? There is no evidence that the British mentioned, let alone bragged about, his incarceration. But also, they did not note or brag about the signers among those captured in Charleston. At that time, they only recorded that Thomas Heyward was a “judge” who had presided over the trial and execution of local Loyalists.31 Further context provided in Pauline Maier’s argument shows that the Declaration of Independence was not considered to be as important as it is today; it did not become a sacred document until years later. But most important, in regard to Stockton, is her statement that “authenticated copies . . . ‘with the names of the members . . . subscribing the same’” were not sent to the states until January 18, 1777.32 They would not have been public knowledge until after Stockton’s release. Most likely he was imprisoned as a Patriot leader and member of the Continental Congress, not as a signer. Why would Stockton do this? The oath was taken under duress, while he was a prisoner held in dire circumstances resulting in his ill health. It appeared that the war was about to end with an American loss. In December 1776, even George Washington thought “the game was about up” and contemplated retreating to the west.33 Then the tide turned after the Battles of Trenton and Princeton; his health improved, and the British withdrew (although most of New Jersey continued to be dangerous). Stockton went back to practicing law, but to do so he needed to take the oath of abjuration. Also, he, along with others on that list,

70 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

was called in by the Committee of Safety. Yet, unlike some, he was treated kindly. Finally, he can be seen as fundamentally a Patriot. His subsequent actions reflected a genuine support for the Revolution, as will be seen when we come back to him. Moses Bloomfield. There are other examples of New Jersey Patriots caught up in the fall and winter of 1776 and 1777 who took the British path, and later reasserted their allegiance to the state. Stockton’s name is not the only one on that list—there are fifty-two others. An example (although not on that list) is Moses Bloomfield (1729–1791), descended from a family that had migrated to New Jersey in 1666. He studied medicine in Edinburgh, then returned and practiced in Woodbridge. He was a founding member of the New Jersey Medical Society, a Presbyterian, and often the secretary at town meetings. An early Patriot, he served in the colonial assembly and then the Provincial Congress. When British forces moved through in the fall of 1776, they “plundered” the family’s property, doing £500 of damage and taking the doctor prisoner. He had heard reports, both at the time false, that the British had taken Philadelphia, and Congress was disbanded. According to his son Joseph he received “the basest Treatment & the grossest insults from the Enemy.” Then, “rather than be sent Prisoner to New-York, haveing no other alternatives” he “took Lord Howe’s Protections” and was released. In mid-February “Delegated by the distressed Inhabitants of Woodbridge” he waited on “Washington respecting his Excellency’s late Proclamation.” This was probably the requirement to take an oath to the Patriot government. Moses Bloomfield returned home, but with both armies nearby he sent his daughters to south Jersey. Then he and his brother found themselves caught in the crossfire as a battle was fought on their land. Joseph wrote, “During the action my Uncle’s & Father’s Familys were obliged to take shelter in their Cellars on Account of the Cannon and Field-Pieces.” After that they moved from Woodbridge. In May 1777 Moses Bloomfield was commissioned a surgeon in the Continental Army. He must have then, if not earlier, sworn allegiance to the United States. Serving at a hospital in Hanover, he and his family moved to a house on the farm of Henry Wick, near Mendham. They later returned to Woodbridge. Married twice, Moses Bloomfield had four children. His son Joseph Bloomfield (1755–1823) attended Green’s Academy in south Jersey, studied law with Cortland Skinner, then moved to Cumberland County to practice. There he was friends with local Patriots and helped defend the Greenwich Tea burners. When Skinner departed to join the Loyalists in New York City, Bloomfield was among those who searched his home. He recruited local men in 1776, and then enlisted in the Continental army, serving in the Third New Jersey Regiment. Wounded at Brandywine and Monmouth, he resigned, moved to Burlington, and returned to the practice of law. Later a Federalist, he led troops into Pennsylvania during the Whiskey Rebellion, but switched parties and went on to become the first

Patriots Part II: In the Maelstrom • 71

Jeffersonian Republican governor of New Jersey, serving twelve one-year terms. Then, after again participating in the military during the War of 1812, he was twice elected to the House of Representatives. His brother Samuel Bloomfield (1756–1806), the second son of Moses Bloomfield, was a doctor who, like his father, served as a surgeon during the Revolution. Both daughters appear to have married Patriots. At the end of the Revolutionary War Moses Bloomfield celebrated the American victory by freeing fourteen slaves—symbolically on July  4, 1783. “As a nation we are free and independent—all men are created equal—and why should these, my fellow citizens, my equals, be held in bondage? From this day they are emancipated, and I hereby declare them free and absolve them of all servitude to me, or my posterity.” Later his will stated that the one remaining slave, who served his wife, was to be freed October 1, 1798. His son Joseph supported abolition after the war.34 In 1784 Moses Bloomfield was again a member of the legislature. The stories of Moses Bloomfield and Richard Stockton help us understand William Paterson’s statement about wanting to forget the fall of 1776 and illustrate the complexities of the war, as well as the importance of time and place. Both Bloomfield and Stockton, along with a number of others in Charleston and elsewhere, were in the end committed Patriots.

Prisoner of War Issues Richard Stockton was captured relatively early in the war, but for him and all the others there was a question about their status—were they criminals or traitors? Were they to be tried in a court of law and executed, or not? Could he have been tried? Like others, he was held without a trial—an issue especially for those imprisoned in England where local sympathizers objected to the failure to do that. Early in the conflict Parliament passed a bill stating that all “seized or taken in the act of high treason, committed in any of the colonies, or on the high seas” would be “detained in safe custody without bail.” They would be treated as criminals, but without any of the traditional British rights, would be denied a trial. The North Act of 1777 specified that they did not have prisoner-of-war status.35 But then Stockton’s situation added other issues. He was a civilian, not in the military. This was also the case of John Fell, a New Jersey delegate to Congress, and a number of Patriots in Charleston, where the British deliberately rounded up and sent political leaders into exile in the Sea Islands and St.  Augustine, Florida.36 There is also the dramatic story of Henry Laurens (1724–1792), a wealthy plantation owner from South Carolina and the former president of the Continental Congress, who was appointed minister to the Netherlands. Captured at sea he was taken to England and imprisoned in the Tower of London, during which time he was pressured to change sides. He refused, insisting

72 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

that Americans must gain independence, and after fourteen months he was released on parole. He agreed to “do nothing directly or indirectly to the hurt of England,” but did not sign an oath of allegiance. Yet he came close to being recalled by Congress for going that far, although ultimately he was not. Finally, exchanged for Lord Cornwallis, in 1783 Laurens traveled to France, where he was a late addition to the Americans negotiating the Treaty of Paris that ended the war and recognized American independence. He signed the preliminary, but not the final, treaty.37 George Washington did not want to trade civilians for soldiers because he feared the British and Loyalists would then kidnap many to have a supply of prisoners to trade for their own soldiers. Some of this clearly happened in New Jersey, where Patriots were captured when neighbors betrayed them, and taken off to New York City prisons, as was Stockton. Some were released, exchanged, or escaped, and others died there. It also occurred in Charleston. There is as well the Fairfield, Connecticut, incident commemorated in the film Mary Silliman’s War, where her husband was taken by Loyalists and held by the British. Then local Patriots raided Long Island and captured Loyalist judge Thomas Jones, specifically to use him in trade.38 When Patriots were in control, they also went about arresting suspected Loyalists. In New Jersey they were brought before the Council of Safety and examined, then tried by local courts. Some were exchanged for American prisoners in British hands. The Patriots also held Loyalist, Hessian, and British prisoners captured in battle. Although there were few initially, by the end of the war they amounted to 17,000. The largest number of prisoners the Patriots acquired were at Trenton (roughly 900), Saratoga (4,000), and Yorktown (8,300). The British had an estimated total of 18,000 to 30,000 prisoners from the Battle of Long Island, surrenders of Fort Washington, Charleston, and elsewhere, as well as the conflict at sea. For Congress, both Saratoga and Yorktown were problematic. American commanders in both situations were seen as having granted too generous terms to those they had defeated, which led Congress to drag its feet fulfilling them. It did not want to release all those captured because then the British would just recycle them back into serving in the war (if in Europe it only meant others from there could be sent to America). It was also argued that the British violated the terms of the agreements, which were made by General Burgoyne and Lord Cornwallis, and never approved by the British government (because doing so would be seen as a recognition of American independence). There were consequences, especially for the “Convention Army” of prisoners from Saratoga, which was moved around for five and a half years, dissolving over time from deaths, escapes, and desertion. There is a shorter but similar tale for the army that surrendered at Yorktown.

Treatment of Prisoners The Patriots captured and held by the British were interned in prisons in England, New York, Charleston, and elsewhere. They left a record of their horrible

Patriots Part II: In the Maelstrom • 73

experiences (especially when they were held on ships). And then as the survivors died off, and subsequent generations downplayed difficult aspects of the Revolution, memory faded. After the wars of the twentieth century, especially Vietnam and subsequent conflicts, interest in the experiences of prisoners of war has increased and led to a reexamination. In the last sixty years, as historians have returned to this aspect of the war, they have alternated between blaming circumstances, damning the British as vicious, and recently condemning all participants, Patriots as well, for what happened. All seem to agree that the issues are complex, the toll of the ill and dead was high, and prisoners were pawns caught between the British government and Congress, between state governments and angry locals. Even when there were good intentions (by George Washington, William Livingston, Elias Boudinot, and other American leaders), they were subverted by anger and the desire for vengeance. Richard Stockton’s own treatment needs to be considered with these interpretations in mind. But it goes beyond him to his extended family, because they became involved in trying to ameliorate the conditions faced by the prisoners, probably influenced by what he told them about his experiences. Recent books make use of numerous accounts from those who lived through the war: Patriots held by the British, as well as records left by British, Hessian, and Loyalist prisoners held by the rebels. Comments from a few appear in other chapters in this book, but here two will illustrate the reactions of contemporaries. The first comes from Ethan Allen’s A Narrative of Colonel Ethan Allen’s Captivity. . . . (1779) about his own captivity, the second from Philip Freneau’s use of poetry to condemn the horrendous experiences of those stuffed into the prison ships in New York harbor. Ethan Allen (1737–1789), born in Connecticut, migrated west into the Hampshire Grants, land claimed by both New York and New Hampshire. He and other members of his family organized the Green Mountain Boys to defend their claims and by 1775 had joined in the Revolutionary efforts against British posts in New York (Fort Ticonderoga) and Canada (Montreal). He was captured in 1775 and held until 1778. First sent to England, then back to North America (Halifax) to avoid questions about his status, whether habeas corpus applied, and whether a trial was required. Moved to New York, he was given a parole, only to be arrested on charges he had violated it, and then imprisoned in the Provost jail (which he described as awful). His exchange for a British officer was arranged by the American commissary of prisoners Elias Boudinot. After a brief trip to Valley Forge, he returned to the Vermont Republic (it did not become a state until 1791). Allen has been described as a feisty, flamboyant character, and this is borne out by the descriptions in his Narrative of his treatment by various British officers while a prisoner. On the ship to England, he was held in a small space twenty by twenty-two feet with thirty-four others equipped with “two excrement tubs,” called a “rebel” and told he would be hanged on arrival, spit on, and, for

74 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

protesting, placed in a “filthy dungeon.” Later he and others on a prison ship in Halifax harbor came down with scurvy. Then, when he was moved to New York, he met prisoners starved due to insufficient and spoiled food. This was, he wrote, “a premeditated and systematical plan of the British council, to destroy the youths of our land, with a view thereby to deter the country, and make it submit to their despotism.” His greatest anger was directed at Loyalist Joshua Loring, the British commissary general for prisoners in New York, who he described as a “monster!. . . . murdering premeditatedly (in cool blood) near or quite two thousand helpless prisoners, and that in the most clandestine, mean and shameful manner. . . . He is the most mean-spirited, cowardly, deceitful, and destructive animal in God’s creation below, and legions of infernal devils, with all their tremendous horrors, are impatiently ready to receive Howe and him, with all their detestable accomplices, into the most exquisite agonies of the hottest region of hell-fire.”39 Philip Morin Freneau (1752–1832) was born in New York to a French Huguenot family that moved to Monmouth County. He attended the College of New Jersey and graduated in 1771. Then he taught school, and early on he wrote political poetry supporting the Patriot cause, attacking both Parliament and the king. In “American Liberty” (1775) he wrote, “Should we, just heaven, our blood and Labour spent, Be slaves and minions to a parliament?” and kings are “born to oppress, to propagate, and rot.” During the war he spent time at sea, serving in the militia and then on privateers, where he was captured. He was imprisoned on the Scorpion on June 1, 1780, then on the Hunter, a hospital ship, until he was exchanged, or escaped, six weeks later. At that point, described as a skeleton, he slowly made his way home. Freneau wrote a long, scathing, epic poem The British Prison Ship, published in 1781, which may reflect his personal experience, or his author’s use of information from others—scholars disagree. Either way, anger clearly comes through: Convey’d to York, we found, at length, too late, That Death was better than the prisoner’s fate; There doom’d to famine, shackles and despair, Condemn’d to breathe a foul, infected air In sickly hulks, devoted while we lay, Successive funerals gloom’d each dismal day—”. . . . “Hunger and thirst to work our woe combine, And mouldy bread, and flesh of rotten swine, The mangled carcase, and the batter’d brain, The doctor’s poison, and the captain’s cane, The soldier’s musquet, and the steward’s debt, The evening shackle, and the noon-day threat.

The poem ends with:

Patriots Part II: In the Maelstrom • 75

FIG. 13 “Interior of the old Jersey prison ship, in the Revolutionary War,” Edward Bookhout

engraver. The Jersey was the most notorious of the ships used by the British to hold American prisoners in New York harbor. There they suffered from harsh treatment, crowding, lack of food, and disease. The death toll was very high, with bodies deposited in Wallabout Bay, where the Brooklyn Naval Yard was later built. (Source: This appeared in Henry Howe, Life and Death on the Ocean: A Collection of Extraordinary Adventures . . . (Cincinnati, 1855). LC-USZ62–5852. Library of Congress Prints and Photography Division, Washington, D.C.)

Rouse from your sleep, and crush the thievish band, Defeat, destroy, and sweep them from the land.

Virtually all historians agree that the prison ships were the worst places in which prisoners of war ended up. Edwin Burrows, in Forgotten Patriots, argues that overall there were far more American prisoners than previously thought— possibly 30,000 rather than 18,000, of whom 60 percent died, many more than in battle. The ships in New York harbor alone resulted in 11,644 deaths, and obviously this included men from New Jersey. While precise numbers are disputed, the conditions and deaths were real and cannot be dismissed as fake news.40 After the war Freneau returned to serving on ships, writing poetry, and working for newspapers. In 1791 he was invited to establish the National Gazette, a Jeffersonian Republican newspaper begun in Philadelphia to counter the

76 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

Federalist Gazette of the United States. In it he continued to use vitriolic words against political opponents. In the 1790s this overlapped with his anti-British sentiments from the Revolution, including resentment of how prisoners had been treated. He has been dismissed contemptuously as just a propagandist, but also praised as “The Poet of the American Revolution.” In 1807 he returned to Monmouth County.41

Historiography Clearly Allen and Freneau joined their contemporaries in condemning British treatment of prisoners. Historians’ views have ranged from praising the Patriots as exceptional, to condemnation of the British, to blaming both sides for failing to do an adequate job. David Hackett Fischer in Washington’s Crossing (2004) viewed the “American way of war” as including treating prisoners with “humanity.” Charles H. Metzger, Prisoners in the American Revolution (1962) was mostly concerned with categorizing prisoners, and the problems experienced by both sides caused by complex situations. But he noted that the British prison ships “show extreme abuse,” and that some jailers were cruel. William Cunningham and Joshua Loring “were heartless villains, strangers to elementary decency in dealing with those under their control.” Similar are the conclusions of William R. Lindsey, “Treatment of American Prisoners of War during the Revolution,” (1973), who argued that both sides were responsible for problems, but the British were “as barbarous as any on previous record.” In contrast Larry Bowman, Captive Americans: Prisoners during the American Revolution (1976) looked only at British treatment of Americans. He concluded that it was not due to malice, not deliberate or cruel, but rather the consequence of “neglect and political complications,” and also of “unsupervised men.” He downplays the number of prisoners as well as how they were treated. This is obviously different than Edwin G. Burrows, Forgotten Patriots (2008), already mentioned, who argues that the numbers and consequences were far larger than previously realized. While he sees neither side doing a good job, he states that there was “a lethal convergence, as it were, of obstinacy, condescension, corruption, mendacity, and indifference. Although the British did not deliberately kill American prisoners in New York, they might as well have done.” Carl P. Borick, Relieve Us of This Burthen (2012) looks at what happened in the south where the war after 1780 has long been seen as particularly vicious, while T. Cole Jones, Captives of Liberty (2020), primarily examines Patriot treatment of those prisoners they held. Like other recent historians, his is a dark view, particularly when discussing how the Convention army from Saratoga was carted from place to place for five and a half years, while those captured at Yorktown were held for nineteen months with similar problems. He concludes, “Winning independence had been messy, violent, and horrifying, it has [had?] to be forgotten.” This includes the harsh treatment of prisoners by Americans.42

Patriots Part II: In the Maelstrom • 77

Despite the different interpretations there are common threads seen in the problems that both sides faced during a war that lasted longer than anyone anticipated. This included lack of places with adequate buildings that could be used to house prisoners (even the Patriots sometimes resorted to ships) leading to crowding and exposure to heat, cold, and disease. There was at times a shortage of food, and portions were starvation level and sometimes inedible. There was an inadequate supply of firewood for armies and the public as well as prisoners of war. Then, too, clothing wore out or was stripped (plundered) from those captured, and not replaced. Bedding could be nonexistent or minimal. The sheer number of prisoners overwhelmed both sides, even as they tried to supply their own armies. At that time, it was expected that a nation paid to provide for its soldiers and sailors held by the other side. Congress was always short of money, the British were reluctant to spend it, even on their own captured men (and sometimes this included family who had joined them) and even less so on captured Loyalists. The disrespect that particularly upper-class British and Hessian officers had for upstart rebels was resented, while the desire for vengeance by relatives of Patriots who had died fighting was taken out on their captives. This was true in New Jersey as early as 1777, then later after 1780 in the south. Although New Jersey never housed large numbers of prisoners, in part because its location near British forces made rescue possible, some Loyalists were held in local jails under awful conditions.43 The question of independence also had an impact on the treatment of prisoners. The British objected to any actions involving handling or exchanging prisoners, that could be construed as formally recognizing the United States. Not until March 25, 1782, did Parliament acknowledge them as prisoners of war rather than as criminal traitors. Congress refused actions unless independence was recognized—for example, formal compacts to exchange large numbers of men, and the signing of the surrender agreements at Saratoga and Yorktown. Meanwhile prisoners from both sides suffered. Despite this, prisoners were exchanged during the war, with arrangements made by local, state, and national officials, and British and American officers.44 Slow at first, because Patriots had few prisoners to exchange, this changed over time when they held far more, including such prominent British officers as Burgoyne and Cornwallis. At times when large numbers were held, releases and exchanges followed because caring for them was both difficult and expensive. Once the preliminary peace treaty was signed the British moved to release prisoners, and the Patriots followed.

Stockton Again Going from the general treatment of prisoners of war in the American Revolution, back to Richard Stockton provides perspective on his experience. It also illustrates the role, overlooked by historians, that his family and friends played in providing for Patriot prisoners of war.

78 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

How Was Stockton Treated? Stockton was taken to the Provost jail in New York City, run by the notorious William Cunningham. This prison was a “small stone building, nearly square in form, and three stories in height” built in 1758. One room on the second floor “was devoted to officers and civilians of the highest rank, and was called, in derision Congress Hall.” A nineteenth-century source reported the room as so crowded that when the men went “to sleep upon the hard plank floor, they could change positions only by all turning over at once, at the words right—left.” Food was “scanty and of the poorest kind,” and the guards corrupt. There was little water to drink or wash with (reputedly delivered in a chamber pot), and in the winter of 1776–1777 some prisoners froze to death.45 Because Stockton was a member of Congress, a report soon circulated that he had been “ignominiously thrown into a common gaol, and there detained.” The news may have come first from Benjamin Rush, who was at Crosswicks, New Jersey, with the army, and who wrote to Richard Henry Lee on December  30, 1776, that his “much honored father-in-law” was “a prisoner with General Howe” suffering “indignities and hardships from the enemy, from which not only his rank, but his being a man [human being?], ought to exempt him.” It was Rush who suggested that Congress pass a resolution to protest, requesting that Richard Henry Lee propose it. He added the following: “I did not want this intelligence to rouse my resentment against the enemy, but it has increased it. Every particle of my blood is electrified with revenge, and if justice cannot be home to him in any other way, I declare I will, in defiance of the authority of the Congress and the power of the army, drive the first rascally tory I meet with a hundred miles, barefooted, through the first deep snow that falls in our country.”46 Whether in response to Rush’s prodding or on its own volition, on January 3, 1777, Congress did pass a resolution. It directed Washington to investigate (and if true to threaten retaliation), as did the letter from John Hancock forwarding the request. Hancock’s horror at the idea of a “common jail” clearly comes through, even as he asked whether the report “has any Truth in it, or not.”47 Two weeks later Congress appointed a committee to investigate the treatment of prisoners, including “civilians.” It was chaired by Samuel Chase of Maryland, and its seven members included the Reverend John Witherspoon (who had been imprisoned as a young man in Scotland and had his own memories). He wrote most of the report submitted in April 1777 while at home in Princeton, where he probably talked to Stockton. It noted British cruelty was fueled by contempt for Patriots seen “not as freemen defending their rights on principle, but as desperadoes and profligates, who have risen up against law and order in general and wish the subversion of society itself.”48 Stockton Afterward By about the middle of January 1777 Stockton was home. Rush wrote that Princeton was a “deserted village. . . . The College and church are heaps of ruin. All

Patriots Part II: In the Maelstrom • 79

the inhabitants have been plundered. The whole of Mr. Stockton’s furniture, apparel, and even valuable writings have been burnt. All his cattle, horses, and hogs, sheep, grain, and forage have been carried away. . . . His losses cannot amount to less than five thousand pounds.”49 On February 26, 1777, Stockton wrote to an old friend of his wife, “God be thanked it is not worse with us; but I assure you it is quite bad enough.”50 However, he and his family had survived and would recover. The New Jersey government had also revived. It called Henry Garritse, Samuel Tucker, and John Covenhoven in to explain their actions. Henry Garritse, legislator from Essex County, appeared February 11 and offered his resignation, which was promptly accepted. An election to replace him was ordered as the assembly resolved “no member having taken” Howe’s oath, “was entitled to his Seat.” Tucker a judge and treasurer for the eastern part of the state, appeared February 15, Covenhoven a member of the assembly from Monmouth County on March 4. Both were removed from office.51 Shortly after this the legislature created the Council of Safety, consisting of the governor, twelve appointed members of the legislature, and local justices of the peace (when needed for a quorum). Starting in March 1777 the Council went county by county through New Jersey calling in the “disaffected,” and those who had taken a British pardon. At its meetings the Council issued numerous warrants for the arrest of suspect individuals. Those who appeared were required to take the oath of loyalty; those who refused were required to post bail and promise to appear for trial. The choices for those considered guilty were to rejoin the rebel cause (for some by joining the army or navy), or sit in prison, or leave (go behind enemy lines)—there was little sympathy or patience for those suspected of being active Loyalists. Those who had been caught in the path of the war apparently were dealt with both more leisurely and more leniently. In this context, how Richard Stockton was treated in the end is very interesting. Rush wrote the following to his wife, Julia, probably early in January 1777: “Some members of Congress think your Papa will be obliged to take part with General Washington in driving the enemy out of New Jersey or submit to be treated as an enemy of his country, This I fear will depend a good deal upon the nature of the oath & obligations he has come under to General Howe.”52 However, contrary to Rush’s fears both Congress and Washington treated Stockton with respect, showing concern for his difficult circumstances, rather than resentment over his actions. There is no evidence that Washington demanded Stockton take that oath within thirty days. Rather, from his winter quarters in Morristown, on February 3, 1777, Washington “strictly ordered” the following: “Any officers, or soldiers of the American Army, who are possessed of Bonds, or other papers, belonging to Mr. Stockton, . . . to deliver them to the Adjutant General at Head-Quarters.” Shortly afterward the Congress agreed to pay Stockton $151, through son-in-law Rush, “for the hire of two horses, a sulky, etc., for his journey to Ticonderoga last fall.” More interesting is that it moved to pay

80 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

Stockton and Hopkinson for their service in Congress—for 150 days to the first and six months the second (apparently until their services had ended). And the New Jersey Privy Council (consisting of the upper house of the legislature and the governor), at a meeting held in Princeton on October 4, 1777, voted to pay Stockton money he was owed for serving as a Supreme Court justice from April 1, 1776, to September  1, 1776, including two months of service while under the royal government; there is no indication in the record that they ever did this for anyone else.53 Stockton did not take the oath of allegiance for nearly a year. The timing was most likely the result of an order issued by the state Supreme Court on September 3, 1777, that all “attornies or Council” had to take the oath to practice.54 Finally, when Stockton was “called before” the Council of Safety in Princeton on December 22, 1777, once again he was treated with respect.55 Most likely he knew all six members of the Council present, including Governor Livingston, who presided, “Mr Speaker” (John Hart, a fellow signer and his cousin), and William Peartree Smith, a College of New Jersey trustee and an active lawyer. Stockton quickly signed the oath of “Abjuration and Allegiance” that was “tendered to him.”56 It is clear that by this time Stockton had already resumed his law practice and taken on new law students, all while freely traveling from place to place.57 One after another of his earlier students, including William Paterson, Frederick Frelinghuysen, William Churchill Houston, Joseph Reed, Elias Boudinot, and Robert Ogden Jr., served the Patriot cause (one has to wonder what he had taught them). In addition, he resumed his role as a trustee of the College of New Jersey, a position he had held since 1757. He worked actively to help the college rebuild from the destruction caused by the occupation of armies from both sides. Stockton’s name appears regularly in the legal records from at least September 1777 to November 1780, shortly before his death. His name is on writs filed with the state Supreme Court for cases from Monmouth, Middlesex, Burlington, Hunterdon, and Somerset Counties, and he appeared before the state Admiralty court. While he was not as active as before the war, neither were other lawyers in this period as the war disrupted proceedings. The Supreme Court met irregularly and wherever it was safe from the British. The cases Stockton took in the period are varied and include defending John Lawrence, indicted on a “misdemeanor,” to an Admiralty case that involved a dispute between two local groups over ownership of property from a captured British ship.58 The trustees of the college met five times in the period from 1777 to the end of 1780, and Stockton was present every time, although the last time he attended briefly, asking to be excused “on account of his indisposition.”59 He attended the meeting held at Coopers Ferry in May 1777, where he was appointed to a committee of the trustees to help restore at least enough of Nassau Hall for classes to resume. Work was done to fix the roof, repair the windows, and clean out the first two (of four) floors of the building, which was described as “very unfit for

FIG. 14 Oath of Abjuration and Allegiance, August–December 1777. American Patriots on both the state and national levels, required their own oaths of allegiance, which denied any recognition of the king or Parliament. Those who held public office, were teachers or lawyers, or had previously signed a British oath, were required to take a New Jersey one. This list was signed by Richard Stockton on December 22, 1777. (Source: SEDSL006, Box1-36, Folder #66. Department of Education, New Jersey State Library, Bureau of Archives and History Series: Manuscript Collection, 1680s–1970s. New Jersey State Archives, Department of State.)

82 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

accommodating the scholars.” Even as classes resumed in the summer of 1777, in a letter signed by the committee (Witherspoon, Stockton, and Reverend Elihu Spencer of Trenton) the college appealed to Congress to obtain money for the reconstruction. On July  17 it was referred to the Board of War. In November 1779, the college received $19,357 for repairs.60 Shortly before this Stockton had attended the commencement held on September 29, 1779, when his eldest son, Richard Stockton Jr., later in life known as the “Duke,” graduated, and gave a speech on “The Principles of True Heroism.”61 Unfortunately, it was while he was in the midst of reconstructing his life that he discovered a lesion on his lip. Stockton consulted his son-in-law and other doctors in Philadelphia, was operated on twice, first in 1778 and again in 1779, but the cancer returned, and he died a slow and painful death.62

The Stockton Family and Prisoners of War There is another part to this story. Rush is not the only member of the extended Stockton family who was aware of how prisoners were being treated. This included Elias Boudinot, married to Stockton’s sister Hannah (1736–1808) (whereas Stockton was married to his sister Annis Boudinot); Louis Pintard (1732–1818), a New York City merchant married to Susannah Boudinot, another sister; and John Pintard, who was a nephew. As early as January 14, 1777, Rush noted in a letter that Congress needed to appoint “a commissary and send provisions” to prisoners in New York, who he had on good information were suffering from the cold and ill treatment.63 When Congress agreed, George Washington asked Elias Boudinot to serve as the first American Commissioner for Prisoners and refused to take no for an answer. Boudinot was later succeeded by Louis Pintard. The third commissioner was Colonel John Beatty (1749–1826), a College of New Jersey graduate who had studied medicine with Benjamin Rush. He was also a Continental army officer who had been captured at Fort Washington and held for six months on a prison ship, followed by a year on parole before being released. His father, the Reverend Charles Clinton Beatty, a Presbyterian, was related to the Patriot Clinton family of New York. After the Revolution John Beatty served in both the state and federal governments.64 Elisha Boudinot (1749–1819), Elias’s brother (and Annis Boudinot Stockton’s), in December 1778 became the New Jersey state commissary of prisoners.65 For these men, the treatment of prisoners of war was not an abstract question. They were concerned enough that while trying to help they sometimes used their own money. When they resigned it was because of both physical and financial exhaustion, and the complications involved in obtaining supplies. As commissary, Elias Boudinot was a colonel in the Continental army. He investigated the status of prisoners, including a visit to New York City in February 1778, where he observed conditions (in the Provost and Sugar House prisons, and several hospitals but not on the ships), talked to some of those held there, and noted “a number of Instances of Cruelty” and “great suffering.” Over time

Patriots Part II: In the Maelstrom • 83

he arranged for supplies that included flour sold for money to purchase other items, firewood, food (including cattle and hogs), clothing such as “796 pairs of shoes, 1,310 pairs of stockings, 787 coats, 1,253 shirts, 549 vests, 376 pairs of trousers, 184 hats, 616 blankets, and eight mattresses.” When Congress provided insufficient funds, he borrowed $30,000 in his own name, he was later repaid for some but not all of it. He also facilitated the exchange of prisoners (including Ethan Allan). Edwin Burrows in his book Forgotten Patriots refers to him as a “saint.” After he resigned, his brother-in-law continued for a time. Boudinot went on to serve in Congress, where he tried to collect some of the money he had expended, and also chaired a committee in 1781 that reported on the treatment of those held on the ships. It concluded that it was “contrary to the usage of civilized nations, thus deliberately to murder their captives in cold blood.”66 He was selected the president of the Confederation Congress and present with its members in Princeton when the Peace Treaty arrived. After adoption of the Constitution, he was elected to Congress, then appointed as director of the U.S. Mint by President Washington. Annis Boudinot Stockton. She was Boudinot’s sister and Richard Stockton’s wife, a well-educated woman who exchanged letters and privately circulated poems with friends, including (before her early death) Esther Edwards Burr (1732–1758). Burr was the wife of the Reverend Aaron Burr Sr. and the daughter of Reverend Jonathan Edwards, both of whom briefly served as presidents of the College of New Jersey before their deaths. Esther Burr has also been seen as an important early American author. She encouraged Annis, who had a number of her poems published in newspapers. In 1776 as the British approached Princeton, she managed to rescue and hide the papers of the Whig Society, a student literary organization, thus preserving them. Throughout the war, she wrote poems celebrating Washington’s activities, and the American victory at Yorktown.67 After her husband’s death she entertained Washington and Rochambeau when they were passing through on their way to the battle in Virginia, members of Congress when they met in Princeton, and army officers. At the end of the war, she wrote one of her brothers that “though a female I was born a patriot.”68 She loved her husband, and there are no indications of disagreements between them. In fact, when he died, she suggested the title of the minister’s sermon: “I Have Seen an End of All Perfection,” and wrote a poetic elegy that was included with the printed sermon. In part it went as follows: O! greatly honour’d in the lists of fame! He dignified the judge’s, statesman’s name!

The poem concluded that his country now expressed its appreciation in the “grateful tears shed o’er his hearse.”69 This was echoed in the newspaper notice of his death, which stated: “The ability, dignity, and integrity, with which this

84 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

gentleman discharged the duties of the several important offices to which he was called by the voice of his country are—well known.”70 One can only speculate that if he had lived long enough to see the Peace Treaty arrive in Princeton and be signed in 1783, he would have clearly and publicly joined her affirmation of patriotism.

Summary and Conclusions Patriots such as Richard Stockton, Moses Bloomfield, Ethan Allan, Philip Freneau, and Henry Laurens, as well as some mentioned in this and other chapters, had their loyalty to the cause tested in the middle of a civil war. In the long run they persisted. Many went on to play important roles in the state and nation. Stockton did not live long enough for that, but he did return to his legal practice and to aiding the college. Rush, when writing his “Autobiography” in 1800, stated that Stockton was “an enlightened politician. . . . He was timid where bold measures were required, but was at all times sincerely devoted to the liberties of his country. He loved law and order. . . . His habits as a lawyer and a judge (which office he had filled under the British government) produced in him a respect of the British constitution, but this did not lessen his attachment to the independence of the United States” (emphasis added).71 Joseph Bloomfield wrote that his father took “Howe’s Protection” because he had “no other alternatives” (emphasis added). Four months later he was serving as a doctor in the Continental army. Timing and place help explain the decisions made by Stockton, Bloomfield, and others. The fall of 1776 was the worst possible time to be in New Jersey. They and other Patriots were caught in an extremely dangerous place at a very difficult time. The recent historical idea of “situational” allegiance makes it too simple and removes the importance that ideology had for many. It reflects the cynicism of the present and downplays the complexity of the past. Some, like Stockton, believed that British measures were unconstitutional. Others, like Allen and Freneau, bitterly resented how they were treated. For those like Bloomfield, circumstances forced a change, but given the opportunity they reverted to the fold. Reactions to what the British did (their laws, the plunder, treatment of prisoners, utter contempt for American colonists) need to be remembered and considered, even as we also noted that the Patriots could and did at times treat others roughly. Both sides in this war lacked the facilities to treat prisoners humanely. Clearly, in New Jersey in this civil war, many were caught in the maelstrom.

4

Straddlers, Trimmers, and Opportunists

The Bridgeton Plain Dealer, January 1, 1776 (a short-lived New Jersey Patriot newspaper, handwritten and posted in a local tavern) commented on the “great numbers of ignorant thoughtless beings who are one day Tories, and the next day Whigs, and the third day nothing at all.”1 This was after Lexington and Concord, the beginning of the war, but before the Declaration of Independence. Clearly, support or opposition to British measures was already divisive. Place and timing, as noted in the previous chapters, would only become more important after that winter, but there are other ways to think about those who tried to straddle the divisions, or who trimmed (hedged their bets). “Straddlers” often had relatives on both sides, and multiple allegiances, and tried to maintain a middle place. “Trimmers” fudged their position, perhaps a tactic to protect themselves and their family’s property. “Opportunists” jumped this way or that, to take whatever advantage the moment offered. Some were clearly torn by conflicting allegiances while caught in this nasty civil war. For others it is not clear from the record why they did what they did, and it is not easy nearly 250 years later to know which label to put on them. The author confesses to moving individuals from one category to another, sometimes more than once. The reader may disagree where in the end they have been placed, but hopefully while reading the examples that follow will gain an understanding of the complexities involved in living through the American Revolution while in New Jersey. Historians have recently suggested thinking about “flexible allegiance,” how changing circumstances (in New Jersey and elsewhere), individual survival 85

86 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

instincts, or the lack of firm principles made allegiance mutable. Some individuals were not consistent. In discussing when commitments changed during the Revolution it usually involves early Patriots who became Loyalists (Michael Adelberg calls them “whig loyalists”), but as noted previously these typically were those monarchists who objected to British measures (the laws passed by Parliament after 1765) but could not accept the idea of independence. Most in this book are simply labeled Loyalists. Often forgotten are those who went the other way. Despairing the possibility of success, they took oaths of loyalty to the crown or advised others to do so, only to later become committed Patriots.2 John Bray (1750–1834) was a young farmer, merchant, and owner of several buildings at Raritan Landing, Piscataway, when the British and Hessians arrived on December 1, 1776. On December 17 he wrote to his uncle Andrew Bray nearby in Lebanon, Hunterdon County, reporting that they had “Possession of this Place.” He advised his uncle and “all my Relations & friends” to “come down & Receive Protection & return home without molestation on the Part of the Kings Troops” as he said you “best know the situation of the Provincial Army.” He continued that Andrew Bray should also advise cousins Johny and Thomas Bray and Thomas Jones to do the same, “for if they do stay out to the last they will undoubtedly fair the Worst.” Indicating what was to come he noted that “40,000 Hessians have offer’d their service to the King of England of which 24,000 are to embark in the Spring.” Surely if you lived in a small village in central New Jersey that was an intimidating prospect. Yet John Bray came from a Patriot family. His father Daniel Bray had been one of the Piscataway men on the local committee of observation. During the war Uncle Andrew served in the militia, state troops, and Continental army. With the exceptions of Bernardus LaGrange and Cornelius Low most residents of Raritan Landing were Patriots. At some point, picking up courage, heartened by Patriot successes at Trenton, or angered by the extensive damage done at the Landing, John went on to serve as a commissary (collecting supplies) and quartermaster for the Patriots. After the war he lived across the river in New Brunswick and became a judge. He is just one example of those who faltered then steadied in support of the war.3

Conflicted Loyalties Many people in New Jersey during the Revolution in one way or another were caught in the middle. For Quakers it was due to their beliefs. Some individuals were caught in the crossfire as both sides literally fired over their heads (if they were lucky). There were also those caught in between, with divided loyalties or with relatives on both sides. Examples are Walter Rutherford (a former British military officer), and James Parker (who had served on the Royal Council),4 Theodosia Bartow Prevost (later married to Aaron Burr Jr.), Peter Kemble (also a member

Straddlers, Trimmers, and Opportunists • 87

FIG. 15 John Bray (1750–1834), oil painting, by an unknown artist. A resident of Raritan

Landing in Piscataway, New Jersey, when the British and Hessians arrived in December 1776, John Bray advised his family in the area to take the oath of alliance to the king. But he went on to serve the Patriots, and after the war was a judge in New Brunswick, across the Raritan River. (Source: Middlesex County Division of Historic Sites and History Services. Photograph courtesy of Richard Veit.)

of the Royal Council), the Swedish Lutheran minister the Reverend Nickolas Collin, and others noted in here.

The Rutherfords Walter Rutherfurd/Rutherford (1723–1804) and James Parker (1725–1797) left war-torn Perth Amboy and tried to sit the conflict out in northwestern New Jersey, only to be arrested and held by the Patriots as possible pawns in a prisoner

88 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

exchange. Both were Anglicans, on the Board of Proprietors of East Jersey, and had family and economic ties to Patriots as well as Loyalists. Rutherford married Catherine Alexander Parker, sister of William Alexander, Lord Stirling (one of George Washington’s generals) and the widow of Elisha Parker. James Parker, Elisha’s brother, married Gertrude Skinner, sister of Cortlandt Skinner (a Loyalist general). Walter Rutherford had served in the British military for twenty years, including in the French and Indian War (in which his brother died at Fort Ticonderoga). During the Revolution Rutherford retired to “Edgerton,” Parker to nearby “Shipley,” both in Hunterdon County. Although often simply counted as Loyalists, both tried to remain away from the fighting and to stay neutral. They did though when taken before the Committee of Safety refuse to take oaths of allegiance to the state, and although left alone for a time were later arrested and jailed, first in a crammed Morristown cell, and then in a crowded house. There they remained while the Patriots tried to exchange them for prisoners held by the British. Rutherford appealed to Governor William Livingston, whom he had known for some time, for help. This was rejected on the grounds that he owed allegiance to the state, the same argument the governor used with others, and should sign the oath of allegiance. The former British officer felt he could not oppose the men with whom he had previously served; he could not take “a part against my native Country.” Livingston replied: “The place of our Birth is merely fortuitous, but Justice is unmutable; & Tyranny ought forever to be detested by whomsoever & against whomsoever it may be attempted.” Great Britain’s measures were “abhorrent,” but in addition a person could only be loyal to one country. He continued: “Nor have I any Idea of a Man’s having a native & an adopted Country, & playing Bopeep between both so as to assist neither in case of a rupture betwixt them. A man’s native Country continues to be his Country till he settles in another. It is then that his adopted Country becomes his proper Country in every political sense & that his native Country ceases to remain his Country in any civil sense.” Today it is possible to hold dual citizenship, but not back then, certainly not in Livingston’s opinion.5 Rutherford and Parker posted a joint bond of £2,000, and for a time they were permitted to return on parole to their farms. Later Rutherford was exchanged for Wynant van Zandt, but not Parker, who then was released to go into New York City to try to make a similar arrangement for himself. His experiences there led him to make some strong criticisms of the British: “I wish L’d North and Sr Wm. Howe may meet with their deserts, the one for not giving the terms before drawing blood, as he says he always intended (this impeaches his humanity as well as his policy), the other for not making the most of his strength.” Sympathetic to the Loyalist cause, he faulted the British for both their actions and their failures to act. Parker was not alone in trying to make his own arrangements. The British were often not concerned about Loyalist prisoners. Washington did not want to exchange civilians for soldiers.

Straddlers, Trimmers, and Opportunists • 89

Released by the winter of 1779/1780 Parker was later providing cattle and other supplies from the Hunterdon county farm to the Continental Army. Counted here as “straddlers,” both men remained in New Jersey through the war. On March 23, 1786, the legislature restored Parker’s citizenship (stripped because he had not taken the Oath of Allegiance), and in November 1791 he became mayor of Perth Amboy. He had, though, like many others who survived the Revolution, suffered economically. He could not meet the mortgage payments on one part of Shipley and lost it, and then sold that portion he owned outright.6 John Rutherford (1760–1840), Walter Rutherford’s son, who graduated from the College of New Jersey in 1776, also apparently deliberately stayed out of the war. He read law first with Richard Stockton, and then with William Paterson, both Patriots. In 1782 he married Helena Morris, daughter of Lewis Morris III, a signer of the Declaration of Independence for New York, and sister of Lewis Morris IV, a Patriot soldier. Initially after the war all the Rutherfords lived in New York City, but the son and his family returned to New Jersey. He was involved in trying to get the records of the East Jersey Board of Proprietors back from John Smythe, the registrar who had taken them into New York City. The Loyalist members of the board (including Oliver Delancey and Cortlandt Skinner) opposed the return, fearing that they would be used to identify portions of their property for confiscation (some of which actually was later confiscated, despite Rutherford’s assurance that this would not happen). The Patriot members of the board (John Stevens, William Alexander, and more) needed the records to continue conducting business and defend their titles. In 1782 John Rutherford obtained permission from Governor William Livingston to cross into the city, where he apparently convinced Smythe they should be returned, but not all of those who were still there agreed, resulting in a stalemate. His efforts, followed by that of others from the board, finally succeeded in obtaining the return of most of the records in 1785. With them the corporation managed to stave off an effort by the West Jersey Board of Proprietors to redraw the boundary line between the two divisions, it also made it possible for them to continue to exist until 1998. In addition to working for the restoration of the proprietors’ records, John Rutherford argued for the return of Loyalists, this on the ground that they would benefit the new nation. He wrote a letter to an unidentified member of the state legislature in May 1783, which proposed three laws to help do this. The first should create free ports to attract trade, the second encourage “Merchants or Mechanicks” to come settle, potentially bringing “more than a million of money” as well as their expertise to New Jersey, and the third to provide a general amnesty, which “would mark this State for a Liberality of Sentiment.” The results, he thought “Would greatly encrease the number of our People; give Employment to our Youth now languishing in Idleness; raise the Rents of our Lands and Houses, and consequently raise their Value; lower the Prices of Goods; furnish Sums to the Borrowers without going out of the State; make Money plentier;

90 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

and make both the Farmer and Mechanick better able to pay their Taxes, which is a thing we should principally have in View.” He ended by saying he was ““soley” interested in “the Prosperity of this State.” The legislature did pass laws designating Perth Amboy and Burlington as free ports and encouraged merchants who had not “plundered” or “murdered” and were willing to take an oath of allegiance to move to New Jersey. Despite Rutherford’s optimism the policies coming in the middle of the post war depression and competition from other places did not benefit the state economically. But John Rutherford prospered. He was elected to the New Jersey assembly in 1789, and then the U.S. Senate, where he served as a Federalist from 1791 to 1798. The son of a former pre-war British officer, married into a Patriot family, he as well as his father, Walter Rutherford, and James Parker, managed to straddle the divisions of the Revolution and find a place in the country it established.7

The Kembles Peter Kemble (1704–1789) was born in Smyrna (now Izmir), Turkey, where his English father was a merchant, his mother was Greek. He was raised there and in England and Holland. Then in 1730 he moved to New Jersey and married Gertrude Bayard from a prominent local Dutch family, and they built a home in New Brunswick. He served as a speaker of the colonial assembly and member of the Royal council from 1745 to 1775. In 1765 he moved to “Mount Kemble,” a country estate on 1,200 acres in Morristown. A Loyalist, he was called before the Court of Common Pleas 1777, where he refused to cooperate. His Patriot son Richard (1733–1813), who had taken an oath of loyalty, intervened, arguing that his father was a harmless old man and should be left alone, which he was. When the Continental army was in Morristown in 1780 General Anthony Wayne used Kemble’s house as his headquarters and, reportedly, he and his staff “treated their host with great respect and understanding.” Wayne was there when Pennsylvania troops mutinied January 1, 1781. Peter Kemble’s brother and several (but not all) of his children were Loyalists. He was married twice; with his first wife he had five sons and two daughters, with the second one, Elizabeth Tuite, a son and two daughters. In the first group, his daughter Margaret Kemble (1734–1824) married British officer Thomas Gage (1719–1787), who became the military governor of Massachusetts in 1774. David Hackett Fischer, in Paul Revere’s Ride, speculates that she was the one who informed the Patriots of the impending raid on Lexington and Concord, but other historians have discounted this story.8 They were married in the Anglican church in New Brunswick in 1758. When General Gage returned to England in October 1775, she accompanied him, and then remained in their London house until her death, thirty-seven years after he died. At least one son went on to have a distinguished career in the British military. Early in his career Gage helped several of Margaret’s brothers obtain British military commissions. Colonel Stephen Kemble (1740–1822) served in the

Straddlers, Trimmers, and Opportunists • 91

British army during the French and Indian War, and again later during the Revolution in Boston with Gage. After he left there, he served with Generals Howe and Clinton in New York, then later in Jamaica, Granada, Canada, and elsewhere. The Kembles were friends with Andrew and Cornelia Bell; in her correspondence with her brother, she often asked about their friends the Kembles who were at that time also in New York City. In 1805 Stephen Kemble, then a general, retired from the British army and returned to the family home in his “birthplace,” New Brunswick, where he served as a warden in the (by then) Episcopalian church. Samuel Kemble left for London in 1783 and ended an exile in Sumatra (now part of Indonesia). William Kemble served in the British military and died in England. Peter Kemble Jr. (1739–1823) spent the war years in the West Indies, then returned and was a merchant in New York City. Daughter Judith married Archibald McCall of Philadelphia. The fifth son, Richard Kemble, was the Patriot who looked after his father (and the family’s property). In Peter Kemble’s second family, his son Robert served the British commissary but remained in Philadelphia after the Revolution, while daughters Ann and Elizabeth never married and stayed with their father in Morristown. They survived the worst winter of the eighteenth century, 1779–1780, surrounded by the Continental army’s encampment. In the end, Peter Kemble’s property was not confiscated, apparently protected by the actions of his Patriot son, his advanced age, and inaction during the war. Of his ten children six or seven remained in or returned to the United States.9

Nickolas Collin The Reverend Nickolas (Nils) Collin (1746–1831), Swedish Lutheran minister in Swedesboro, south Jersey, arrived in New Jersey in 1769. During the Revolution he was caught in the middle of the war, as this area along the Delaware was across from Philadelphia. Suspected of being a Loyalist, and spying, he was arrested twice. The first time a friend paid his bail, the second time a Pennsylvania Patriot, a refugee from British-occupied Philadelphia, came to his aid because Collin had taken him into his own house. Collin insisted that as a Swedish citizen his right to be “neutral” should be recognized. Finally, the Swede was permitted to take an oath of neutrality, rather than one of allegiance. Accustomed to monarchy in his own country, and a representative of what was a state church there, Collin had Loyalist leanings, but he also criticized the British, referring to soldiers as plunderers, and the officers unable to control their men, resulting in loss of support. He said that this was “one of the main reasons for their slight success, because often both friend and foe were robbed in the most despicable manner, and sometimes with the permission of the officers.” The Patriots also went through the town, and General Anthony Wayne stayed in his house twice, just barely avoiding capture. Collin commented, “He was a well-bred gentleman and showed me great respect.” Yet he also described the

92 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

destruction wrought by the Patriots. When the various military groups were finished using the church it was filthy and unfit for religious services. Collin is included as a “straddler” because he tried to remain neutral.10 At one point, eighteen or nineteen local men were arrested for treason (some were members of his congregation), though in the end all but one was released/paroled. Collin visited that young man, an Anglican named William Hammet, and accompanied him and his mother on January 29, 1779, the day of his execution. The minister held the prisoner’s hand and prayed with him. When they complained that his only crime was being loyal to the legitimate government, that “he had carried arms for his legal sovereign,” Collin wrote in his diary that he had replied that as a Swedish citizen he could not take sides.11 Of course, which was the legitimate government was a basic issue of the Revolution, and for the Patriots the young man’s statement was a confession of treason. Collin also recounted a day when the fighting came to Swedesboro. He commented that while British forces and Patriots exchanged numerous shots, they were all angry and therefore so bad at firing that no one was hit. Still as the many “bullets flew in all directions” he and others watching the action retreated inside the house for safety. Similar to the Reverend Abraham Beach, he was literally caught in the middle of the war—one he specifically referred to as a “civil war.” Also, like Beach, he stayed through the war. Afterward he too moved—into Philadelphia where he became the minister for Gloria Dei Church, the secondoldest Swedish church in the Delaware valley. When the U.S. Constitution was written in 1787, he wrote a pamphlet to support this new form of government. After his wife died in 1797, in one of the yellow fever epidemics of the period, Collin thought about returning to Sweden. But instead, he remained, living as a Swedish citizen in the new United States until his death in 1831, sixty-two years after he first arrived in 1769.

Lowe/Low Family The members of the extended Lowe/Low family tried with varied success to straddle the Revolution, a story that begins in New Jersey then ends with members scattered there and in New York as well as Ireland and England.12 Cornelius Low (1700–1777) became an important merchant and shipper at Raritan Landing in Piscataway, where in 1741 he built an imposing Georgian style house on a bluff overlooking the river. He owned a farm there as well as property in New York. He married Johanna Gouveneur of Newark, and they apparently had five children—sons Isaac Low (1735–1791) a Loyalist; Cornelius Low Jr., who died before 1783; Nicholas Low (1739–1826), a Patriot; and daughters Sarah Low Wallace and Gertrude Low Wallace, who both married merchants who were Loyalists.13 Cornelius Low Sr. died before the New Jersey confiscation acts were passed; his son Nicholas, who became his executor, managed to hold on to his property. However, Isaac Low’s property and that of the Wallace brothers was confiscated by New York state. They went to England, where they filed claims

Straddlers, Trimmers, and Opportunists • 93

with the Royal Loyalist Claims Commission that were questioned for interesting reasons. Later Sarah Lowe Wallace managed to get partial restitution from New York, and at some point, she returned to New Jersey where, in 1804, her will was filed in New Brunswick. The Loyalist son and sons-in-law became very successful merchants in New York City, as well as important political figures. With brief exceptions they remained in the city until the British evacuated at the end of the war. At a very young age Isaac Low had partnered with Abraham Lott Jr., son of the treasurer of New York. They ran a dry goods business until 1766, when they continued in business but separately. By then, besides the long list of varied fabric offered for sale, young Low’s business included wine, furs, and other goods. He married Margarita/Margaret Cuyler, a daughter of Cornelius Cuyler, a mayor of Albany, and served on the New York Royal Council. When disputes arose between colonists and empire, as a moderate, he appeared to take the Patriots’ side, serving as the chair of the New York City Committee of Correspondence, forwarding information to other colonies, including about Lexington and Concord. He was also elected to the revolutionary Committee of Fifty-one, then the Committee of Sixty, and finally the First Continental Congress. Fellow member John Adams noted in his diary in 1774 that he doubted that Low was a sincere supporter of the “Cause of Liberty.” This was a prescient observation. Low returned to New Jersey in 1776, where he was suspected of treason and briefly imprisoned until George Washington, who had served with him in Congress, intervened. Washington noted that he had been “arrested on suspicion of corresponding with the enemy” but “cleared himself by trial.”14 Low then returned to the city. As a Loyalist during the war, he was a president of the New York City Chamber of Commerce and a lieutenant colonel in the local militia. He also recruited “Seamen for the Fleet.” He and his wife left in 1783 with the last evacuation fleet, arriving after a rough passage. Son Isaac Low Jr. preceded them and had arranged housing at Mortlake near other refugees they knew. When the father filed his claim in England for compensation, he said he had been a loyal “inhabitant of the City of New York previous to the public Trouble,” but the claim was denied. He appealed several times, saying he had only served in the First Continental Congress to further “reconciliation,” and had refused election to the Second Continental Congress before the Declaration of Independence. He asked for compensation for over 1,000 acres of land in Herkimer County, New York, that had been forfeited, as well as £684.13.4 in New York currency for a house and barn destroyed to make room for a barracks for British troops, and for merchandise destroyed in a 1778 fire. While he waited for an answer, he constantly wrote his brother Nicolas appealing for documents to prove his losses, and money to tide them over. From the Royal Loyalist Claims Commission, he initially received a small annual stipend of £140, which he thought totally inadequate, then £1,700, which he thought “scanty.” He blamed his enemies and his early service with the Patriots,

FIG. 16 Isaac Low (1735–1791). A member of the Low/Lowe family of Raritan Landing,

New Jersey, he was a successful merchant in New York city who initially appeared to support the Revolution, even serving in the First Continental Congress. A Loyalist he remained through the war, then left for England, where he found it difficult to collect claims from the British government. The story of the larger Low family is complicated, but some members successfully straddled Revolutionary war divisions, retaining or reclaiming property. (Source: https://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/510d47d9-4cae-a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99, The Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Division of Art, Prints and Photographs: Print Collection, The New York Public Library. “Isaac Low.” New York Public Library Digital Collections.)

Straddlers, Trimmers, and Opportunists • 95

complaining that he was a “ruined man.” After he died at Cowes, on the Isle of Wright, his son Isaac Low  Jr. wrote his uncle Nicholas Low that the “cruell treatment he experienced on both sides of the Atlantic brought on an anxious mind which hurried him to the grave.” Low, apparently in his and his son’s minds, had paid a price for trying to straddle the Revolution, as neither side trusted or respected him.15 The son remained in England, where he became a commissary general in the British army. The Wallace brothers immigrated from Ireland to New York in the 1750s. Hugh Wallace (1728–1788) arrived first, in 1752, and brother Alexander (?–1804) five years later. By 1760 they were business partners. It was also that year when the older brother married Sarah Low. The younger later married her sister Gertrude Low. Successful merchants, they invested in land in New York. By 1776 they too were viewed as Loyalists. Later, in England, Alexander Wallace noted that because of his known loyalty he had been arrested in August 1776, then imprisoned in Connecticut for five months to the detriment of his health and fortune, while his “Wife and Children” had been “turned into the Streets.” After returning to New York City, while the British controlled it, he had served as a commander of militia forces. Hugh Wallace was a member of the New York Council from 1769 to 1783. In November 1776 he was the first of over 700 to sign a statement of loyalty to Britain in Scott’s Tavern on Wall Street. Like Isaac Low, the brothers left for England in 1783 where they also filed for compensation; their claims were turned down, which led to appeals. In addition to lost property, the Wallaces claimed they had loaned Sir Henry Clinton £4,000 in gold and silver for his unsuccessful expedition to South Carolina in 1776, when no one else would, and had not been repaid.16 They claimed onethird ownership in the Brig Elizabeth, filled with supplies for the British navy. It was captured by a “rebel” privateer, and then recaptured by the British. But they had not been compensated for their costs, stating that they had lost £2,367.16.8. Their compensation was what they saw as a measly shared £1,500. Angry Alexander Wallace wrote Nicholas Low on September 15, 1785: “It cost me double the sum to bring myself & family to England & to support them in London to prove my losses. . . . Damn them all & your good people who passed the law to deprive us of our property.” Despite his anger, that same year Alexander Wallace reported from Waterford, Ireland, where he and Gertrude Low Wallace and their children had settled, that “I cannot say I like it so well as I once liked N. York: but this place answers with me & I am perfectly content & happy.” Gertrude wrote her brother in 1787 that she was getting used to her new home, but she missed “a few of my old acquaintances.” Still living in Ireland at her death she left a substantial amount in stocks/annuities (£18,461.10.7) to her children in her will. While this husband and wife adjusted, brother Hugh did not. He stayed with them hoping for enough money to return to his wife who had remained behind in New York. Missing

96 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

her, overcome by “his misfortunes,” his health rapidly declined, and he died in 1788. Sarah Low Wallace had stayed behind when her husband left for England, perhaps to protect their property. She was one of a number of women who in the 1790s sued New York State to obtain compensation for their dower rights (widow’s share) to lands that had been confiscated from their husbands during the war. Because she had never left, she could not be dismissed as an “alien.” A law passed in 1796 appropriated specific amounts to six women, each with the stipulation that they sign releases within six weeks to any claim to the property (most in the interim had been purchased by state residents). They were paid, and the purchasers’ rights were protected. She received £4,000, by far the largest amount. Living in New Jersey when she died in 1804, she mentioned no children in her will, but she left land to a son and daughter of her sister, then other assets in fifteen shares to the children of her siblings. She also left some personal items to her sister in Ireland and freed two female slaves, Isabel and her daughter Betty, also leaving them $125. Nicholas Low, the Patriot who stayed through the war and in the new United States, waited until the war ended to deal with his father’s estate. He sought legal advice from Alexander Hamilton who, like John Rutherford, was known to favor the return of some Loyalists. Over the years several other lawyers were also paid for their assistance, including William Paterson and Aaron Ogden. Nicholas’s account as executor of the estate begins in 1783 and ends in 1812—thirty-five years after the death of his father, when it was submitted to judges in New Brunswick; it included over 600 transactions. He systematically set about collecting rents and debts that were owed, then steadily sold off the property. This included buildings and the mansion at Raritan Landing, a number of slaves, as well as lands at Ballston in the Kayadaroperas patent near Saratoga Springs in New York. As he collected money after 1795, he divided the receipts into fifths—one for himself and four for his siblings, or with deaths their descendants (one share went to Isaac Low Jr., another became tenths). This was done equally so that those who had been Loyalists also received their share. Nicholas himself went on to develop some of the Ballston lands, and to serve for a time in the New York assembly. The town Lowville is named for him. In the 1790s his sister Gertrude’s son William Wallace returned to New York and went into business with him. Although Isaac Low Sr. and the Wallace brothers were disappointed and angry about their compensation from the British government, they were also wealthy men who unrealistically expected to resume their American lifestyle in England after the war. Despite the despair of Isaac Low Sr. and Hugh Wallace, they received some compensation when others did not. At the end of their lives the Low-Wallace sisters were well off. Most interesting is that this family managed to both straddle their own political differences and hold on to what their father left them in New Jersey and New York. Also, although even when

Straddlers, Trimmers, and Opportunists • 97

geographically apart, they and their descendants kept in touch with one another for a very long time.17

Hartshorne Family The Hartshorne family arrived in the Monmouth area of New Jersey in 1676. The property they originally settled on consisted of 2,411 acres and stretched from Sandy Hook Bay south to the Navesink River. Originally Quaker members of the Shrewsbury Friends Meeting, by the time of the American Revolution both their religious affiliation and political loyalties are unclear. The home area of Portland Place in Middletown left them in a geographically exposed position. At one point, Richard Hartshorne’s house was the site of the skirmish over a ship’s cargo that left twenty-five militiamen dead, as well as seventy-two captured and taken into New York City. In 1778, after the Battle of Monmouth, British forces marched past on their way to the ships that took them across to New York. Apparently, family members Isaac, Lawrence, Robert, Thomas Jr., and Ezekiel had Loyalist sympathies, although Quaker adherence could by itself lead to this classification. Evidence of such a stand is clearer for Thomas Jr., whose property was confiscated and listed as for sale.18 Four members of the family signed a petition as victims of the Association for Retaliation. And there appears to have been a question about their right to vote, as Loyalists, after the war. All that noted, not everyone in the family was a Loyalist. Richard Hartshorne was a Patriot who, from 1778 to 1781, served as a quartermaster for the Monmouth County militia. Court-martialed at one point for neglect of duty, he remained in office. A family with divided loyalties is not usual in New Jersey. The members of this family, like some others, appear to have been straddlers who survived the war. All of the family remained after the Revolution. The names of five members (Richard, Robert, Esek, Thomas, Thomas Jr., formerly Patriot and Loyalists) appear in the tax records in the 1790s, owning from 100 to 500 acres each, as well as cattle, horses, hogs, part interest in a sawmill, and several fishing vessels. This includes both Thomas Jr. and his father. Continued Quaker adherence is not clear. Thomas Jr. was married in a Dutch church in New York City in 1786, an action that would have led to his being read out of the meeting. And family members were buried on their own land, not in the Friends cemetery. Yet this family persisted and prospered well beyond the Revolution. Records from eight generations rest in the archives of the Monmouth County Historical Association.19 John Wallace John Wallace (?–1783) was born in Scotland and emigrated to Newport, Rhode Island, and then from there to Philadelphia. A successful merchant and importer of cloth, with Loyalist sympathies, he decided in 1775 to move to Somerville,

FIG. 17 John Wallace (?–1783) painting, artist unknown. A Philadelphia merchant with Loyalist leanings, Wallace moved with his family to New Jersey for peace and quiet. Instead, he was for a time in the middle of the war, with part of his house in 1778–1779 occupied by General George Washington, his wife Martha, and members of his staff. The house is now a state historic site. (Source: Copy from Paul Soltis, Wallace House, Somerville, N.J.; original at the Powell House, Philadelphia. Reproduced courtesy of the Philadelphia Society for the Preservation of Landmarks.)

Straddlers, Trimmers, and Opportunists • 99

New Jersey, to escape the heated politics of Pennsylvania. He retired to an estate of 107 acres that he bought there, adding to the small “Hope Farm” house, an eight-room Georgian-style mansion. With him were his wife, Mary Maddox Wallace (?–1784); elderly mother-in-law, Mary Maddox (ca. 1681–1783); son William Wallace (1763–1796); and several slaves. Two older, married children, Joshua and Ann, settled nearby. John Wallace expected to live there in peace and quiet, but, like William Livingston who had moved to Elizabethtown for similar reasons, he was instead caught in the middle of the war. This Loyalist refugee during the winter of 1778–1779, with Patriot forces located a few miles away in Middlebrook, was persuaded to rent part of his house to George Washington. The request had originally been for the entire house for £1,000, but Wallace agreed to let just half of the house for that price. The general initially stayed for eleven days, but then returned for several months, along with Martha Washington, members of his staff, military guards, and numerous visitors, including foreign dignitaries. Nearby was the parsonage of the Reverend Jacob Rutsen Hardenbergh (1736– 1790), the young Dutch Reform minister who sold most of the land the farm was on to Wallace. Hardenbergh had married Dinah van Bergh Frelinghuysen (ca. 1723–1807), the widow of his predecessor the Reverend John Frelinghuysen. They had nine children, five of whom survived. A strongly committed Patriot, Hardenbergh served in the New Jersey assembly during the war, and as president of Queens College afterward. Patriot military leader Frederick Frelinghuysen (1753–1804) was his stepson. Merchant John Wallace with his Loyalist leanings, who had wanted to retire peacefully, spent the winter when Washington was there, in the middle of Patriot headquarters. He must also have been present in 1779 when British forces raided the area and burned the Dutch church. But he remained, and at his death, son William Wallace inherited the farm and was raising three children there when he died young.20

Theodosia Bartow Prevost Burr Theodosia Bartow (1746–1794), born into a family that had lived in north Jersey for several generations, in 1763 married Jacques/James Marc Prevost (?–1781), a Swiss solider born in Geneva. He and his brother, Augustine Jacques Prevost, served the British in the Royal American Regiment during the French and Indian War.21 James purchased a 300-acre estate, named the Hermitage, in HoHoKus, Bergen County. In 1776 the Prevost brothers were recalled to active duty, and later, two of Theodosia’s sons joined them. The Prevost brothers, especially General Augustine Prevost, were high-ranking officers active in the southern campaigns in Florida and the Caribbean. Theodosia remained in the house with her mother, half-sister, several younger children, and a number of slaves. While two half-brothers were Loyalists, others in her extended family were Patriots. All were living in an area of active conflict.

100 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

After the Battle of Monmouth in the summer of 1778, she invited General George Washington to visit, which he did with several of his staff officers. They relaxed, engaged in intellectual discussions about political and religious subjects, and also, according to one person who was present, “walked and laughed and danced and gallanted away the leisure hours of four days and four nights.” Afterward, faced by efforts to confiscate the house and lands, which were legally owned by her Loyalist husband, she successfully sought help from those Patriots that she knew (including Governor William Livingston, Attorney General William Paterson, and Chief Justice Robert Morris) to prevent New Jersey officials from taking the family’s property. Then, in 1782, soon after being widowed, she married Aaron Burr (1756–1836), who had been one of the general’s staff officers and had repeatedly visited. Afterward she moved with him to New York.22 Theodosia was a bright, well-educated woman who clearly impressed many prominent Patriots. Burr was the grandson of Jonathan Edwards and the son of Aaron Burr Sr. and Esther Edwards Burr. His father and then grandfather served as presidents of the College of New Jersey, but parents and grandparents all died within a short time of each other, leaving two orphaned children to be raised by relatives. Burr graduated from the College of New Jersey, then for a time served in the Continental army, including on Washington’s staff. He resigned before the war was over, studied law, and went on to a controversial political career during the early republic, first in New York and the U.S. Senate, and then serving as Thomas Jefferson’s first vice president. He had one daughter, also named Theodosia, and helped raise the surviving Prevost children. His political career was derailed during the election of 1800, and after his duel with Alexander Hamilton in 1804. But before that Theodosia’s marriage to him, amid speculations about their relationship before her husband’s death (Livingston in a letter mentioned “the Tongue of Malice” being silenced by their wedding) brought respectability and connections that helped her keep the HoHoKus property.23 Perspective on what Theodosia accomplished, how she successfully straddled the pitfalls of the Revolution, is provided by comparing her experience with that of Elizabeth Graeme Fergusson (1737–1801), a wealthy Pennsylvania woman who was not successful in saving property she had inherited because she married a Loyalist. Elizabeth was also well educated and connected, a woman who wrote poetry and was admired for the salons held in her home. The daughter of Dr.  Thomas Graeme, she was engaged to William Franklin before he left for England in 1757, but her father objected, and the engagement was broken (although by whom is disputed). She later fell in love with Henry Hugh Fergusson (1748–?) suspected by the father of being a fortune hunter, but they secretly married in 1772 just before her father’s death. Fergusson was a British citizen, he traveled with the British army, declined to take an oath of allegiance to the Patriot government, and then left in 1779 for England. She refused to accompany or follow him afterward and fought for years to keep the property she had inherited, applying to numerous friends for help (Benjamin Rush, Richard

Straddlers, Trimmers, and Opportunists • 101

Stockton, the financier Richard Morris, Francis Hopkinson, Elias Boudinot, and others), but she also had made important enemies, including Joseph Reed, president of Pennsylvania, and George Washington. Most of the estate was confiscated; then later she regained some of it, but financially she could not hold on to it. The full story is long and complicated, but the important point here is that unlike Theodosia Bartow Prevost Burr, she ended up impoverished, bitter, and lonely. She could not straddle the divisions created by the Revolution.24

Jane Demarest As Fergusson’s tale illustrates not all families who tried were successful straddlers. Patriot Jane/Jannetje Zabriskie Demarest (1743–?) of Bergen County in 1761 married David  G. Demarest in the Schrallenberg Dutch Reformed Church. During the Revolution, her husband was a Loyalist, while her oldest son, Gilliam, served in the Patriot militia. Their divisions reflected those of the larger Demarest family in the area, where out of thirty-five men twenty-four were Patriots and eleven Loyalists. In November 1776, David Demarest enlisted in the New Jersey Volunteers. Captured on December 6, he managed to return home. But in May 1779 he left again and rejoined. After 1780 he was part of a refugee group supplying the British by raiding into the area for wood and cattle, which led to his being indicted for treason. During an August 1781 raid his forces captured three local Patriot militiamen: his relatives John and Philip, and son Gilliam. After two months the first two were paroled and exchanged, but the son was held longer in the notorious Sugar House in New York City, where his father unsuccessfully pressured him to change sides. Finally exchanged, Gilliam returned, continued fighting, and was later wounded in the hand. Afterward a neighbor commented that the father had “deserted his country’s cause and eloped to the enemies service,” and as a result “his farm was confiscated.” Jane Demarest, although a vocal Patriot, who petitioned Governor William Livingston and the legislature noting that she was attached “to the interests of America” and had conveyed her “zeal” to her children, was unable to retain the family’s property. It had all been in her husband’s name. Yet, at the end of the war, when her husband left for Nova Scotia, she remained behind, as did Gilliam, who married and raised children in the Hackensack valley.25 Jane Demarest lacked the status and political ties that Theodosia Bartow Prevost Burr was able to use to her advantage.

Trimmers, Opportunists, Flexible Survivors During the war Francis Hopkinson wrote a poem, “The Birds, the Beast, and the Bat.” In it the birds are the Patriots, the beasts the British and Loyalists, and the bat a trimmer. He wrote in part: A WAR broke out in former days,— If all is true that Aesop says,—

102 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

Between the birds that haunt the grove, And beasts that wild in forests rove. . . . From every tribe vast numbers came To fight for freedom, as for fame. . . . The bat,—half bird, half beast,—was there, Nor would for this or that declare,—. . . .

When the birds were winning the bat claimed a place, “With leathern wing I skim the air / And am a bird though clad in hair.” When the Beasts rallied, he changed his tune, declaring himself a beast “With teeth and fur ’twoud be absurd / To call a thing like me a bird.” Rather he was “at least a flying mouse.” When the birds “new powers displayed,” led by their “chief, the eagle,” won, the bat hid, afterward coming out only at night.26 Hopkinson’s poem is fanciful, with his usual measure of satire. It does reflect those who changed sides, depending on which army or angry neighbors were on their doorstep, or who were out to help themselves by protecting their property no matter who won the war. Some were intimidated, others most probably simply opportunists. In a time of much disorder there were also those who just took advantage of the chaos to prey upon their neighbors (such as the “banditti” or “Pine Robbers”).27

Philip van Horne Philip van Horne (1719–1793) was a New York City merchant who in 1755 moved to a home in Bound Brook, Somerset County. During the French and Indian War, he served as a colonel in the county militia, and afterward as a local judge. At the time of the Revolution, he had five daughters and three nieces, apparently all attractive, often in residence. The family became notorious for welcoming soldiers and officers from multiple armies to their house, referred to as “Convivial Hall,” alternatively assuring them of their loyalty. As a result, he was suspect, arrested, paroled, then released but distrusted. Washington apparently wished the Van Hornes behind enemy lines but, as with Mrs. Chandler, he did not succeed. There are two stories about the Van Horne family relevant to the notion that they, like some others, were simply opportunists. The first incident took place during the Battle of Bound Brook, when their house was used by both sides on the same day, while the family was in New Brunswick, then under British control. On the morning of April 13, 1777, while General Benjamin Lincoln was using the house and his Patriot forces were nearby, General Cornwallis with British and Hessian soldiers led a raid hoping to capture all of them. Given very brief warning Lincoln apparently left his breakfast behind (Cornwallis ate it) pulling on his pants as he ran off. Later that day Lincoln and the Patriots returned, and the American general got to eat his dinner in the house. Interesting is that while other homes in the town were looted and burned, Van Hornes’ house was

Straddlers, Trimmers, and Opportunists • 103

FIG. 18 Van Horne House, Bridgewater, New Jersey. Built in 1754 by merchant Philip van

Horne, this house was dubbed “Convivial Hall” because his family hosted both Loyalists and Patriots during the war. In the Battle of Bound Brook on April 13, 1777, it was alternately used by Patriot General Benjamin Lincoln and British Lord Cornwallis. It is now owned by Somerset County and operated by the Heritage Trail Association. (Source: Photograph courtesy of Richard Veit.)

not harmed. The house was later used by General Stirling during the Middlebrook encampment.28 The second story comes from the journal of Hessian general Friedrich Adolf Riedesel’s (1738–1800) wife. Friederike Charlotte Luise Riedesel (1746–1808) and their three children were present at the Battle of Saratoga when General John Burgoyne surrendered the army under his command. Many in the captured “Convention” forces then wandered as prisoners from Boston to Virginia, Pennsylvania, and New York, going through New Jersey several times. The first time Mrs. Riedesel encountered the Van Hornes, in October 1779, she and the children were on the way to meet her husband, who expected to be paroled in New York City. She wrote in her diary that the family “was very kind to us and told us they were royalists.” They were most “hospitable” and “asked us to give their regards to” General Cornwallis. However, when the group reached Elizabethtown the Hessians were told no agreement had been reached between the Patriots and British. They were turned around and then sent to Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. On the way the family stopped a second time with the Van Hornes (Mrs. Riedesel was expecting another child and exhausted). This time they met “a nephew of General Washington there with a number of American officers, who during the three days of their stay had succeeded in so changing the minds of those

104 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

people (they were of the turn coat type), that not only did we find the daughter of these so-called royalists on the friendliest terms with those anti-royalists, who she allowed all sorts of liberties, but in addition, as they no longer felt that they needed to spare our feelings, we heard them singing all through the night ‘God save great Washington! God Damn the King!’” In November, an agreement exchanging prisoners having been reached, the group headed back toward New York. They ended up at the Van Hornes’ a third time. She wrote, “I did not want to visit with the Van Hornes again, because I  detest two-faced people, but we had the misfortune of having our carriage break down almost before their door, so we were forced to stay with them” until it was repaired. They did not stay the night. On leaving, she wrote, “When they asked us again to give their regards to the King and assured us of their loyalty to him, in whose army the head of the family [Philip van Horne] had been a colonel, I replied dryly that I did not believe he needed our recommendations, an answer he could take as he chose.” This time the Riedesels made it into New York City, where they were welcomed and provided for by British authorities, and she safely delivered a daughter, named “Amerika.” In 1781 they left for Canada, and then in 1783 returned to Germany.29 Before the war was over at least one Van Horne daughter (Mary Ricketts) married a Patriot officer, Captain Stephen Moylan, while Hessian captain Johann von Ewald (1744–1813) fell in love with (but did not marry) another. Ewald wrote a series of letters to “My adorable friend,” Jeanette van Horne, mentioning in one that he had sent her “sausages.”30 He, however, returned to Europe alone. The Van Horne family and the house survived. Today it is a historic museum across from the minor league baseball stadium in Bound Brook.

Mary Peale/Peel Field Mary Peale Field (1743–1816) of Philadelphia married Robert Field II in 1765, whose property, called White Hill, was in Burlington on the Delaware River and included a large house with a basement, a tavern on the main floor, and family quarters above. There was also a bake house and a store, and he ran a ferry to Philadelphia. Together they had seven children, although only three of them survived. Field was a wealthy merchant and privateer during the French and Indian War. Then an early Patriot, a judge, and a member of the 1774 New Jersey Committee of Correspondence, he died suddenly the following year in a boating accident. She continued with the help of her mother, Sally Redman (a friend from Philadelphia), slaves, and servants. The house and its stores were raided by the Pennsylvania navy, next the British, and then the Hessians appeared. Hessian captain Carl August von Wreden told her that his forces needed quarters and suggested that an officer would be the best idea. When she agreed he moved in with his cook and four servants. She later told friends that he “was the sweetest little Dutchman you ever see, the politest, obliging creature in the world.” While he was there, she was visited by Colonel Carl Emil Donop and his officers, and

Straddlers, Trimmers, and Opportunists • 105

all had tea. The Hessians departed after the Battle of Trenton, and then General Hugh Mercer and the Patriots appeared. At this point he also treated her kindly. A little over two years later, in 1779, she married Commodore Thomas Read (?–1788) an American naval officer. After the war two of her children married into the Stockton family. First Mary Field married Richard Stockton Jr. (aka the Duke) in 1788, then in 1797 her brother Robert Field III married his sister, Abigail Stockton. Both of Mary Peale Field Read’s husbands were Patriots, and she may have been as well. What is clear is that the house/tavern was used by a dizzying succession of Patriots, British and Hessian soldiers, and Loyalists. She dealt with them as they came and went, held on to the property, and survived the war.31

Others John Covenhoven of Freehold (captured with Richard Stockton in Monmouth County in November 1776) and Samuel Tucker (1721–1789) of Trenton (captured in Crosswicks in December 1776), took the Howes’s oath promising loyalty to the King. They were both released. In February 1777, Covenhoven, a member of the assembly, asked to resign. In response, on March 4 he was called in “by order of the House,” which noted that he had been taken prisoner, signed an oath to the King, and been “given security to remain inactive.” The assembly resolved that he was “unfit” to remain in the assembly and that his seat had been vacated. It ordered an election in Monmouth County to replace him. Tucker was a wealthy merchant who had served in the Provincial Congress, signed the Constitution of 1776, and then served as the treasurer of the eastern division of the state. In December, the British had first seized part of the state treasury in his custody, and then captured Tucker himself. Despite taking the oath of loyalty to the king, he lost a “phaeton, horse, cows, silver plate” and money. The assembly also asked him to attend. He appeared on February 15 to give his version of what had happened. He tried to defend himself, saying his family had been in distress, but the statement has been described as “rather a rambling and unconvincing document.” He was removed as a justice of the state Supreme Court, and the legislature kept the bond he had posted when treasurer. However, even before the end of the war Covenhoven (in 1781) and Tucker (1782–1784) were again serving in the New Jersey legislature. Yet neither man was trusted by William Livingston, who in 1784 described Tucker as one of his “implacable” enemies. The governor was angry because the British had taken the portion of the Patriots’ much needed money that was in his care, but also because in 1783 he had tried to gain election as governor.32 Tucker failed to unseat Livingston, but clearly both his and Covenhoven’s constituents supported their return to political offices. Cited or tried for treason but not convicted. Abraham Hunt was a prominent Trenton merchant who entertained the Hessian commander Colonel Rall on December 25, 1776, the night before the battle that took place in the town.

106 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

Although a lieutenant colonel in the Hunterdon County militia he was seen as a “luke warm” Patriot, who did business with both sides. Accused of treason he was tried in December 1777–January 1778, by a grand jury of Patriots. The one witness who appeared against him did not impress the court, the jury, nor the attorney general William Paterson, and the indictment was quashed. Hunt was married to Theodosia Pearson, sister of Ann Pearson Yard, whose husband was an adamant local Patriot. The connection may have helped, or he could have been falsely accused. Johannes/John van Buskirk, of Bergen County was also tried for treason and acquitted.33 In 1779 a group of Loyalists who had served the British for three years, having enlisted after the Declaration of Independence, with their terms now completed, returned to the Hackensack valley. The local sheriff arrested them for treason. On December 1, 1779, he turned them over to General Anthony Wayne, expecting the Continental army to deal with them. But all eleven claimed they were “deserters,” and Wayne released them, commenting, “As it is the policy in one army to encourage deserters from the other, I think it highly improper to hold men under color of high treason (let the time of their enlistment be what it may), as a measure of this nature would inevitably deter all others under similar circumstances from coming over . . . and shutting the door of mercy against poor deluded wretches who wish to return to the bosom of their country.” While it is doubtful that their Patriot neighbors welcomed them back, they did return to their farms.34 And there were those just exhausted by a war that dragged on for a very long time—eight years in New Jersey. They refused to turn out for military service or to accept Continental or New Jersey notes as payment for food, animals, and other supplies. Some crossed enemy lines and engaged in the “London trade,” illegally selling to the British forces or purchasing goods not otherwise available. They were motivated by the need for hard currency, specie, rather than increasingly worthless paper, sometimes by plain greed. One center of the trade was Clamstown on the Monmouth Shore, another in north Jersey across from Manhattan. The trade involved a “network of receivers, abettors, and customers.” Governor William Livingston, General George Washington, other civilian and military leaders, who saw the practice as aiding the enemy, complained, and tried to stop the trade, but without much success. In 1782 a Patriot, who called himself “A Plain Farmer,” also objected that it provided unneeded “British gew-gaws [showy trifles].”35 Then there those who were just plain robbers. Those who took advantage of the disorder and lack of policing abilities to prey on others no matter what side they were on, Patriots, Loyalists, or neutral Quakers. Some had been criminals before the war and continued afterward under its cover. These “banditti” engaged in questionable activities, using aliases. Some operated in the northern highlands crossing New Jersey and New York, others in the Pine Barrens. The “RefugeeTown” at Sandy Hook “attracted irregulars, deserters, refugees, spies, double

Straddlers, Trimmers, and Opportunists • 107

agents, horse thieves, and illicit traders.” David J. Fowler noted, “Sometimes they were conducting legitimate partisan operations, such as horse stealing or disrupting rebel commerce. At other times they were merely plundering or committing criminal acts.”36 They were opportunists. Not flexible or quick enough? Isaac Pearson (1739–1776), Burlington County, whose house is now in Hamilton, was a member of the Provincial Congress and supported independence. But shortly after the Battle of Trenton he was supposedly on his way to New Brunswick to take an oath of loyalty to the crown when he was murdered (but it could have been during a robbery). Possibly switching sides? Not flexible or quick enough, he did not survive.37

Failures Chief White Eyes, Koquethagachton (?–1778) was a straddler who utterly failed to bridge the divisions caused by the Revolution, with serious consequences for the future of the Delaware Indians. Before the Revolution, the Lenape/Delaware had divided, with a small number remaining in New Jersey, while most moved north or west. The Western Delaware who relocated to the Ohio country included three clans or tribes (the Turkey, Turtle, and Wolf) that came together in a confederation during the period between the French and Indian War and the Revolution. They held council meetings and decided on joint policies. When the Revolution began, they were pressured to take sides by supporting either the British or the Americans. But White Eyes, an emerging leader of the Turtle clan, tried to straddle the differences by having them all remain neutral, being “determined to stand fast and not to meddle with the War.” He failed and then sided with the Patriots, but most of the nation instead aligned and fought with the British. The group siding with Americans signed the Fort Pitt Treaty in September 1778, the first between the United States and an Indian nation. It opened the possibility of a fourteenth state for Native Americans, but neither this nor its other provisions were followed. Two months later White Eyes was murdered by frontiersmen, even as a civil war had begun among the Western Delaware. In 1779, in an effort to protect them, George Morgan, an Indian agent whose home was in Princeton, brought a small group to New Jersey, where they met with George Washington while he was at Middlebrook. Included were three children: George Morgan White Eyes (ca. 1770–1798), the eight-year-old son of the chief; John Killbuck, age sixteen, son of Chief Killbuck; and Thomas Killbuck, aged eighteen, a half-brother. The three first boarded in town, then with Morgan’s family. In 1785 the two Killbucks returned to Ohio, along with John Killbuck’s wife and child. Thomas Killbuck apparently became a blacksmith, while John Killbuck became a merchant in Cleveland, which he helped settle. The young White Eyes remained, and Morgan urged Congress to support him at the College of New Jersey as a “worthy orphan, whose father was treacherously put to death at the moment of his greatest exertions to serve the United States.”

108 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

He attended from 1785 to 1788, leaving before his senior year. Sent to New York City, he wrote several letters to President George Washington saying he wanted to return home. He was supplied with clothes, a horse, and money to help him do so. In Ohio he married, but sadly, he apparently became an alcoholic. In 1798 while drunk he approached William Carpenter Jr. with a raised tomahawk and was shot and killed. Another George White Eyes, possibly his son, died in 1826 in Missouri when a group of Delaware were attacked by an Osage war party.38 This was an additional tragic incident in the history of a family that tried to straddle the differences in the Revolution and between peoples. When the war ended the British in the Treaty of Paris abandoned their former Indian allies. Bitter warfare along the frontier had only made Americans more racist and had fueled hatred of all Indians, who they blamed for problems (rather than their own aggression and land hunger). The unity of the Western Delaware was broken, and they were forced from Ohio, moving farther west, some ultimately to what is now Oklahoma. For most Native Americans, including the family of Chief White Eyes, no matter which side they took, the Revolution was a catastrophe.39

Conclusion All of those identified in this chapter as straddlers tried in some way to bridge the gap between the two sides in this war. Most of those also survived the civil war that raged around them, and then stayed afterward in the new republic. Straddlers included those who switched sides because they saw the Patriots as losing, or later the British as failing, or because there was an army in front of their homes or about to arrive there. This was clearly on John Bray’s mind in the fall of 1776. Others had family members on both sides and were divided in their allegiances, such as Walter Rutherford and James Parker. In some cases where families were at odds, at least one member (or more) took the Patriot position that then helped protect family property, as did Nicholas Low and Richard Kemble. After all these years it is very difficult to figure out if their actions reflected their belief in the Patriot cause or if protecting their families’ property was foremost in their calculations. They could also have been trying to preserve themselves, as Mary Peale Field appears to have done, when accepting Hessian and then Patriot soldiers into her house. Some deliberately calculated, but others felt they had no choice. Whatever path was taken, it was a dangerous gamble made in the middle of difficult times. For some it worked, but not all straddlers, trimmers, or opportunists, were successful.

5

The Society of Friends (Quakers) Pacifists and Participants While New Jersey members of the Society of Friends, called Quakers, shared with other religious groups the experience of being physically caught in the middle of the Revolution, they were unique because they were additionally entangled by their own religious doctrines, which magnified their problems during the war. Quakers had distinctive beliefs, particularly pacifism, and adhering to them led to riffs within their own community and charges of disloyalty from those who were outside it. Where they were a significant part of the population, as they were in Pennsylvania and parts of New Jersey, refusal to participate in the war produced resentment, even in places with a long history of religious toleration. From the perspective of whoever was in control at the time, when Quakers refused to fight, or pay taxes, others had to take up the burden. As a result, Quakers were doubly caught in the crossfire, first between contending armies, and second because of the tenets of their faith. Those unable, unwilling, stubborn, refusing any compromise, wanting to be martyrs, found living through the war particularly difficult. Afterward the Society of Friends was diminished in percentage of the population, prestige, and political power. At the time of the American Revolution Quakers were scattered throughout all the thirteen colonies but present in larger numbers in Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and North Carolina, as well as in the mid-Atlantic colonies. There were an estimated 61,000 altogether, with 24,000 in Pennsylvania and 6,000 in New 109

110 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

Jersey (the largest numbers).1 Pennsylvania, with the Friends Yearly Meeting in Philadelphia, the governing body of the faith on this side of the Atlantic, was central. Yet the first of the seventeenth-century colonies settled and controlled by Quakers were West New Jersey (1674) and East New Jersey (1681), held by different proprietary groups, with members of the Society of Friends for a time dominating both governments. Merged into the single royal colony of New Jersey in 1703, their proportion of the population and political influence diminished in the eighteenth century, yet they remained important. There were in the colony (later state) local weekly, regional monthly, and quarterly meetings. While centered in West Jersey, what today would be termed south Jersey (Salem, Burlington, and Gloucester Counties) with meetings at least in Haddonfield, Evesham, Kingswood, Chesterfield, Mount Holly, and Salem, there were also meetings scattered in East Jersey, today’s north Jersey, including at Rahway, Shrewsbury, Woodbridge, and Plainfield. All reported to the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting. In addition, after 1756 Philadelphia had Meetings for Suffering to protest religious persecution from without and enforce compliance within the group. By the 1770s, Quakers insisted that to be a member in good standing one had to marry within the faith, free their slaves, and remain a pacifist. When the Revolutionary War started this meant that non-Quaker neighbors regarded them with distrust (because they were suspected of probably being Loyalists), while the Quaker Meetings began to “read out of meeting,” to “disown,” (excommunicate), those who violated these principles. Of course, picking up arms was objectionable, but so too was supporting the Revolutionary government by swearing loyalty, offering aid, using its money, printing its newspapers and documents, or paying taxes that helped its military efforts. An estimated 10 to 14 percent of New Jersey Quakers were disowned during the war for engaging in one or more of these activities.2 Most maintained their principles, but this was not always easy to do when the war swirled around them, for they too were caught in the middle. While the Quakers were predominantly in West Jersey, and more of the fighting was in the east, in neither section did they escape being involved in the war. Given the substantial number of Quakers who lived in New Jersey the new state did try to accommodate them (as had the colonial government). From the seventeenth century on most Quakers refused to swear an oath, but some would agree to an “affirmation.” As previously noted, the Revolution produced competing oaths of loyalty. The New Jersey Constitution of 1776 specifically provided for religious freedom and prohibited the creation of an established church. The oath it required for all members of the legislature could be taken by swearing an “oath” or making an “affirmation” of allegiance by agreeing “viz’t. I, A. B. do solemnly declare.” This was extended to a more general population by the legislature on September 19, 1776, when it required all civilian and military officers in the state to “sincerely profess and swear (or, if are of the People called Quakers,

The Society of Friends (Quakers) • 111

affirm) that I do not hold myself bound to bear Allegiance to the King of GreatBritain . . . and do swear (or affirm) allegiance to the state.”3 This was a more explicit provision, but of course it did not solve the problem for Quakers who believed it wrong to take sides in the war (or that the old government was the only legitimate one). Then in October 1777 the legislature added jurors and teachers to the list of those who had to testify to their allegiance. Yet the state tried, sometimes more than others, to accommodate Quakers. This is seen when in 1778 New Jersey Quakers brought up another issue. They objected to the required practice of kissing the Bible after taking an oath. This custom went back to medieval Europe and to Britain. When Governor Livingston was apprised of their complaint, he agreed with them. The legislature then passed a law stating that it was not necessary, instead providing that it was permissible to simply raise a hand.4 However, by early in 1776 the Philadelphia Meetings (Yearly and Suffering) had specifically instructed members to neither swear an oath nor make an affirmation. Those who adhered to this made any government concessions futile. There were also provisions for those who could not, or for religious reasons would not, serve in the military. This included providing a substitute (paying a free man or sending a slave), paying a fine, or providing alternative service (done in Pennsylvania and Rhode Island). Most Quakers were not willing to do any of this; those who did faced censure and expulsion from their meetings. Concessions did not mean that Patriots were then willing to accept all refusals to support the war efforts, whether to serve in the military, or pay taxes. In the heat of conflict and pressure to obtain support (and soldiers), feeling threatened by what they saw as treachery, local and state, civilian and military authorities were not always forgiving of Quaker pacifism during a vicious civil war. Sometimes even those who were usually tolerant were not. Neutrality helped the enemy. When Quakers were suspected of loyalism their property could be seized, they could be fined, imprisoned, exiled, and in a few rare cases executed.5 Yet when early in 1777 General Israel Putnam (a Continental officer from Connecticut) was finding it very difficult to raise troops in the southern counties of New Jersey and wanted Quakers drafted, Governor Livingston wrote to stop him. Livingston noted, “as for the People called Quakers, they cannot be compelled to fight without violating those conscientious Scruples which they have always professed as a people. But I hope they are, in other respects valuable Subjects, & will give Government no Trouble.” As the war continued Livingston was less generous (see a later exchange with Samuel Allison).6 From the Stamp Act onward, Quakers objected to British measures but also disapproved of violence as part of that opposition. After 1774 the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting increasingly insisted that pacifism meant not participating on committees, in parades and other protests, not interfering with imperial officials, “defrauding the King of his duties,” or dealing in illegal goods. When the New Jersey Provincial Assembly approved the actions of the Continental Congress

112 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

early in 1775, Quakers added the reservation “excepting . . . such parts as seem to wear an appearance or may have a Tendency, to Force (if any such therebe) as inconsistent with their religious Principles.”7 After Lexington and Concord, when fighting had started, the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting expanded restrictions to not serving in the military, nor paying taxes, nor doing anything that recognized rebel governments. Quakers were increasingly inflexible, refused to make any compromises (which of course was difficult in the middle of this war). And sometimes their statements and actions fed suspicion that they were in fact simply Loyalists. In January 1776, as Thomas Paine’s Common Sense began to circulate and Patriots were inching toward independence, the Philadelphia Meeting for Suffrage issued “The Antient Testimony and Principles of the People Call’d Quakers,” insisting on submission to the existing British government, opposing independence because only God could “set up and pull down Kings.”8 The New Jersey Constitution of 1776, and the better-known continental Declaration of Independence, would instead base government on the idea of popular sovereignty, that government “was, by compact derived from the People.” The Philadelphia Yearly Meeting followed with a statement that Quakers were not to participate in civil government, not to vote, and were forbidden to serve in the military or pay fines for not doing so. Nor could they let others pay for them. Quakers in all the colonies were expected to agree. Those in Pennsylvania were the most strident because pietistic conservative wealthy urban merchants dominated there. New Jersey was overwhelmingly rural, most Quakers were farmers, and sometimes meetings were more lenient. Of course, what was and should be recognized as the legitimate government became a central issue in the Revolution. The timing of the Quaker statement as well as the sentiments insured widespread distrust. Paine, among others, attacked Quakers for, rather than being neutral pacifists, mixing religion and politics. Pennsylvania authorities and members of the Continental Congress were rankled by the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting statement on pacifism in 1776. The suspicions this raised were enhanced in 1777 when General John Sullivan forwarded from Hanover, New Jersey (located near Morristown) documents found on Staten Island that had reputedly been produced by the Yearly Meeting of Friends at Spanktown (today’s Rahway). They contained a list of names of Quakers who were supposedly spying for the British. This is thought to have been a “fabrication,” a “forgery,” because of “inconsistencies,” and that no such meeting existed. But the incident occurred at a tense moment when Patriots in Philadelphia were awaiting a British attack. Sullivan inflamed reactions by sending along with the materials a letter to John Hancock, then president of the Continental Congress, in which he pointed to the Quakers as “the most Dangerous Enemies America knows,” because they “Covered [loyalism] with that Hypocritical Cloak of Religion.” He concluded that while he was adverse “to Interfering

The Society of Friends (Quakers) • 113

with the Religious principles of any Set of men,” Quaker meetings had “Prostituted to the Base purposes of betraying their Country.” This was delivered on August 28, 1777, to a committee consisting of John Adams of Massachusetts, Henry Lee of Virginia, and William Duer of New York, all reputedly predisposed against the Quakers. Several times Adams wrote to his wife, Abigail, criticizing Quakers, specifically reporting the following in a September 8, 1777, letter: “We have been obliged to humble the Pride of some Jesuits who call themselves Quakers, but who love Money and Land better than Liberty or Religion. The Hypocrites are endeavouring to raise the Cry of Persecution, and to give this Matter a religious Turn, but they cant succeed. The World knows them and their Communications. [They are] Actuated by a land jobbing Spirit.” With suspicions heightened Pennsylvania authorities then arrested forty-two men, most of whom were Quakers. In the aftermath of this incident twenty Quaker leaders were sent to exile in Virginia, where two escaped and two died. After seven months the others were then released. Some Patriots thought the treatment had been too harsh. Meanwhile the British had entered Philadelphia on September 26, 1777, and remained until the end of June 1778.9

The Sides New Jersey Quakers Took While, as noted, most Quakers maintained their principles and membership in their meetings, the specific choices they made were diverse and interesting, further illustrating the complexity of the Revolution in New Jersey. Some examples include pacifists such as Margaret Hill Morris (who left a diary of her experiences), and Ann Cooper Whitall, who nursed and scolded (for fighting) the wounded from both sides during the battle of Red Bank on the Delaware River. She and her extended family, including grown sons, were clearly caught in the middle of the fighting. Other Quakers, these nonpacifists, supported the war in a variety of ways and were as a result removed from membership. This could include serving in the Patriot army or militia as did Philemon Dickinson, Lambert Cadwalader, and members of the Shreve family. There were also those who took the Loyalist side—including Judge William Hancock, killed during the infamous March 26, 1778, “massacre” at his house in what is now Lower Alloways Creek, Salem County. He was a Quaker Loyalist, but British and Hessians did not always recognize those who were Loyalists, even when they presented “papers” showing that they had “protection.” Afterward, other Quakers were aware of what had happened to him. At least a few Quakers picked up arms and fought for the British.

Pacifists, Noncombatants Margaret Hill Morris (1737–1816) was the daughter of Richard Hill and Deborah Moore, of South River, Maryland. Experiencing financial difficulties, the

114 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

parents moved to Madeira, leaving her and five siblings in Philadelphia in the care of her older sister, Hannah Moore (married to a cousin with the same last name as her mother). In 1758 Margaret married William Morris Jr., a local merchant, but he died in 1766, leaving her with four surviving young children ages seven to an infant. In 1770 she moved to Greenbank on the outskirts of Burlington, where she then lived with Sarah Dillwyn, a sister. Their house (formerly owned by William Franklin) was on the Delaware River and they were caught in the fighting before the Battle of Trenton and then while the British were occupying Philadelphia. Ships from the Pennsylvania navy and Britain sailed in front of the town, sometimes firing at the shore, and at other times sailors and soldiers landed, presenting another threat. Her diary describes some of the action that took place. She knew that even as a neutral Quaker, the widowed mother of children, she and her property were not safe. When a friend warned her to hide all the family’s gold and silver from the Hessians, her initial answer was that they only harmed rebels. But this was immediately contradicted, as she was told “that Signified nothing [that] we should lose all.” When her son was sent on an errand she worried until he safely returned. Though Morris was a Quaker, a pacifist, and supposedly “neutral,” John M. Jackson the editor of her diary, noted, “Her political sympathies are of a somewhat vacillating nature. Unquestionably she favored a retention of the status quo, however, certain entries show an underlying sympathy for her fellowcountrymen.” The text illustrates this even though she said she wanted to stay out of the fray. When the British and Hessians arrived in nearby Mount Holly in December 1776 she wrote “great news—very great news.” At one point she hid the Loyalist Anglican minister Jonathan Odell, a friend, in a “closet” [small attic room] in her neighbor’s house (while they were away, she was taking care of it). For five days she kept him safe from searching Patriots. Odell later returned the favor—while on board a British ship that was about to fire on her house, he convinced them to not do so. Yet, when she heard of local skirmishes, she began referring to the Patriots as “our troops” “our men” “our friends.” And, on first hearing news of the Battle of Trenton she commented that the “loss on our side [is] not known.” Throughout she missed her family in Pennsylvania. At one point, she describes a difficult trip by ferry and then coach to Kensington near occupied Philadelphia to visit her father and two sisters, family members who were still there. She and another woman, illegally traveling through a war zone, had quite an adventure while worried about being stopped and dealing with a carriage that broke down. To the relief of friends and relatives they arrived home safely. In 1779, with the British gone from Philadelphia, she opened the equivalent of a pharmacy in Burlington, offering herbal remedies of her own making. She wrote that it helped keep her family “a step above absolute dependence.” When the war was finally over, she returned to that city and stayed until the yellow fever epidemic of 1793. Then she moved back to Burlington to raise an orphaned granddaughter.

The Society of Friends (Quakers) • 115

FIG. 19 Margaret Hill Morris (1737–1816). A widowed Quaker pacifist, she moved from

Philadelphia to Burlington with her children in 1770, where she was caught in the crossfire of the war. Soldiers and sailors from British, Hessian, and Patriot forces were at times in the area. At one point she hid the Anglican minister Jonathan Odell, and at another expressed concern about local Patriots. (Courtesy of Quaker and Special Collections, Haverford College, Haverford, PA.)

As a Quaker and pacifist Margaret Hill Morris supposedly had no sympathy with either side in the war, but her diary clearly shows that she was torn. She initially welcomed the British and aided a Loyalist friend, but she also felt kinship with neighbors who were Patriots. While the war literally went on in front of and around her house, she stayed in contact with extended family, and

116 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

kept her children safe. She also passed her medical knowledge on to a daughter and a son.10 The Whitalls. Another Quaker woman, Ann Cooper Whitall (1716–1797) and some of her family, also living in west Jersey on or near the Delaware River, were caught in part of the fighting that took place as the British moved to capture the river approach to Philadelphia in October and November 1777. Patriot forces took over part of their farmland to build Fort Mercer, using 1,000 feet of cedar boards, 8,550 rails, 2,048 stakes, and 50 posts for construction. Military horses consumed 15 tons of hay, while they and cattle ate fields of grass. At one point during the battle of Red Bank that followed, while cannons roared above and one shot landed inside the house, Whitall retired to the basement—supposedly calmly continuing to use her spinning wheel. Then she nursed the wounded from both sides, reputedly as a good Quaker chiding all of them for fighting. The Hessian commander Colonel von Donop died in her house. Fighting then continued in the area for months while both sides used the property. Forced to leave, the family returned five months later to assess the considerable damage. Her husband, James Whitall, filed a claim for £5,760 in damages, including a barn, a hay house, and an orchard of 300 grafted trees, that had been destroyed. Unable to get compensation from the state government for damages caused primarily by Patriot forces, they slowly made repairs. Ann Whitall survived the war, but not the Yellow Fever epidemic of 1797, which also took four other family members.11 Whitall had nine children—six sons and three daughters. One of her sons, Job Whitall (1743–1797), left a diary that covers the war years. Much of it is a day-by-day record of his activities as a farmer—crops planted and harvested, animals (such as pigs slaughtered and smoked into hams) for sale, horses borrowed and loaned, visits to and from family (father, brothers, cousins), with relatives and neighbors helping each other with the work. He occasionally also hired workers.12 The descriptions provide vivid insight into the richness of the land and the large quantity of food and forage produced, the reason why both sides in the war wanted to control the area. He planted and harvested a wide variety of grains, fruits, and vegetables, such as rye, wheat, corn, oats, watermelon, apples, peas, potatoes, pumpkins, turnips, and more. The family sold butter and cedar for fences, and purchased shad, cloth, shoes, and other items. He also describes frequent trips to local (Woodbury) and regional (Haddonfield) Quaker meetings, and even when it was not occupied by the British, into Philadelphia for worship at the meeting there (as well as to sell crops and purchase those things the family could not produce or exchange for locally). The diary further records the damage that his property and that of others in the region suffered from raids by the British and Hessian forces, as well Patriot Continental and militia ones, and in at least one case by a group of “rogues” who robbed them. He recorded on November 21, 1777, that English soldiers took

The Society of Friends (Quakers) • 117

FIG. 20 Whitall House at Red Bank Battlefield Park, in National Park, New Jersey. This

house was built in 1748 by Quakers James and Ann Whitall on their 400-acre farm along the Delaware River south of Philadelphia. During the war, particularly in 1777 when the British were fighting for water access to the then Patriot capitol, they were caught in the middle of the fighting. At one point during the Battle of Red Bank Ann Whitall retreated to the basement where she nursed soldiers from both sides. (Source: photograph courtesy of Richard Veit.)

horses, “bread, pyes [pies], milk, cheese, meat, dishes, cups, spoons . . . shirts, sheets, Blankets, cover beds, stockings, Breeches” as well as an axe and some cattle. The next day they returned and made off with pigs, “potatoes and milk.” In addition, he mentions paying a fine, perhaps for not serving in the militia or not paying his taxes (possibly paid because New Jersey Meetings were not as rigorous in punishing these offences as were those in Pennsylvania, considering it a matter of individual conscience). He did accept Patriot money. Whitall noted that even if one were a Quaker neutral or Loyalist trying to stay out of things one could end up dead (like Judge Hancock).13 Further Examples. Some Quakers, their loyalty questioned by local Patriots, paid more than Whitall’s fine, though less than Hancock’s life. Joseph Moore (1732–1793) a Quaker farmer from Woodbridge, lived in Amwell. He refused to swear an oath of loyalty to New Jersey. Arrested and jailed for six weeks, he was then fined and released. His animals were confiscated in lieu of the taxes he refused to pay.14 Others stepped aside, and kept quiet, as did James Kinsey (1731–1803), who graduated from the College of New Jersey in 1750 and then moved to Burlington. He was a lawyer as well as a member of the assembly from 1772 to 1775, and

118 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

he served in the Continental Congress. However, he resigned before the Declaration of Independence, and then dropped out of politics during the war. He refused to take an oath of allegiance to the new government, his penalty unknown. Yet, in 1789 he became the chief justice of the New Jersey state Supreme Court, at which point he had to have asserted his loyalty. But by then New Jersey, and the United States, were the legitimate governments.15 Samuel Allison was also a prominent Quaker lawyer from Burlington, and an advocate of abolition. He had written a preface to the 1776 edition of the colony’s laws (from 1702 to 1775), but with independence tried to remain neutral. In July 1778, seeing fellow Quakers persecuted by state laws that required statements of allegiance, payment of fines, and more, he wrote to Governor William Livingston expressing his objections. Allison insisted that Quakers could live under any “De Facto” government that recognized they could not take “part in the contest or advancing one side or the other.” There was, he argued, a difference between acknowledging a government that was “only temporary; but declarations of abjuration & allegiance, go to the right, are perpetual & final.” He objected particularly to the recent law that had extended the requirement to teachers, saying it resulted in closed schools because Quaker teachers could not take oaths or affirmations. Livingston quickly wrote a lengthy reply, noting that while he was sympathetic, there was a difference between religious and civic duties. The laws of England required oaths; pacifists in New Jersey did not have to fight, but they did have obligations to the now “de facto” civilian government and should expect to forfeit property if they did not comply. He maintained that “our Schoolmasters were almost universally what we call Tories,” surely Quakers should be able to find others. In addition, he maintained that many Quakers had “given the World sufficiently to understand, that they sided in the dispute with Great Britain.” Livingston insisted that “as a private person I have not the least prejudice against that People, but love & esteem all good & religious men of every persuasion. As Governor of this State, I make no distinction between one Citizen & another on account of their ecclesiastical discrimination but only as they are good or bad members of the Community.” This exchange, as well as others noted in this book, makes clear that at the center of the Revolution was the issue of which was the legitimate government, and then what was owed to it. Clearly Allison and Livingston did not agree in their views.16 Relief Efforts. Another way Quakers during the war tried to live up to their ideals, discipline or testimony of faith was to aid others (Quakers and non-Quakers). For example, in 1775, even while disciplining members who participated in military exercises, the Haddonfield Friends Meeting sent some £289.17.6 for the relief of blockaded Boston. Later, to help those suffering from the ravages of war or held captive by one side or the other, Quakers raised money and collected supplies of food, clothing, and blankets, to help prisoners, refugees, and the destitute. In the period from 1777 to 1779, help was extended to New Jersey Friends

The Society of Friends (Quakers) • 119

in Rahway, Plainfield, and Shrewsbury affected by the war going on around them. In 1790, speaking in Congress, New Jersey representative Elias Boudinot, who earlier had served as Commissary General of Prisoners, thanked Quakers for their “humanity” and “exertions.” Providing aid for prisoners of war was acceptable, but not to soldiers from either side actively engaged in fighting.17 Even as they tried to help others, Quaker pacifists in all the colonies paid a price for noncompliance with the requirements for military service, payment of taxes, use of Revolutionary money (state or continental), and taking of oaths or affirmations of loyalty. The most rigorous enforcement was in Pennsylvania, but that was also the location of the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, which most stubbornly refused to comply or compromise with the state and continental governments. New Jersey officials were more lenient in writing and then enforcing laws, while local Quaker meetings more often left to an individual’s conscience decisions about paying fines or using Patriot money. Despite this the estimate for New Jersey is £16,026.19.5 worth of property distrained for unpaid fines or taxes. Occasionally Quakers were imprisoned for their refusals, but then were usually released when an official intervened. In one case two men (Mark Miller of Woodbury and Thomas Redman of Haddonfield) were arrested, tried, and fined; then a non-Quaker stepped up and paid their fines for them. No examples were found of New Jersey Quakers executed for treason, although two were executed in Pennsylvania (both had apparently helped the British).18

Patriots, Nonpacifist Friends There were Quakers who picked up arms and served, usually (but not always) with Patriot forces, paid taxes, took oaths, or affirmed their allegiance to the new governments. Estimates range from 400 to 1,724 Quakers disowned for supporting the war, almost all male because they were the ones subject to the draft, taxes, and fines. The most comprehensive estimates appear in the work of Arthur J. Mekeel. According to his statistics Quaker meetings “dealt with” 2,350 cases and disowned 1,724 (74 percent) of the men examined. Of these disownments 993 were for military and 84 for naval service, 115 for assisting with the war (manufacturing military supplies, providing carts and teams, collecting blankets, carrying messages), 247 for paying fines and taxes, 187 for taking a test of affirmation, 36 for holding public office, plus some for such things as celebrating Independence Day. New Jersey, because of the size of its Quaker population, and the fact that it was a war zone for so much of the Revolution, was second only to Pennsylvania in total numbers (about one-third the number of those disowned in that much larger state). He reported that for New Jersey 429 cases were examined, with 288 resulting in disownments—this included 165 for military and 5 for naval service, 11 for helping with the war effort, 71 for paying fines and taxes, 28 taking a test of affirmation, and 8 for holding public office. Richard P. McCormick thought that during the war 10 percent of Quakers in New Jersey were disowned for various reasons, but Mekeel’s figures are closer

120 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

to 14 percent or higher. Some of those disowned joined what turned out to be a relatively short-lived group of separate “Free Quakers,” or became members of other religious groups.19 Among those from New Jersey excommunicated for supporting the Revolution were members of the Shreve family, Isaac Collins (who printed the minutes of the Revolutionary legislature and a Patriot newspaper), and John Cooper who served in the state assembly.20 Free Quakers, also known as the “Fighting Quakers.” From the seventeenthcentury founding of New Jersey and Pennsylvania the Quakers in both colonies belonged to the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting. When the Free Quakers organized during the Revolution, members came from families of both provinces. In a public letter of July 9, 1781, published as a broadside, “From the Monthly Meeting of Friends, Called by Some The FREE QUAKERS,” they blamed the area Quakers for forcing them to separate: “As you have by your proceedings against us separated yourselves from us . . . you have compelled us, however unwillingly, to become separate from you.” They had been “read out of meeting” “disowned,” the equivalent of being excommunicated. The letter went on to note that “we are not desirous of having any mistake which we may happen to make laid to your charge; neither are we willing to have any of your errors brought as guilt against us.” Meaning they did not want to be classified with those seen as disloyal to the new government. This open letter went on to maintain that they were entitled to some of the Quakers’ property; they particularly wanted for their use one of the meeting houses in Philadelphia, plus access to the burial ground. “For, however the living may contend, surely the dead may lie peaceably together.” They wanted to reach an agreement without going to court (Quakers advocated arbitration and avoidance of lawyers), but they would take that action if forced to do so. The letter ends, “As Christians, laboring in some degree to forgive injuries, we salute you, and, though disowned and rejected by you, we are your friends and brethren. Signed for the Meeting, by Samuel Wetherill, jun. Clerk.” The group specifically rejected Quaker pacifism and argued that a “just” church would never tell its members that they could not defend their lives or those of their friends, or their government. Indeed, “all government is essentially a defensive war for the protection of public peace, and that when the government is threatened by domestic treason or foreign invasion, it then becomes the plain duty of every man to join in the public defence by all means possible, and that War, while an extreme measure is in such instances not merely justifiable, but right and proper.”21 The Philadelphia Meeting rejected the claims of the Free Quakers to any of their property, and the Pennsylvania legislature refused to intervene in what it saw as an internal religious dispute. In 1783 the Free Quakers bought land at 5th and Arch streets and began construction of their own meeting house and burial ground. The surviving membership list of 1785 includes thirty-two men and

The Society of Friends (Quakers) • 121

thirty-four women. A number of the leaders in the group had New Jersey connections, including Samuel Wetherill (1736–1816), originally from Burlington; Owen Biddle (1737–1799), from Burlington County; Thomas Matlack, his brothers Timothy Matlack (1730–1829), and White Matlack (1745–1824), originally from Haddonfield; and Elizabeth “Betsy” Griscom (1752–1836), who married in succession John Ross, Joseph Ashborn, and John Claypoole. Best known as Betsy Ross, she had Griscom Quaker relatives in New Jersey.22 At its height there were about 170 members, but the number diminished over time. The group continued to worship until 1836, although at the end apparently only a son of Samuel Wetherill and Betsy (Ross) Claypoole attended. In the interim members had moved away, died, rejoined the “regular” Quakers, or joined other religions. The building still exists, and today is part of the historic Independence complex in Philadelphia. There were other shorter-surviving Free Quaker meetings in Rhode Island and North Carolina. While Quakers were disowned for supporting the war in one way or another, they were also removed from membership for other (or additional) reasons. Betsy Ross was a seamstress who produced flags for Revolutionary state and national forces, but also married out of meeting (three times). Samuel Wetherill was dismissed in 1779 for publishing a book, title unknown, but he was also a cloth manufacturer who sold to the Continental army, and he took an oath of affirmation to the Pennsylvania government. Several who lived in Pennsylvania were tanners, brewers, and clockmakers, who broadened their activities to participate in early industrial projects in Trenton, producing leather, steel, paper, and more. They and the other members of the Free Quakers supported the Revolution.23 Isaac Collins (1746–1817) was a Quaker Patriot and a printer who used type, ink, and paper to support the Revolution.24 As a result, he was disowned, at least briefly joined the Free Quakers, and then after ten years was readmitted to Quaker fellowship. Collins was born in Delaware to Quaker parents, then when young moved to Philadelphia, where he served an apprenticeship and then worked for printers. In 1770 he relocated to Burlington, where he opened his own print shop, and soon won a contract to be the public printer for the colony of New Jersey (replacing the printer James Parker who had recently died). He married Rachel Budd, a Philadelphia Quaker, in 1771. She helped in the shop and over time gave birth to fourteen children (most but not all survived). By early 1776 Collins was printing for the Patriots. On July 6 of that year this included 1,000 copies of the new state constitution. As the public printer he also published the minutes of legislative meetings and the state’s paper money. At the same time, he refused to publish Governor William Franklin’s address to the Provincial Congress objecting to his arrest and removal from office. Collins had picked his side. Like the other members of the Free Quakers he believed in selfdefense and supported the Revolutionary War. When Governor William Livingston proposed that the state subsidize a newspaper to contradict the Loyalist press, Collins agreed to be the editor and publisher. The first edition of the New

FIG. 21 Statement of Free Quakers July 9, 1781, broadside. During the war, a group of

Quakers from Pennsylvania and New Jersey who supported the Revolution were disowned, and as a result formed their own separate meeting. In this broadside they defend their actions and insist that they are entitled to a portion of the Quakers’ religious property. They wanted to own one of the meeting houses as well as space in the burial grounds. When this failed, they built their own place of worship in Philadelphia. (Source: Early American Imprints: Series I. See image from Manuscript Division, LOC at http://www.loc.gov /exhibits/religion/vc006501.jpg.)

The Society of Friends (Quakers) • 123

Jersey Gazette appeared December 5, 1777, and continued under him for eight years, although he and the press moved to Trenton in February 1778. In that first issue he promised “to treat with disregard the intemperate Effusions of factious Zealots, whether religious or political, as injurious to Virtue, and destructive of Civil Order. With great Care shall he reject every Proposition to make his Paper a Vehicle for the dark Purposes of private Malice, by propagating Calumnies against Individuals, wounding the Peace of Families, and inflaming the Minds of Men with Bitterness and Rancour against one another.” When it met on May 4, 1778, the Burlington Monthly Meeting charged Collins with transgressing “the Rules of our Discipline, by paying in Effect, his Fine in lieu of Personal service in the militia.” As a Patriot publisher he and his four employees had received a military exemption. Then on September 7, 1778, he was officially disowned. Richard Hixson, his biographer, concludes that “he had gone too far to turn back, both as a wise and frugal businessman and as a wise and devoted public servant.” He was also an independent person, insisting for instance that freedom of the press included no interference, not even from his patron, Governor William Livingston, to whom he wrote to insist “my Ear is open to every Man’s Instructions but to no Man’s influences.” At some point after 1781 he joined the Free Quakers; his name appears on the 1785 membership list with the notation “of Trenton.” It is interesting that his wife and then living five children transferred their membership from the Burlington Meeting to the Chesterfield Meeting located near Trenton, where, unlike him, they remained within the fold. This is probably an important clue to understanding why with the war over, and the newspaper’s publication discontinued in 1786, in 1787 Isaac Collins rejoined the mainstream Quakers. First the Burlington Monthly Meeting readmitted him, after he had confessed “his error in having acted inconsistently with our peaceable Testimony.” It noted that he had been “active in the late War” but wanted “to be reunited in membership with Friends.” The Meeting then sent a certificate to the Chesterfield Monthly Meeting testifying that he was a Friend in good standing and enabling him to join the rest of his family as a member there. Collins served on a committee for establishing schools. When he moved to New York City in 1796 his membership was transferred to the New York Monthly Meeting. In the larger city he continued a long and successful career as a printer and publisher. After the death of his wife in 1808 he returned to Burlington, where a year later he married a widow. When he died in 1817, he was buried there with other Quakers. The fact that Collins was a birthright Quaker (born to Quaker parents), married within the faith, and that his family continued their membership through the war, helps explain why this Patriot rejoined the regular Quakers. Also, by 1787 the war was over, and for some reconciliation was possible. Stacy Potts (1731–1816) was born in White Hill, Burlington County, and moved to Trenton. Descended from one of the earliest Quaker families in the area, he

124 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

started as a tanner, then became a merchant and an early industrialist. He was initially successful and able to build a substantial house with two stories, ten rooms, six fireplaces, a kitchen, and a stable. Hessian Colonel Rall visited him, and then died in his house after the Battle of Trenton.25 His wife was among the women who helped Deborah Reed raise money for the Continental army. (If a Quaker she was not the only one to participate in this way.) Potts was related to Rachel Budd Collins. During the war he owned a steel factory, tannery, and paper mill. The last was established to supply paper to Isaac Collins for the New Jersey Gazette. In return the owner and workers received exemptions from military service. However, during the war Potts had economic problems, accumulating debts he could not pay. Also, he and his partner John Nuncarrow (ca. 1743–1801), a Philadelphia steelmaster, disagreed, and apparently got into trouble over steel produced for the American government but not delivered (possibly sold instead on the open market). Lawsuits followed and Potts’s property was seized and sold to pay both taxes and debts. In 1789 Potts moved to Harrisburg in western Pennsylvania, where he started over again as a tanner and merchant. About 1805 he returned to Trenton and the next year was elected mayor, serving from 1806 to 1814.26 Potts was possibly a Quaker straddler, trying to bridge both religious and political divides. He at one point refused to take an oath of allegiance and was fined. But he also assisted in the production of military goods (steel and paper) for the Patriots. It is likely that he was among those who were disowned for their activities.

Military Service Several prominent leaders of the Continental army who served with George Washington, had been raised as Quakers, most notably General Nathaniel Greene (1742–1786) of Rhode Island, who was disowned for supporting rebellion even before the war started, then went on to serve as a major military figure throughout. This included less well known officers, such as Thomas Mifflin, Samuel Marshall, John Cadwalader (1742–1786, born in Trenton and brother of Lambert Cadwalader), all of Pennsylvania. Also in that state the military “Quaker Blues” was organized in 1775 by Joseph Cowperthwaite, Clement Biddle, and other prominent men. In New Jersey Philemon Dickinson (1739–1809), Lambert Cadwalader (1742–1823), and Israel Shreve (1739–1799), Shreve’s brothers Caleb and William (1737–1812), Shreve’s son John (1762–1854), and two nephews, served in the Patriot military and were as a result disowned. When the war was over, the Shreves moved west.

Dickinsons and Caldwalladers Philemon Dickinson was a Quaker from Maryland with property there as well as in Delaware and New Jersey. His older brother, John Dickinson (1732–1808),

The Society of Friends (Quakers) • 125

also held property in all three colonies then states. One result was that they were both involved in the politics of more than one place. John Dickinson, the better known of the two, was a graduate of the College of New Jersey, studied law in London, and wrote Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania (1767–1768) opposing the Townshend Acts. Published initially in newspapers and then as a pamphlet, the “Letters” maintained that the Townshend Acts were “unconstitutional” and “destructive to the liberty of these colonies” because, while the British government could regulate trade, it could not directly tax. The colonists were not represented in parliament. He represented Pennsylvania in the Second Continental Congress, where he pushed for reconciliation and refused to sign the Declaration of Independence, but then turned around and enlisted in the state’s militia serving until the end of 1776. During and after the war he served in the governments of both Pennsylvania and Delaware (at one point simultaneously president of both states), and then in the Constitutional Convention in 1787. Although both his mother and his wife were Quakers, he apparently was never a formal member of a Meeting, and believed in “defensive war,” which provides an explanation of his changing positions. Yet, when he died, he was buried in the Friends Burial Ground in Wilmington, Delaware. Younger brother Philemon Dickinson graduated from the College of Pennsylvania in 1759, and then studied law but did not practice. He settled on an estate named “The Hermitage” near Trenton in 1767 and married Mary Cadwalader (1746–1781), a first cousin. By July 1775 he was serving in the Hunterdon County militia, the Provincial Congress, and then in 1776 on the committee that wrote the New Jersey constitution. He was very active during the war as a brigadier general in the state militia, involved in actions throughout the state, while also frequently forwarding intelligence to George Washington (in 1778 sending so many reports that Washington asked him to put the time as well as the date on his correspondence). At one point his home was literally in the middle of the Battle of Trenton, used by Hessians and then Patriots. He and the militia forces that he led were important in the Battle of Monmouth, as well as in constantly trying to keep British, Hessian, and Loyalist forces at bay. Later, from 1782 to 1783, he represented Delaware in Congress, and from 1783 to 1784 served on the New Jersey Council. Then from 1790 to 1793 he filled the term in the U.S. Senate vacated when William Paterson went on the Supreme Court. When he died, he was buried in the Friends Burial Ground in Trenton. Lambert Cadwalader was born in Trenton and attended the College of New Jersey but did not graduate. He went into business with his brother John Cadwalader in Philadelphia. Throughout the war John Cadwalader was an active militia general in Pennsylvania, while Lambert Cadwalader served only briefly. He was captured at Fort Washington in 1776, but quickly released, apparently because his father, a doctor, had treated a British general. He returned to Trenton where he was on parole for two years. Because he was never exchanged, he thought himself in an ambiguous position, which was settled when he resigned

126 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

his commission. He later served as New Jersey’s representative, first in 1784 in the Confederation Congress, then in the Federal Congress in 1788 and 1792. When he died, he joined his cousin (who was also his brother-in-law), Philemon Dickinson, in the Friends Burial Ground in Trenton. The related Dickinson and Cadwalader families, four cousins with Quaker backgrounds, were all Patriots who served in a variety of ways, in both the military and politics. Wealthy men, they at some point each lost property in one or more of four states when it was destroyed by British forces.27

The Shreves While Colonel Israel Shreve’s brothers served terms in the militia (William as a Burlington County colonel), he and his son were members of the Continental army’s Second New Jersey Regiment and took part in military actions throughout most of the war. A Gloucester County farmer and justice of the peace, described by historian Harry Ward as “enormously overweight and not particularly competent,” Israel Shreve served in Canada, the fighting around Philadelphia, through southern and northern New Jersey, and even in the western campaign with General John Sullivan against the Indians. Wounded at Brandywine he recovered to serve along the Delaware River, in the thick of the Battle of Monmouth, later in the Newark and Elizabethtown areas, and then at the Morristown encampment. Most of the time he was under the command of General William Maxwell, but he was also in direct contact with George Washington as he worked to counter British and Hessian raids in Salem County, collect cattle and other supplies for the army while it was at Valley Forge (instructed by Washington to be sure to give receipts to local farmers). His service included handling the cases of two men who had been captured and were accused of treason. One, William Seed, was executed May 3, 1778, after a military trial and conviction, held under Shreve’s command. Shreve was at Morristown when first Pennsylvania troops and then New Jersey ones from his regiment mutinied. Washington was furious at his slow reaction to the mutiny, writing on January  28, 1781, to demand an explanation. Shreve replied the same day, stating that he had not wanted to appear in person because he could be asked to pardon some of the men; instead, Colonial Elias Dayton had taken command. He wrote that “when General How [Robert Howe] Surrounded the Camp I was within a few miles and thought it best not to go [to] Camp until the matter was Over, or those who Suffered, might Look up to me for to Interseed for their Pardons.” Then he added that he hoped Washington would understand that after six years of service “the Distressed Situation this Mutiny has Caused in my mind has been Such as to Stagger me much as to the part I had to Act.” Shreve then resigned his command. This former Quaker apparently could serve in battle, could execute a traitor, but could not fire upon his own men.28 In June 1776 when he first went off to war, Shreve, worried about his fate, wrote his wife “knowing I owe my service to my Country am Determined to

The Society of Friends (Quakers) • 127

Defend our Rights and privileges so just, with all my [p]owers.” But they were both in danger. During the war, his wife and family fled and returned several times, while the farm suffered neglect. His brother William’s home in Mount Holly was burned. Israel Shreve’s military service rarely paid. He married twice and had four children with his first wife, Grace Curtis (?–1771), and after her death another seven with his second, Mary Cokely (1749–?). After the war in 1783 he and his brother Caleb ran for the Burlington County seats in the state assembly and lost. Then with numerous children to provide for he moved west. His diary describes the 1788 trek with family and neighbors. The group included his wife and six children, his brother William’s wife and two children, plus others for a total of twenty-nine “souls.” Together they traversed rivers and mountains, traveling on unfinished or nonexistent roads. Wagons broke down, horses regularly lost shoes, one child died, and the women in the group constantly complained of being exhausted as to lighten the load they often had to walk. Once there he first rented and then purchased land from George Washington, but even in Washington’s Bottoms, Fayette County, in western Pennsylvania, he and others in the family struggled financially. Although he repeatedly promised to pay Washington for what he had purchased, and sold some of it to others, he was unable to come up with the money. A clearly frustrated Washington reluctantly kept granting extensions. The matter was unresolved when both men died (on the same day) in 1799. Shreve’s family then scattered, moving farther west and south. Son John Shreve moved to Ohio and was later elected to the legislature there. Henry Miller Shreve (1785–1851) became a steamboat captain on the Mississippi, to earn money for the family after his father’s death. Shreveport, Louisiana, is named for him. While they in the long run succeeded, this Quaker family is yet another example of those who were dislocated and paid a price during the Revolution.29 Two other examples of Quakers who picked up arms are Benjamin Whitall, one of Ann Cooper Whitall’s sons and John Cooper’s nephew, a captain in the Patriot artillery who participated in the battle of Red Bank (even as his mother retreated to the basement of her house). The other is Captain John Mott, although since he married out of meeting, he was apparently excommunicated for that reason. This Hunterdon County militia officer killed three of the six Hessians who attacked his house in December 1776, while his terrified children hid in the cellar. One of them later remembered that for the rest of his life he felt guilty for what he had done.30

The Coopers John Cooper (1729–1785) was a brother of Ann Cooper Whitall. He served in the New Jersey Provincial Congress, including on the committee that wrote the state constitution of 1776, and in the Second Continental Congress. He resigned before the Declaration of Independence, but later in the war served in the state legislature. He was disowned because of his political service. In 1780 he made a

128 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

passionate argument for abolition, emphasizing that the war was being fought for liberty, and to not grant it to slaves was illogical and wrong. The following is part of his statement that appeared in the New Jersey Gazette on September 20, 1780: “Whilst we are spilling our blood and exhausting our treasure in defence of our own liberty, it would not perhaps be amiss to turn our eyes towards those of our fellow-men who are now groaning in bondage under us.” He went on to make a connection between the war and abolition: “And as tyranny is the accursed thing against which we have waged war, how can we hope to prevail against our enemies whilst we ourselves are tyrants, holding thousands of our fellow-creatures in slavery under us?” Cooper was influenced by his fellow Quaker Anthony Benezet to support immediate rather than gradual abolition. However, in 1778  in the middle of the war, the New Jersey legislature had rejected all suggestions about ending slavery. Cooper’s plea did not bring a reversal of that position.31 An older brother David Cooper (1724–1795), also a Quaker and an abolitionist, maintained his pacificism during the war. In 1783 he wrote A Serious Address to the Rulers of America, on the Inconsistency of Their Conduct Respecting Slavery: Forming a Contrast Between the Encroachments of England on American Liberty and American Injustice in Tolerating Slavery. He continued to argue against the institution into Washington’s presidency. While the brothers agreed about abolition, their disagreement on the war soured their relationship.32

Loyalists The estimates and examples of New Jersey Quakers who were Loyalists and were disowned for their support, or who left at the end of the war, are revealing because they are so low in comparison to those who in some way sided with the Patriots as well as of course those who did try to remain neutral pacifists. If their preference when the war started was for the existing (royal) government, they rarely acted on this inclination by picking up arms. For New Jersey Arthur Mekeel reported nine disowned for joining the British military, and two who as exiles filed claims with the British government for losses. One who did this was Samuel Moore, a Woodbridge farmer, who served in the British army and afterward went to Nova Scotia. In addition, when the war ended in 1783 the group of Quaker Loyalists who obtained permission to settle in New Brunswick, Canada, in a town named Pennfield, included 200 from New York and 53 from New Jersey. Others followed, apparently for the free land being offered, but few remained after a fire destroyed most of the town in 1786.33 Joseph Williams, from a Shrewsbury Quaker family, served in the New Jersey Volunteers during the war, and afterward went to Canada. At least two of his brothers were also Loyalists. The Woodward family of Quakers in Upper Freehold, Monmouth County, took up arms to aid the British during the war. Led by “Little Anthony” Woodward Jr., joined by six members of his family and several neighbors, they led an uprising against the Patriots in 1776, and later hid

The Society of Friends (Quakers) • 129

out in the pine lands from where some continued to fight. Disowned for their actions, at the end of the war some left for Canada, but at least one, Anthony Woodward Jr., had returned by the late 1780s.34 Some Quaker Loyalists who stayed during the war took “protections” from the British, but did not take up arms. They of course could still be caught in the middle as was Judge William Hancock Jr. in the spring of 1778. He was descended from Quakers who had been in the area since 1675, and he served, as his father had, in the colonial assembly and as a county judge. With the Continental army at Valley Forge and the British in Philadelphia, both sides sent forces into south Jersey for food and forage. In March 1,500 British troops led by Colonel Charles Mawhood occupied Salem and searched the area for cattle, corn, and more. Local militia forces tried to prevent them from obtaining supplies; they clashed at Quinton’s bridge, which crossed Alloways Creek, and then the Patriots destroyed Hancock’s bridge, also over the creek, in an effort to keep them away. Instead, about 300 British soldiers led by Major John Graves Simcoe crossed through wetlands and on March  21 attacked the Hancock home, where some twenty to thirty militia were resting. Their orders were to “Go—spare no one—put all to death—give no quarters.” In the predawn dark the Queens Rangers silently used bayonets, killing ten and wounding another five, pursuing those who tried to flee. The dead included four Quakers, one of them Judge Hancock, who died shortly afterward. Mawhood followed up with a letter demanding the militia lay down its arms or he would call out local Loyalists to burn all their homes, leaving their wives and children destitute. He listed twenty-seven who would be targeted. Patriot Colonial Elijah Hand, angered by the brutality, refused to back down, replying to Mawhood that the command “induces me to image [imagine] that I am reading the cruel order of a barbarous Attila.” This was to no avail, and the local Patriots were targeted. The Judge’s daughter, Sarah Hancock Sinnickson, who lived in Salem and was married to Thomas Sinnickson, a Patriot militia captain, learned of the attack from British soldiers who occupied her house. Believing her father dead (before he was), she so vigorously berated the officers for their actions that they threatened to hang her.35 Colonial Israel Shreve, who was in the area, reported to George Washington on March  28, 1778, that numerous houses had been destroyed, and “this Country is in a miserable Situation the Inhabitants afraid of every person th[e]y see.” Loyalists were capturing Patriot officers and taking them into the “City” (Philadelphia). Sarah’s husband was apparently not among them.36

Summary and Conclusions The Revolution forced Quakers to reconcile, or not, their beliefs in the middle of war. The conservative urban, sometimes wealthy merchants, leaders in Philadelphia more rigidly enforced doctrines and disciplines. The result was to expel

130 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

at a greater rate than before those not willing to conform, narrowing the size and perspective of the group. Some became Free Quakers or joined other religious groups, some moved west, and a small number left for Canada and other places still within the British empire. But most New Jersey Quakers remained because of their long presence and numerous family members in the area. Also, despite some persecution during the war, there was religious freedom in the colony and then state (more than available elsewhere). Even with cases of Quakers prosecuted for noncompliance during the war, and in some cases refusals to pay taxes toward debts from it afterward, New Jersey authorities were more lenient than those in neighboring Pennsylvania. While with time the number of Quaker meetings increased in New Jersey, their proportion of the population and political importance, which had started to diminish with the French and Indian War, suffered a further blow during and after the Revolution. They never regained the political or religious status they had had in America before the war; there was less connection with British Quakers than before. They also turned inward, ever more associating with other Quakers, concerned to maintain their separate identity and “plain” lifestyle. That said, those who stayed were important in reform movements in the nineteenth century, such as abolition, prison reform, treatment of the mentally ill, and education. They are still a presence in New Jersey today.

6

Loyalists Part I The Irreconcilables Barnardus LaGrange (1721–1797), an Anglican and lawyer from New Brunswick, was an early and consistent Loyalist. He was opposed to the protests that objected to British policies, then against independence, and after the war he was an exile in England. He was reported as saying in 1774, in response to news of the Boston Tea Party, that it was the result of the “damn’d hot headed Presbyterians, who were aiming at independency.”1 After the war he wrote to a friend in what was then the United States and referred to his former neighbors as the “Dirty Nest of Brunswick,” and made clear to relatives in Albany, New York, that he was never coming back. There was a range of positions taken by those who remained loyal to king and country, and LaGrange fits into the group here labeled as “irreconcilables.” He will be discussed further to help provide insight into the views and experiences of some of those in this category.

Historiography Immediately after the Revolution its earliest historians either decried the Loyalists as enemies or just left them out of their accounts. More recently there have been two waves of American Loyalist studies. The first in the 1960s and 1970s argued that they had been ignored, neglected, and needed to be brought back to help understand the Revolution. This was also a more sympathetic view of them.2 The second, more recent one, has looked at where they went, and Maya Jasanoff

131

132 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

in Liberty’s Exiles: American Loyalists in the Revolutionary World (2011) does this with a global perspective. Or, for example, Gregg L. Frazer, in God against the Revolution: The Loyalist Clergy’s Case against the American Revolution (2018), who observes how terribly they were treated by the awful racist, now disparaged Patriots (a dark view of the Revolution that, as previously noted, reflects the times we live in).3 Taking a different perspective is Rebecca Brannon in her book From Revolution to Reunion (2016) on the Loyalists’ surprisingly quick reintegration into South Carolina, where the war after 1780 had been particularly bitter, and Thomas N. Ingersoll pointing to basically the same phenomenon in The Loyalist Problem in Revolutionary New England (2016) on Massachusetts (which then included Maine), Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New Hampshire, where the worst of the local fighting was over after 1776. Unlike Jasanoff, Brannon and Ingersoll emphasize those who stayed. There are many examples of New Jersey Loyalists who became exiles, yet clearly most remained. Then there are those who came back (a few quickly, but others many years later). Historians have tried to estimate the total number of Loyalists, which is difficult because some were active (picked up arms), while others sadly but quietly watched the demise of the imperial connection. The most detailed recent estimates of the number of Loyalists are found in Jasanoff’s book, where she calculates that 10 to 30 percent of the overall population were Loyalists, but then is primarily concerned with those who left during or after the war, arguing that there were over 75,000 from all thirteen colonies (including in that number 15,000 Blacks, most of them slaves) making this a very radical and violent war. It was certainly violent in New Jersey. Yet the overall story looks different if consideration is given to the number of Loyalists (most) who in fact remained in the new United States (425,000 out of an estimated 500,000). Ingersoll recently observed that in New England they “remained in their homes until they died of natural causes.”4 There were as well those who came back several or even many years later. Although an exact number of these returnees is difficult to tabulate, Alan Taylor estimated that about a third who had gone to maritime Canada returned in the 1780s and 1790s.5 If that percentage is accepted as a reasonable possibility, then perhaps 450,000 remained or returned. New Jersey had more Loyalists than some other places and provided proportionally a larger number of men who served in Loyalist military units. Estimates range from 20 to 30 percent of the population as Loyalist, with 5,000 to 10,000 in active military service. This actually varied depending on time and place, but overall the largest numbers were in Bergen and Monmouth Counties, with pockets also in Sussex and Hunterdon Counties. Cape May was not densely settled and had the fewest exemplified by the fact that property there was confiscated from just one Loyalist.6 In the end, the estimate is that over 1,200 forfeited their property. Specific numbers are difficult because, as noted, it depends on whether the calculation is for all Loyalists or just those who were “active” (i.e., took up arms) or otherwise served the British. The most active, the most resented by the

Loyalists Part I: The Irreconcilables • 133

Patriots, took refuge behind British lines in New York City, then went to England or Canada, occasionally even farther.7 While economic status, once seen as an explanation of who were Loyalists, does not work, there are categories of those more likely to support the crown. They included governors and other royal officials (with the sense that they “ate the king’s bread”), physicians who often had trained in Scotland, merchants engaged in international trade with ties to relatives and business partners abroad (often the same individuals), Anglicans (where they were a minority as in the middle and northern colonies), recent immigrants, slaves wanting to escape, Native Americans with ties to the British, conservatives adverse to change, and monarchists opposed to a republic. Sometimes the positions taken were because of family ties, friends, and neighbors, or the influence of the teachers or lawyers who trained them.8 Loyalists who took up arms certainly contributed to the violence of the Revolution, particularly in New Jersey throughout the war, and then in North and South Carolina after 1780. The actions of James Moody, and William Franklin’s Associated Loyalists operating out of New York City, deliberately targeted certain Patriots and responded to or provoked revenge, which led to more brutality. Monmouth County, the scene of much disorder, had its own group of Patriots called the “Association for Retaliation,” organized in mid-1780, with a membership list signed by 436. Its policy was “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.”9 Some of the Dutch in the Hackensack valley, which ran through southern New York into Bergen County, New Jersey, a hundred years later had not forgiven local Loyalist families who pointed them out to British forces, then helped burn their homes and crops.10 The active Loyalists, the irreconcilables, were most likely to become refugees and exiles, and to lose their property, forfeited because of the positions they had taken, confiscated by the state to help pay for the Revolution. Of course, it must be remembered that both sides took the property of their opponents, and that there were long historical precedents for this. It was used in Britain after uprisings, and in the Civil War there during the seventeenth century, to tamp down opposition and punish those who were disloyal. There it has been described as being “as old a practice as private property itself.”11 During the Revolution, in areas they controlled, the British used, destroyed, and confiscated Patriot property. In New York City they marked such sites to be taken, used, or destroyed with an “R” for rebel. New Jersey moved to tamp down loyalism early in the war. In October 1776, the legislature passed a law defining treason against the new state and the United States. In June 1777 it passed an act offering a pardon to those who would sign a pledge of allegiance to the Patriot government, but then in December 1777 the first law providing for the confiscation of property was enacted, and others followed. The state appointed three commissioners per county to collect evidence of treason against the accused, and then present it to a jury. If twelve jurors agreed, a verdict was issued to confiscate the property. This could be appealed, but since

134 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

most of those accused had fled behind British lines or entered the service of the crown elsewhere, few cases were appealed. The process went on for years, with sales halted at times due to depreciated values or suspected fraud, but in the end sales of Loyalist estates raised £1,350,000 for the state, with Middlesex County providing the largest sum, £450,000.12 The stories of the individual Loyalists that follow are quite diverse and interesting. Like the Patriots they took their stands for many different reasons, including ideological, economic, and religious ones. For some, who agreed that British taxation and other measures were wrong, independence just went too far. This was the difficult dividing line for most because they were “at once rooted American colonists and committed British subjects,” who now could no longer be both.13 Decisions to leave, become exiles, or remain during and after the war could be voluntary or forced upon them. Legal restrictions, having been declared a traitor, loss of property, or, after the war, fear of nasty treatment, kept some away. There are examples of those who tried to return but discovered they were not welcome, as did Thomas Milledge in Morris County, Cornelius Hatfield/ Hetfield and Cavalier Jouet (ca. 1737–1810), both of Elizabethtown. Jouet was described by William Livingston as a “malignant Tory.” Banished in July 1776 he returned with the British a few months later, collected intelligence, and pointed out the homes of Patriots to be plundered or destroyed. When in May 1783 he visited Woodbridge, to test the reaction, he was shocked by the threats of an angry mob that called him a “traitor” and “a rascal” and wanted to “hang” him.14 Sentiment was particularly bitter where the war was the most violent—for example, in Bergen and Monmouth Counties. A 1783 petition signed by 207 from the Monmouth County “Association to Oppose the Return of Tories” wanted them all “banished,” while some residents of Morristown thought that “‘those despicable wretches’ should be hanged.” There was also a petition from Hunterdon County, which listed seven reasons why they should not be allowed to return, including, “Because they have Been Guilty Of the Greatest Cruelty and Devastation. . . . To Receive Such Cruel Paracides into the Bosom Of Our Country, the Weeping Voices of Nature Remonstrates Against.” It was signed by ninety-seven.15 But considering the violence and depth of feelings, the opposition dissipated surprisingly quickly, and there were those who wanted returnees, especially if they would bring an influx of investment capital. Some of the laws expired or were repealed within five years.16 Finally, often overlooked are those Loyalists who did come back, some many years later. Those who died while serving in British units, or with local Loyalist militia, should also be remembered. Loyalists perished for what they saw as their country (Britain), and they also lost relatives, including children, in the war. The Reverend Thomas Bradbury Chandler lost a son, and Bernardus LaGrange lost a son-in-law and toddler grandson. Obviously, there were many more, but firm or precise figures do not exist, and there are no totals.17 One example that has

Loyalists Part I: The Irreconcilables • 135

attracted increasing attention is Colonel Tye, a former slave who led raids by a combination of Black and white men into New Jersey. He died of lockjaw, the result of a wound received in an engagement.18 Obviously, there are far too many Loyalists to tell all their stories here. Rather, examples have been selected that help us understand who took this stand and why. And because of the surprising diversity in where they ended up, the discussion has been divided into three chapters. This one concentrates on those who left and never came back, chapter 7 looks at some of those who stayed or at some point returned. A third, chapter 4, has discussed those who “straddled” sides, or sometimes switched from one to another.

Exiles/Refugees: The Irreconcilables There were many active Loyalists in New Jersey, here called irreconcilables, adamantly opposed to independence. They became permanent exiles. Those who left and tried to make new lives elsewhere include William Franklin (son of Benjamin Franklin and the last royal governor, who in 1782 went to England); Reverend Jonathan Odell (Anglican minister who went to Nova Scotia); Bernardus LaGrange and his family who went to Britain; members of the prominent Skinner family (General Cortland Skinner, who organized the largest force in the colonies loyal to England; and his brother William Skinner, former Treasurer of East Jersey, to Nova Scotia); James Moody, notorious Sussex County farmer (to Nova Scotia); and Black slaves and freedmen (to Canada and then in some cases on to Sierra Leone). Maya Jasanoff shows the exiles scattering across the globe, some moving more than once. These “irreconcilables” strongly supported the existing government, fought, and encouraged others to do likewise, and earned the ire of former friends and neighbors. They both did not want to return after the war and would not have been welcomed back if they tried, as a few learned. They were most likely to make claims for losses and to receive compensation from the British government. The Royal Loyalist Claims Commission started to process requests for reimbursement for their losses from Loyalists in 1783. It met in England and in Canada and worked for six years. Claimants needed to provide evidence (five copies), difficult for those who were poor, female, or illiterate. Claims made by the few Blacks who managed to do so were usually dismissed because they were suspected of being fraudulent. While in New Jersey about 1,200 estates were confiscated by the state, 239 claims, less than a quarter of that number, were made to the British Commission. Still this was the fourth-largest number from all the states. A number of claims included requests for payment for lost slaves, who had done household and farm work. Under the rules these were allowed, but repayment for rents, debts, depreciated currency, and some other items were not. Of those filing, even the most prominent were lucky if in the end they received one-third the value of their estimated losses. Connections helped claimants, but also led

136 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

to suspicion because a small group regularly testified for each other (from New Jersey, this included Governor William Franklin, General Cortland Skinner, and the Reverend Thomas Bradbury Chandler).19

William Franklin (1731–1814) Historians are not sure exactly when or where William Franklin was born, or who his mother was (although a few have speculated). Although known to have been illegitimate, he was acknowledged by his father Benjamin Franklin, and raised as part of the family. He helped his father with scientific experiments, as well as Pennsylvania and imperial politics. He served in King George’s War in the 1740s. He studied law with Joseph Galloway in Pennsylvania and then at the Middle Temple in London, where he was admitted to the bar in 1758. Father and son worked together and agreed on many matters until just before the Revolution. When William first arrived in England his father’s friend William Strahan wrote Deborah Franklin how impressed he was by the young man, and by his relationship with Benjamin who “is at the same time his friend, his brother, his intimate and easy companion.” In part their differences were a consequence of William Franklin’s appointment to the governorship of New Jersey in 1762, so that by 1773 his father was describing him as “a thorough government man.” Before leaving England, he married Elizabeth Downes, daughter of a Barbados planter. They settled in Burlington, purchased a local farm, and built a house. Meanwhile, in England his father drifted, or by some accounts suddenly moved, to disillusionment and opposition. Benjamin Franklin returned to Pennsylvania in 1775, to take up an important role in the Revolution. William Franklin, who had been raised in the colonies, was politically astute, and initially had been quite successful as a colonial governor, was now clearly a king’s man, increasingly in a difficult position. A moderate who disliked change, he was also “vain, ambitious and authoritarian.” Personality traits and political events overtook him. As the Revolution unfolded, he was caught between colonists and British administrators, unable to please both. While not “a rubber stamp” for the British, he thought sovereignty could not be divided, and that it rested with the “King in Parliament.” Due to his original success in New Jersey William Franklin has been described as one of its best governors, but this waned after the robbery of the East Jersey treasury in 1768, when members of the assembly increasingly insisted that they and not the governor had the right to make a replacement appointment. His position became increasingly difficult from the Stamp Act Crisis on as he was caught between the colonial legislators’ opposition to British measures and distant administrators’ insistence that he force them into line. After the Coercive Acts of 1774, as he continued to support royal power, and colonists moved in a different direction, he was less effective. He and his wife sold their Burlington property and moved into the Proprietary House in Perth Amboy, built by the

FIG. 22 “A view of the guard-house and Simsbury-mines, now called Newgate—a prison for the confinement of loyalists in Connecticut.” Connecticut, United States (London, 1781). A British rendering of a mine that was used by Patriots to intern prisoners during the war. It had first been a copper mine, then a colonial prison. During the Revolution it held Loyalist prisoners in deplorable conditions. Entrance and exit were by a long ladder, there was no natural light, and little air circulation. Despite this it has been estimated that half the prisoners successfully escaped. (Source: https://loc.gov/item/2004671519/ Library of Congress Prints and Photographs, USZ62–50390.)

138 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

East Jersey proprietors as a mansion for the colony’s governor. It was also a more conservative town. From there he continued to remind New Jersey’s representatives that they were part of the British empire, which he argued had a powerful military that they could never defeat. In a January 1775 address to the “Gentlemen of the Council, and Gentlemen of the Assembly,” he told them, “You have now pointed out to you, Gentlemen, two Roads—one evidently leading to Peace, Happiness, and Restoration of the publick Tranquility—the other inevitably conducting you to Anarchy, Misery, and all the Horrors of a Civil War.”20 He also continued to send reports to England about the colonists’ actions, along with copies of local newspapers, seen by Patriots as “spying.” In January 1776 the New Jersey militia arrested him, only to back down after his neighbor Frederick Smythe, the colony’s royal chief justice, intervened. They had dramatically surrounded the governor’s mansion at 2 a.m., terrifying his wife. By this time, New Jersey had two governments, the old royal one, and a series of Provincial Congresses. When in May the governor ordered the old legislature into session, the rebel one ordered his arrest, and they offered him a parole, which he refused. They then asked the Continental Congress to deal with him. In the end he was the last royal governor removed from office.21 First held in Connecticut towns, he was then incarcerated in Litchfield jail (because he continued to write incriminating letters and issued pardons to Loyalists). He was at one point kept in what was described as a “one-windowed room, situated above a tavern . . . overrun with flies, lice, and rats.” After eight months he was released to a private house in West Windsor. Meanwhile, his wife Elizabeth Downes Franklin retreated behind British lines in New York City, where soon afterward, she died at age forty-three. William Franklin blamed New Jersey revolutionaries for the death of his wife, his father for lack of support as well as capturing his son William Temple Franklin and taking him to France (where the elder Franklin served as the ambassador from the revolutionary government). After being exchanged for an American prisoner on November 1, 1778, John McKinley, a former governor of Delaware, William Franklin spent the rest of the war in New York City, where in 1780 he organized the Associated Loyalists, known for their raids into Patriot areas where they destroyed property and kidnapped political and military leaders. A Jersey Dutch Loyalist, Peter DuBois, who served the British in the city, described a raid on Closter as “marked by circumstances of savage barbarity,” and blamed the “governor” among others. Franklin’s part in ordering the summary execution of Patriot militia leader Joshua Huddy, infuriated Patriots and did not garner him favor with local British military leaders. He left for London in 1782. When the war was over even his father could not forgive him for taking up arms against Americans, writing on August 16, 1784, that “Nothing has hurt me so much and affected me with such keen Sensations as to find myself deserted in my old Age by my only Son; and not only deserted, but to find him taking up Arms against me in a Cause wherein my good Fame, Fortune and Life were all at Stake.”

Loyalists Part I: The Irreconcilables • 139

FIG. 23 “Reception of the American Loyalists by Great Britain in the Year 1783,” engraving based on a painting by Benjamin West (1738–1820), from John-Eardley Wilmont, Esq.’s Historical View of the Commission for Enquiring into the Losses, Services, and Claims of the American Loyalists (London, 1815). Included in those being welcomed is Governor William Franklin. (Source: Rare Book Collection, New Jersey Historical Society.)

William Franklin spent the rest of his life in exile, married his landlady Mary D’Evelin in 1788, and lived quietly, supported by a pension of £800 a year from the British government. Although he submitted a claim of £48,245 to the Royal Claims Commission, he only received £1,800 (possibly because what remained of his New Jersey property had been signed over to his son). Yet, in 1792–1793, his half-sister Sally Franklin Bache and her family, after their father died, spent six months in England visiting him. They had been close while he was governor and had helped care for Deborah Franklin and continued to maintain family ties. In his last years his only companion was his granddaughter, Ellen Franklin, the illegitimate child of his illegitimate son Temple.22 Franklin had refused to recognize the Patriot government, overestimated the number of Loyalists, and participated in retaliatory aspects of the war. But with British aid he lived out his life quietly in England.

Anglican Ministers In the years before the Revolution, with the support of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, the Anglican church expanded in the middle and New

140 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

England colonies to the dismay of other Protestant groups. The result was a level of distrust, increased by the fact that (unlike in Virginia and other parts of the south) the ministers were overwhelmingly Loyalists in the Revolution. All the Anglican ministers in Connecticut (twenty-three), Maine, and New Hampshire were Loyalists.23 New Jersey, which had never had an established church, feared the imposition of religious taxes and the administration of affairs from afar. As in the other middle colonies of New York and Pennsylvania, there was opposition to a bishop. When the Revolution began in 1775 there were approximately a thousand congregants and eleven Anglican ministers in New Jersey; often they conducted services in more than one town. A single minister, the Reverend Robert Blackwell, was a Patriot serving as a Continental army chaplain and surgeon. Most were Loyalists who left, while one (the Reverend William Ayres) was “Incapacitated through insanity 1775–1780.” Only Abraham Beach stayed through the war, and even he suspended public services for most of it. Traditionally the services opened with a prayer for the king, his family, and Parliament, which the ministers in New Jersey were not willing to leave out—obviously problematic during the war. When the Reverend William Frazer arrived in Amwell, “one Sunday after the outbreak of the Revolution a noose was found hung suggestively over the pulpit,” resulting in closure of the church. In 1783 there were four ministers left in the state, with just two of those working (Beach and Urzal Ogden who had returned). Congregants in these Anglican churches did not always agree with the political stands of their ministers. In Salem the Reverend James Barker was a Loyalist, but three-quarters of the male members of his church were listed as Patriots. Also, these churches fared no better than Presbyterian or Dutch ones during the war as they were used as hospitals, sometimes also stables, with destruction caused by those on both sides. St. John’s, the Anglican church in Elizabethtown, was damaged yet survived, but the pipes of its organ had been melted down by local Patriots to make bullets.24

Reverend Jonathan Odell The Reverend Jonathan Odell (1737–1818), born in Newark, was an early (1757) College of New Jersey graduate (his mother Temperance Dickinson Odell was a daughter of the institution’s first president). Educated as a physician he served in the British army during the French and Indian War, after which he went to England, where he was ordained as an Anglican minister in 1767. The Society for the Propagation of the Gospel appointed him to Burlington, New Jersey, although he also served churches in Mount Holly, and Bristol, Pennsylvania. Odell was a strong supporter of proposals for an Anglican bishop in the colonies. He married Anne de Cou, and they named their first son William Franklin Odell, after the governor who was a friend and who attended his church while living in Burlington.

Loyalists Part I: The Irreconcilables • 141

A strong committed Loyalist Odell had a vitriolic pen. He used poetry to pillorize the revolutionaries, and he particularly targeted John Witherspoon and William Livingston. Suspected by Patriots in 1776 the Committee of Safety in Burlington ordered him to sign a parole, which he then violated. He was (as noted in chapter 5) at one point hidden by Quaker Margaret Hill Morris in a “closet” in her neighbor’s house, then escaped and met up with Hessians in the area. While there he wrote his friend Reverend Thomas Bradbury Chandler that he had “been obliged to leave my wife and three Children (the youngest not five weeks old) and to ramble as a Refugee.” He soon made his way into New York City, where he remained through the war serving as a chaplain for the First Battalion of Pennsylvania Loyalists.25 He also helped Major John Andre negotiate with Benedict Arnold, and assisted William Franklin and the Associated Loyalists. It is not surprising that he was declared a traitor and his property confiscated. In 1783 Odell went first to England and then to Brunswick, Canada, where he remained for the rest of his life. Reading his doggerel, it seems clear that he burned his bridges behind him. He had no love for the Patriots and they none for him. The following brief selection from a long poem called The Word of Congress, attacking the Continental Congress in September 1779, provides a taste of his language: An hydra-headed form, with harpies’ claws— Lo! Num’rous mouths hiss, chatter, bark or croak: Here, one like Cacus belches fire and smoke; The second like a monkey grins and chats; A third squalls horrible, like angry cats; Here, you’ve the growls and snarlings of a dog; And there the beastly gruntings of a hog. . . . The whine, the cant, the snuffle, and the groan. In Candour’s accents falsehoods some disguise; Whilst others vomit forth essential lies— All sounds delusive, all disgustful notes, Pour like a torrent from their brazen throats, To fill with rage the poor distracted crowd; Whilst Discord claps her hands, and shouts aloud.26

In American Times of 1780 he criticized numerous Patriot leaders, including John Witherspoon, Presbyterian minister, president of the College of New Jersey, and member of the Continental Congress. Odell wrote in part, To dirtiest acts of treason he’d descend; I’ve known him seek the dungeon dark as night, Imprison’d Tories to convert or fright;

142 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

Whilst to myself I’ve humn’d in dismal tune, I’d rather be a dog than Witherspoon.27

He saw General George Washington as a base traitor who would ultimately be tried and sent to hell. Governor William Livingston he criticized and predicted a similar fate: Go, glut like Deathly vast unhide-bound maw; Remorseless swallow liberty and law; At one enormous stroke a nation slay— But thou thyself shall perish with thy prey.28

After the war Odell rose to prominence in Brunswick, Canada. He served as a member of the council and as secretary of the province, receiving a substantial enough salary that he waived compensation for any losses suffered during the war. Looking back in 1810, he wrote a poem for his wife on their thirty-eighth anniversary. Unlike some other Loyalists he apparently had no regrets. It ended as follows: I hither came and found a safe retreat. Here joined by thee and thy young youthful train, I was o’erpaid for years of toil and pain.29

Odell was the grandson of one of the Presbyterian founders of the College of New Jersey, who became an Anglican, and a supporter of a bishop for the colonies. Like the Reverend Thomas Bradbury Chandler, he was a convert. Before, during, and after the Revolution he was very vocal in his religious and political views, and his support for king and country. He was though not alone in that support, nor in becoming an exile. The Reverends George Panton of Trenton, Isaac Browne (1709–1787) of Newark, and Samuel Cooke of Monmouth County also went to Canada. All had served as chaplains. Others who were still alive at the end of the war went elsewhere.30

Dutch Ministers As previously noted Dutch ministers divided with those of the Coetus faction, evangelicals, and usually Patriots, while the Conferentie conservative ones were either quiet or irreconcilable Loyalists. Among the most vocal was the Reverend Gerhardus/Garret Leydecker (1729–1794) from a local Hackensack family, a graduate of the College of New Jersey in 1755, who afterward studied with the Reverend Johaanes/John Ritzema, “the most reactionary minister of the entire conferentie party.” He was the only native minister of that party ordained in the colonies, a recognition of his “somewhat frail” health. He served as the minister

FIG. 24 Reverend Jonathan Odell (1737–1818), artist unknown, ca. 1770. An Anglican

minister in Burlington, New Jersey, Odell was a strong supporter of a bishop for the American colonies, and an opponent of independence. He wrote poetry that savagely criticized Congress and Patriot leaders. During the war he served the British in New York City, and afterward moved to Nova Scotia. (Source: Water colour on ivory, overall: 5.5 × 3.5 cm. John Clarence Webster Canadianna Collection, gift of Mary Kearny Odell. W1294. New Brunswick Museum/Museé Au Nouveau–Brunswick, Saint John, Canada.)

144 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

in Readington and then at the English Neighborhood Dutch Reformed Church from 1770 to 1776, where he openly prayed for the king and British government until he fled into New York City. There he served as a German translator for the British. His property was confiscated in 1778. After Yorktown he wrote a “Petition of American Loyalists to King George III,” urging him to continue the war that was signed by other Loyalist ministers. Then, recognizing reality, in 1783 he left for England with his wife Elizabeth Coby Leydecker and their three sons. There he filed a claim for £3,175, received £1,730 plus a £50 pension, and complained that he was “Under the severe gripe of penury and want.” The property left behind in New Jersey included a 400-acre farm, part of which was purchased by his Patriot cousin, an active militia captain also named Garret Leydecker, who had suffered extensive damage to his property in British and Loyalist raids during the war.31

Bernardus/Barnardus LaGrange Bernardus LaGrange, mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, descended from the French Huguenot Omie LaGrange, who immigrated to New Netherland about 1656 and married Anna De Vries a Dutch woman. Members of the family remained in the Albany area during and after the Revolution. But Bernardus LaGrange moved to New Jersey, became a New Brunswick lawyer and a vestryman in the Anglican Christ Church, and in 1747 married Frances Brasier, daughter of Francis Brasier of Perth Amboy and Raritan Landing. During the land controversies in New Jersey, he represented creditors, and he was among those accused of charging high fees. In the run-up to the Revolution he became a Loyalist, despised by the local Patriots (who carted his effigy through the town in June 1775, and then burned it), while he intensely disliked them in return. In June 1776 he was sent two threatening letters signed “A Mechanic,” reminding him of what had happened the previous June and stating that although born in America he had become a “cruel enemy.” One letter continued with a warning: “change your wicked heart, become a friend to your Country; hearken not to the unwholesome advice of your wicked wife. I really pity you when I behold the storm that is gathering over your head, big with destruction, and threatening every moment to burst upon you; for when your enraged Citizens rise against you, the Consequences will be dreadful.”32 Soon after the arrival of the British fleet, LaGrange went to Staten Island and joined General William Howe. When the British overran New Jersey in the fall of 1776 he returned to New Brunswick, and there he administered oaths of loyalty to the Crown to those who remained during the eight-month occupation. When the British and Hessian forces left at the end of June 1777, he fled to New York City. In 1783 he went to London and remained in England for the rest of his life. In addition to his own actions as a Loyalist, there were those of his family. LaGrange had three daughters and one son. Susannah LaGrange married Arthur Wadman, an Irishman serving as a British soldier, who was captured, paroled,

Loyalists Part I: The Irreconcilables • 145

and then served until 1780 when they and their six children moved to England. Lydia LaGrange married Dr. Henry Dougan, also born in Ireland, who served with the British before the war, then as a physician in Elizabethtown. In December 1776 he joined the New Jersey Volunteers as a surgeon. Afterward they and their children moved to his native Ireland. Frances LaGrange married Edward Vaughan Dongan, a lawyer from Elizabethtown and Rahway. He also served in the New Jersey Volunteers, but very briefly, dying of battle wounds in 1777. Their son Walter Townley Dongan, only eighteen months old, died the same day in New York City. Frances, then a young widow, ultimately joined her father in exile. The son James Brasier LaGrange, a Kings College student, was drafted into the Patriot militia, but then served in the New Jersey Volunteers and briefly the British army. Once in England he met and married an heiress, got a job at the Exchequer, and did quite well (as his proud father reported to friends and relatives still in New Jersey). LaGrange left behind in New York state brothers and other family members, later writing to tell them he would never return. His property in New Jersey was confiscated in 1778 and sold in 1779 with a large farm and stone house purchased by William Paterson for £12,324, inflated money going to the state. He corresponded with the Reverend Abraham Beach still in New Brunswick to get copies of his losses to submit to the Royal Loyalists Claims Commission, which he did. He asked the Commission for £8,300, received £2,638 plus an annual allowance of a £120 pension and £240 for lost income. His widowed daughter claimed £2,232 and received £422. They were successful enough that while “frugal” lived comfortably in a large house (containing six “handsome” rooms, two kitchens, and garret rooms) with gardens. In the end, even though Bernardus LaGrange was a refugee three times (fleeing New Brunswick twice, and then New York City), his family was better off than most others. Although he had no desire to return and given the family’s military service would not have been welcomed, he did express some regrets. In a 1785 letter to Beach he referred to the “dirty nest of Brunswick,” yet in 1787 he also wondered if an offer to replace surplice stolen by Hessians from Christ Church would be accepted from a “deserter of his country.” He missed his old friends and his church. Similarly, some other Loyalists who “as the years passed . . . thought ever more longingly about the land they had left.”33

The Skinner Family Cortlandt Skinner (1727–1799) was a resident of Perth Amboy, a wealthy and prominent member of colonial New Jersey government and society. His father, the Reverend William Skinner, reputedly fled Scotland after the 1745 uprising, changing his name before arriving in America, where he became the minister of St. Peter’s Anglican Church and married Elizabeth Van Cortlandt. They had at least five children, the boys Cortlandt, Stephen, William, and John all ended up serving the British, while daughter Gertrude married James Parker.

FIG. 25 Bernardus LaGrange Application to Royal Claims Commission (1783). A lawyer and Loyalist from New Brunswick, New Jersey, LaGrange left for England at the end of the war. Once there he corresponded with the Reverend Abraham Beach to obtain records that proved the worth of his confiscated property so that he could collect compensation from the British. His application lists service to the British, the losses, and those supporting his claims. (Source: Bernardus LaGrange Papers, 1721–1797, Special Collections and University Archives, Rutgers University Libraries, AC 1453, Folder A (3).)

Loyalists Part I: The Irreconcilables • 147

Cortlandt Skinner studied law with David Ogden, and married Elizabeth Kearny, also from an important local family. He was a member of the East Jersey Proprietors, served as the last royal attorney general from 1754 to 1776, as well as twice as Speaker of the colonial assembly. He practiced law and taught it to others; the last two students were Andrew Bell and Joseph Bloomfield, who took opposing sides in what followed (the first becoming a Loyalist, the second a Patriot). While opposed to the Stamp Act and other measures, as war approached, Cortlandt Skinner increasingly became disaffected. Offered a Patriot military command, he instead joined the British. Insight into why is provided by the letter he wrote in December 1775 to his brother Colonel William Skinner, a British officer then in England. The letter was intercepted and sent to the Continental Congress, which forwarded it to the New Jersey Council of Safety, resulting in an order for his arrest, but he had already fled to New York. He wrote, “I have always fondly, I may say foolishly, hoped that the unnatural dispute now subsisting could have an amicable conclusion. I find myself sadly disappointed.” What started with tea, now he said was over “dominion.” What began with “smugglers” was now due to “pride, ambition,” and the enemies of the Anglican Church. The result would be to “deluge this country in blood.” He thought Canada lost (it would not be) and feared for those still loyal to the “Royal cause.” “The saints [Patriots] say, Heaven is on their side: I rather think the old saying is more applicable ‘The devil is kind to young beginners.’” Then he predicted “A few regiments and fleets to different Provinces will set it right; at least bring us to our senses and support the friends of Government.” The letter made very clear that he was a Loyalist. Cortlandt Skinner had departed in haste, leaving his wife and family behind in Perth Amboy. Later his daughter Catherine, who had been five years old at the time, remembered being pulled out of her bed while Patriot soldiers searched in and under it looking for him. They stabbed the mattress to be sure he was not there. The family hid in the basement listening to gun shots above. The mother managed to move the ten youngest children to the rural farm of the married eldest daughter. According to Catherine’s Recollections (1842), written more than sixty years later, during that winter outbuildings were burned, animals were poisoned, and they survived on frozen buckwheat. The youngest child, a fourteen-month-old boy, died and was buried in a field by his siblings.34 Meanwhile Cortlandt Skinner, commissioned as brigadier general by Sir William Howe in September 1776, organized and then commanded the New Jersey Volunteers, the largest Loyalist military group in the Revolution, raising an estimated 1,600 to 2,000 to serve. Known as “Skinner’s Greens” after the initial color of their uniforms (later changed to red), they participated in battles from New Jersey to Georgia. While he only occasionally commanded troops in the field, he provided British commanders with intelligence gathered from local contacts throughout the war. Toward the very end he served on the court martial that tried Captain Richard Lippincott for the execution of Joseph Huddy, joining

148 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

others in the not guilty verdict that infuriated George Washington and area Patriots. Skinner’s command was located on Staten Island, where after their property was confiscated, his family joined him. Of his twelve children, at least three of his sons served the British (during and after the war), as did also several of his brothers. In 1782 he sailed for England, where he remained. When he filed a claim with the Royal Loyalist Claims Commission, he said he had three daughters and four sons who still needed his help. He requested £10,382 and was more successful than most as he received £5,169 plus £500 per year. He spent the rest of his life there and died in Bristol. Afterward members of his family and their descendants continued to serve the British, often in the military. The four youngest daughters married military officers. Lady Catherine married fellow Loyalist William Henry Robinson in 1794. Maria married General George Nugent, who served in Jamaica and India. Son General Philip Skinner also served in India.35 The most prominent of Cortlandt Skinner’s brothers was Stephen (1725–1808), who served from 1763 to 1774 as the treasurer of East Jersey, as well as on the royal council after 1769. In the eighteenth century, as a legacy of New Jersey’s seventeenth-century history, there were two treasurers (East and West). Unfortunately, on July 22, 1768, his house was robbed, and the thief or thieves made off with between £6,000 and £7,000 belonging to the colony. Over the next four years this escalated into a dispute between the colonial assembly, which wanted Skinner to personally repay the lost money and themselves to name a new treasurer, and Governor William Franklin who opposed both ideas. The dispute ended when Stephen Skinner resigned, but it probably contributed to his loyalism. In July 1776 he was arrested, posted bond, and was then paroled, but as had his brother he fled behind British lines. The family claimed that his wife and six “small children were treated with severity” and were turned out of their home in a snowstorm. During the Revolution he served as a major with the New Jersey Volunteers, the forces his brother raised. His property was confiscated in 1784. He then claimed £6,975 in losses and received £4,764. Afterward he went with his family to Nova Scotia, where he later served in the local assembly replicating some of the political status he had had in New Jersey.36 Brother William Skinner obtained a British commission during the French and Indian War, after which he lived in England and married well (his wife was related to the Duke of Grafton). He did not serve in America during the Revolution and died in 1778. The youngest, John Skinner, also obtained a British commission and remained in England during the Revolution and therefore did not participate in the fighting across the Atlantic. Afterward this Skinner sold his commission and returned to Perth Amboy. He set up as a merchant, married Sarah Kearny, and died there in 1797.

The Coxe Family Daniel Coxe/Cox V (ca. 1741–1826) of Trenton was descended from a family in West Jersey with ties to, and extensive land rights derived from, early

Loyalists Part I: The Irreconcilables • 149

proprietors.37 Colonial Daniel Coxe III (1673–1739) had a large number of children, three of whom are important for the story that follows. Daniel Coxe IV (1710–1758) married Abagail Streate Coxe, and their children Daniel Coxe V and daughter Grace Coxe Kempe are discussed following here. Rebecca Coxe (1716–1802) never married and lived out her long life in Trenton. William Coxe (1723–1801) moved to Philadelphia, where he established a successful mercantile business and married Mary Fisher. They had numerous children, including sons John D. Coxe, William Coxe Jr., Daniel W. Coxe, James Coxe, and Tench Coxe (1755–1824), the best known. With the passage of the Stamp Act in 1765 William Coxe  Sr. was appointed stamp distributor for New Jersey. He quickly resigned but remained in Philadelphia, including through the war and afterward. Son Tench, then a young merchant, supplied the British there and in New York City, then when he returned to Pennsylvania was accused of disloyalty but changed sides and was pardoned (the judge was a family friend). He later represented Pennsylvania at the Annapolis Convention, served briefly in Congress from 1788–1789, and then held several positions in Washington’s administration. He was allied with Alexander Hamilton in advocating an economic development for the new country that emphasized manufacturing. First a Federalist, and then a Jeffersonian Republican, he was dubbed “Mr.  Facing Both Ways” by political opponents. Daniel Coxe V and his immediate family were ardent Loyalists, but as the foregoing sketch hints, the story of the larger family is more complicated and included Loyalists, those who tried to be neutral, as well as Patriots. The lawsuits they became involved in after the Revolution were important as members attempted to regain confiscated property, as well as resolve a family dispute over an American inheritance. These cases raised questions about Loyalist widows’ dower interests in confiscated property, and the distinction between citizens and aliens—whether and when the Revolution changed an individual from the first status to the second. Several of the cases went to the U.S. Supreme Court. Daniel Coxe V was an Anglican, wealthy landowner, and a lawyer practicing in both New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and he served on the royal council of New Jersey from 1771 to 1776. He and his wife Sarah Redman (1752–1843) had eight children, including Daniel Coxe (?–1836), and John Redman Cox (1773–1864). Daniel Coxe V helped organize the West Jersey Volunteers in Philadelphia, served with the British there, and then left with them when they withdrew to New York City. He was a member of William Franklin’s Board of Associated Loyalists. He later wrote that he had stayed, “looking forward to the probable moment when his deluded Countrymen would perceive the Madness of their Conduct, and the Folly of their Independent Views, or [when] the Operations of the British Arms w[oul]d again reunite the Colonies to the British Empire.” That had not happened; instead he was forced to leave. In London he filed claims for his losses, which included a large house in Trenton plundered and burned by the Hessians, and extensive landholdings. He claimed £40,267.11.6 and received

150 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

£9,997, and a £300 annuity, in part because his arguments were disparaged by General Cortlandt Skinner, Bernardus LaGrange, and Governor William Franklin. They thought he had actually done little while in New York. In addition, much of the land he wanted compensation for was unimproved. When he left Philadelphia his wife and children stayed behind with family, most likely her parents—her father was the important physician Dr. John Redman (1722–1808). As the wife of a well-known Loyalist, she was expelled in1780 by Pennsylvania’s Executive Council, joining her husband in New York City, and in 1785 following him to England.38 His sister, Grace Coxe (?–1831) married John Tabor Kempe (?–1791) a New York lawyer, also an irreconcilable Loyalist. Kempe was born in England and moved with his parents to New York. He studied law with James Alexander, and when his father died in 1759 replaced him as the royal attorney general of that colony. A crown employee compensated for expenses, collecting fees for land transactions, and knowledgeable about opportunities for acquiring land patents, by the time of the Revolution he was one of the wealthiest men in the colony, claiming title to 163,000 acres. He had property in both New York and New Jersey, where title to 6,120 acres inherited by his wife from her Coxe grandfather had been signed over to him after they married. His estates were confiscated, and he filed claims with the British Royal Commission for £64,942 sterling in lost property (including his wife’s). He could not prove all the claims because of missing records, and some of the New York land patents had never been completed. Late in the compensation process he received £5,546, plus £1,500 for lost income, and a pension of £640 that began in 1788. This was one of the largest settlements provided to a New Yorker, but Kempe thought it insufficient and keenly felt the loss of a fortune he thought he had worked hard to obtain. After Kempe’s death his wife Grace Coxe Kempe brought suit in New Jersey, claiming that her lands there should not have been subject to confiscation because, although she had gone to England with her husband, she was entitled to keep the property she had inherited from her grandfather. The Hunterdon County Court of Common Pleas ruled against her. The decision was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, where her lawyer, Richard Stockton Jr., argued that as a feme covert the husband had been the “inhabitant” of England, while she as a married woman had no will of her own. However, in Kempe’s Lessee v. Kennedy et al. (1809) the court denied jurisdiction. Yet as he did in Marbury v. Madison, Chief Justice John Marshall added comments (obiter dicta), noting that he thought “the case did not warrant the judgment which was rendered on it” (she should have won), but that under New Jersey law the Hunterdon county court had judgment that “cannot be disregarded” unless “reversed” by a higher state court. There is no evidence that ever happened, but that did not totally discourage the family. In 1825 John Tabor Kempe’s heirs managed to get a law passed in New York state that restored the ownership of his house and grounds in the city to the family.39

Loyalists Part I: The Irreconcilables • 151

While Daniel Coxe V, his sister Grace Coxe Kempe, and their children were Loyalists who ended up in England, other members of the family remained in America, some Patriots, and others neutral or Loyalists during the Revolution. Also at least one of Daniel’s children, John Redman Coxe, returned to the United States.40 The aunt, Rebecca Coxe (1716–1802) never married, stayed in Trenton, kept her extensive inherited property, and was buried in St. Michael’s Episcopal church across from her house. When she died intestate, without a will, Daniel Coxe V and his Coxe cousins (the sons of Uncle William), hired lawyers who argued in the courts over who could inherit from this elderly aunt, and whether “aliens” (former Loyalists who had left and therefore were noncitizens) could do so, meaning in particular Daniel Coxe V. The case was brought to settle the issue for a divided family. Some were willing to share with cousin Daniel, but, unlike his brothers, Tench Coxe, who faced financial difficulties, did not want to do so. The case was first heard by the U.S. Third Circuit Court in Trenton, which issued a brief special verdict in Daniel Coxe’s favor. That left the main issue to be decided on appeal. McIllvaine v. Coxe’s Lessee was argued before the U.S. Supreme Court twice, first in 1805 (unresolved because not all the judges were present and those who were could not agree), and again in 1808. The decision was that if before the peace treaty he was a citizen (rather than an alien) subject to having his property confiscated, then he was also able to inherit. After 1783, even though an expatriate, he had the right to own and “take lands in New Jersey by descent.” After his death, Daniel Coxe’s wife, Sarah Redman Coxe, sued in the state of New Jersey, in Coxe v. Gullick (1829), for her dowager rights in his confiscated property, and she won. This was thirty years after Sara Low Wallace received a settlement from the State of New York,41 and fifty years after the Coxe property had been confiscated. Justice Gabriel H. Ford, of the New Jersey Supreme Court, wrote that before the Declaration of Independence Daniel Coxe was “a subject of the king of Great-Britain; so was Hancock and Adams; so was General Washington and the band of Patriots that composed his army, and must we gainsay their citizenship and declare them aliens to their country?”42 The issue, argument, and conclusion echo that of the U.S. Supreme Court justices in the 1808 case over the inheritance of his aunt Rebecca’s estate. But it seems to go even further, seeing him as both born in New Jersey and therefore not an alien, even while living the rest of his life in England where he “elected to continue a subject of the king of Great-Britain.” Some wealthy Loyalist members of the Coxe family fought against the Revolution, filed claims in England for their loses, and then years later members figured out how to have at least some portion of their property restored. Others remained, including Tench Coxe, who during the war was clearly a Loyalist but straddled the divisions. Then there is at least one son, John Redman Coxe who returned and remained. His grandfather, Dr. John Redman, had taught Dr. Benjamin Rush, then after the Revolution his namesake studied medicine at the Pennsylvania Medical School and with Rush, then in Europe, but he returned

152 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

in 1796, married his cousin Sarah Cox (1779–?) and remained. He and his grandfather were in Pennsylvania when the lawsuit between the cousins over Rebecca Coxe’s estate began, and they moved to protect his father’s interests. His mother may also have been present because she briefly returned about that time to visit her elderly parents. But she went back to England and died in Brighton. The family’s story shows that irreconcilable Loyalists could also be determined litigants. And sometimes, even many years later, they were able to regain property supposedly lost in the Revolution even as they resolutely remained British citizens. It should be noted that when members of the Coxe family, and other Loyalists, regained property they threw in doubt the titles of those who had purchased confiscated lands during and after the Revolution from the state. In the case of this family it was not the first time their actions disrupted titles. In the seventeenth century Dr. Daniel Coxe unsuccessfully negotiated the sale of West New Jersey lands to the West Jersey Society, a London land company, only for both to then sell the same tracts. His son, Colonel Daniel Coxe, later pressed claims for disputed lands contributing to the multiple land conflicts in the colony.43 While William Franklin, Jonathan Odell, Bernardus LaGrange, members of the Skinner family, and Daniel Coxe V, were among the well-educated, wealthy exiles, there were also middle and poor farmers, former slaves, and Native Americans among the irreconcilable Loyalists.

Abraham van Buskirk Descended from a family that dated back to New Netherland, Abraham van Buskirk (1735–1791), his brother Andrew, father Lawrence, and son Jacob (1760– 1834) were all Loyalists as were other members of the extended family in the Hackensack valley (a few were Patriots). They were members of the Lutheran church in Teaneck, farmers, tavern owners, and the operators of a stagecoach that connected travelers to the ferry to New York. Abraham was a surgeon who initially appeared to side with the Patriots, but then he secretly changed sides and was commissioned a lieutenant colonel in the New Jersey Volunteers. He, along with brother Andrew and son Jacob, served throughout the war, and afterward left for Shelburne, Nova Scotia. Abraham van Buskirk was elected to the Committee of Correspondence, then the Provincial Congress, resigning before the Declaration of Independence, later “boasting” that he had served “at the desire of Governor Tryon” of New York, and had “remained in New Jersey until the British came there, but held a correspondence with Governor Tryon, Lord Percy and with General Campbell and had been to Paulus Hook before the British landed in New Jersey.” Adrian Leiby calls him a “brazen liar” for pretending to support the Revolution; he clearly served as a spy before openly accepting a commission and then recruiting others to serve as well. The unit he led was headquartered at Paulus Hook and Staten Island, using those places as points from which raids on Patriots in New Jersey

Loyalists Part I: The Irreconcilables • 153

were repeatedly staged. These provoked and responded to Patriot actions, part of the nasty civil war in the region. This included a particularly vicious raid on Closter (targeted several times), and the attack on Elizabethtown in 1780 that destroyed the Presbyterian Church and other buildings. He was also with Benedict Arnold (then serving the British) when New London, Connecticut, was raided and burned September 6, 1781. There he took the “proffered sword of its surrendering commander . . . plunging it into his body,” soldiers with him then used their bayonets to finish off the man. Other members of the garrison were killed as well. Son Jacob van Buskirk served as a captain in the New Jersey Volunteers. He was captured during a raid led by New Jersey militia general Philemon Dickinson in November 1777, taken (with two others) to Trenton to be tried as a New Jerseyan for treason rather than being held as a British officer for possible exchange. Governor William Livingston asked General George Washington for advice on how to proceed and was advised not to take this action for the precedent it might set. Instead the captain was transferred to Continental forces, and later released. A committed Loyalist, he returned to recruiting men and then service in the New Jersey Volunteers. He was later wounded in action in South Carolina. These van Buskirk men were determined and active Loyalists, earning the enmity of their former Patriot neighbors. Father and son survived and left for Nova Scotia in 1783. The father was awarded £1,111 in compensation from the Royal Claims Commission and served for a time as mayor of Shelburne. The son became a merchant and a justice of the peace, and in 1805 a member of the provincial assembly.44

James Moody James Moody (1744–1809) was born in Little Egg Harbor but moved to Sussex County in 1766. An Anglican and relatively substantial farmer he lived on 500 acres close to the Delaware River, where he said “when the present ill-fated Rebellion first broke out” he was “happy” with his wife Elizabeth Brittain and their three children. Threatened for refusing to take an oath to the new government, in April 1777 he went with seventy-three other local men to enlist in Colonel Joseph Barton’s Loyalist force. Included in the group were three of her Brittain brothers (three others were Patriots), neighbors, and members of his church. This effort failed, though, when it was intercepted by Patriot forces near Perth Amboy. Over sixty of the men were captured, but not Moody and seven others. Most were held in the Morristown jail and tried for treason. Of those convicted twentythree were pardoned, nine reprieved, and two (James Oliff and John Mee) executed. Governor William Livingston pardoned those who agreed to enlist in the Continental army, but to his disappointment almost all of them later deserted. Moody’s subsequent actions and notoriety resulted in his being called the “Scarlet Pimpernel of the American Revolution,” and leave no doubt that he was an irreconcilable Loyalist.

154 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

Moody was not deterred by the misadventure but rather spent the war repeatedly traveling into rebel territory, alone and with others, and while there he recruited Loyalist soldiers, spied for the British, and raided Patriot homes. He said that one of the purposes was to “Tarefy [terrify] the most Violent of the Rebels” so “he Surprised them at their own Houses and Threatened them with Death in Case they did not Desist from Persecuting their Neighbours which has had the Desired Effect.” He also managed to seize George Washington’s dispatches on three occasions, tried to kidnap (or assassinate) William Livingston, and freed several Loyalist prisoners from the Sussex County jail. At one point in 1780, captured by Patriots, he was imprisoned at West Point and placed in leg irons and rough handcuffs to prevent his escape. His harsh treatment gained him some sympathy. He was moved and the leg restraints removed while plans to court martial and then hang him proceeded. But Moody managed to slip off the handcuffs, overpower his guards, and escape, then, avoiding those hunting him, stealthily made his way safely back to New York City. His escapades continued. Moody’s actions and adventures frustrated both General George Washington and Governor William Livingston. In August 1781, the governor issued a proclamation calling for the capture of Moody and three other Loyalist raiders, promising a $200 reward for each. In response Moody offered a reward of 200 Guineas for Livingston, “A Lawless Usurper, and incorrigible Rebel.” If the whole person could not be obtained, he would pay half for the “EARS and NOSE” that were “too remarkable to be mistaken.” But in a raid soon afterward Moody barely escaped, while his brother John was captured, tried as a spy in Philadelphia, and then hanged. This apparently helped convince him he had taken enough risks. In 1782 James Moody left for England. His first wife had died, after being thrown from a horse, and he had married Jane Robinson Lynson, a young Loyalist from Newark. His three young children stayed behind with his father, but his new wife soon followed him. He wrote a short book about his dramatic experiences, Narrative of His Exertions and Sufferings in the Cause of the Government, Since the Year 1776 (1782), which helped him gain the attention of prominent Loyalists, British authorities, and finally a pension as compensation for his services. Four years later they left for Canada, settling in Sissiboo, Nova Scotia, where his two surviving children joined them. Moody started a shipbuilding business, was elected to the provincial assembly from 1793 to 1806, and for a while prospered. But afterward he and his son were overwhelmed by debts, as well as ill health. Given his adventures, remarkably he lived until 1809, then left behind a wife and several grandchildren.45

Black Loyalists Blacks fought on all sides in the Revolution, but not surprisingly large numbers used this as an opportunity to escape from slavery to freedom. Starting with Lord Dunmore, the governor of Virginia, who promised freedom in 1775, they headed for British-controlled places. For New Jersey slaves this meant Staten Island,

Loyalists Part I: The Irreconcilables • 155

where the Black Brigade and Black Pioneer units were organized and then conducted raids into New Jersey and elsewhere; or they headed for New York City, where they found employment in a variety of military-related tasks. Colonel Tye/Titus (ca. 1755–1780). While a number of Blacks, freedmen, as well as slaves, joined Loyalist forces during the war, it is Colonel Tye who has recently been given attention. He was owned by John Corlis (Corliss/Corlies), a Shrewsbury, Monmouth County, Quaker, who refused to free him even when admonished to do so by members of the local Meeting. When Titus escaped in 1775, Corlis advertised in the Pennsylvania Gazette for his return, describing him as “about 21 years of age, not very black, near 6 feet high,” and offering a reward of £3 proclamation (New Jersey) money. Titus had gone to join the British in Virginia and claim his freedom by serving in Lord Dunmore’s Ethiopian Regiment. He emerged a few years later as Colonel Tye, the leader of Black and white Loyalist raiders who attacked New Jersey Patriot slave owners and stole and sold their property. He was present at the Battle of Monmouth, and then led raids into the county afterward. Those he led captured Patriot militia leaders and delivered them to prisons in New York City. Working with Loyalists, Black and white refugees, sometimes British officers, his raids in 1779 and 1780 led to the death or capture of many leading Monmouth County militia officers and men. The group plundered and burned homes and barns, drove off cattle, and spread fear. Then he led an attack on militia captain Josiah Huddy’s house in Toms River. With the captured Huddy in tow, pursued by local Patriots, a brief dramatic confrontation followed in which Huddy escaped by jumping out of a boat, and Tye was wounded. The minor wrist injury resulted in lockjaw, which killed him. Tye, for his military skill and daring, was admired by Loyalists, British officers, and even the Patriots he terrified. He has been seen by some modern historians as a “freedom fighter.”46 At the end of the war Blacks, free and former slaves, left on British ships for Canadian ports or England. The Book of Negroes compiled by British officers in New York City, lists some 3,000, with names, brief descriptions, and sometimes where and by whom they had been enslaved. Most on the lists had been slaves in the south, but approximately 100 were from Bergen County (an estimated 12 percent of the slaves there). Overall, of those from New Jersey in the 215 counted, approximately twenty-six claimed to have been born free, eightythree escaped from slavery, ninety-seven were freed by British proclamations, six were emancipated, one was still a slave (most likely owned by a Loyalist also going to Canada), and two were indentured. For those who were free before the war, or those who claimed freedom with it, leaving obviously seemed a far better option than capture and reenslavement.47 That said, the British were not without prejudice, in the colonies, during the war, then in Canada, England, and Sierra Leone. They returned Loyalist-owned slaves, abandoned Black soldiers at Yorktown and elsewhere, failed to inoculate

156 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

them or take care of them when they had smallpox, and did not always keep their promises. Some ended up living in poverty in London, or in Nova Scotia, also facing terrible conditions. Canada was undeveloped, the climate was colder than they were accustomed to, they were provided with insufficient land and inadequate supplies, and they were discriminated against by white Loyalists; many did not survive. A small group then went from England to Sierra Leone and even worse conditions—of the 377 in the first group that arrived by 1791 only 42 were left. Over a thousand from Nova Scotia followed, though, fleeing hostile conditions. Rather than being cold Africa was hot, the local African population was hostile, and the British company rigid and controlling. At one point the French attacked the settlement. Those that survived later revolted against the restrictions placed on them. Britain replaced the Sierra Leone Company with a chartered colony and an appointed governor. In the long run some of the original settlers survived, and their descendants remained in Africa. A few examples of those with New Jersey connections who left on the British ships show the diversity of their backgrounds and experiences and their mixed status, and that frequently they left in family groups. The Van Sayl family consisted of husband Cornelius, wife Catherine, and their two children. They had been slaves of John Vanderveer and John Loyd of Monmouth County. They were joined by his brother Peter. From Newark came the freeborn family of Mary Thomson (fifty-four and “nearly worn out”), her daughter Margaret twenty-five, and three grandchildren ages ten, three, and one. Also, from Essex County came Prince, who had purchased his freedom, and his wife and son who were free. They were joined by their daughter, her son, and her husband Samuel van Nostrandt who had escaped from slavery. Perhaps the most interesting is Boston King. Although not originally from New Jersey, he was enslaved there for a time.48 On the 1783 list he was noted as age twenty-three, a “stout fellow,” formerly owned by Richard Waring, Charleston, South Carolina. His wife Violet King, age thirty-five, was a “stout wench,” formerly owned by Colonel Young of Wilmington, North Carolina. They had met and married in New York City. Boston King first escaped in 1779, joined the British in Charleston, survived smallpox, and followed the army to New York. There, while serving as a pilot, he was captured by Patriots and reenslaved in New Brunswick. Although he said this master was reasonable, “used me as well as I could expect,” he wanted to be free and escaped again. He walked at night and hid during the day, making his way to Perth Amboy. Then he found a boat and used it to cross to Staten Island, obtained a pass, and went into the city. He worked there during the war. The Kings left in 1783 on the L’Abondance for Port Roseway. They survived the starving times in Birchtown, the Black settlement near Shelburne, and had children. He built ships and furniture, worked on fishing vessels, converted to Methodism, and served as a minister. When a representative of the Sierra Leone Company arrived, this family signed up and left. While his wife died of a fever shortly after they arrived in Africa, he

Loyalists Part I: The Irreconcilables • 157

survived and started over again, serving as a minister and operating a school. In 1796 he went to England to study, and while there wrote his Memoirs. Then after two years he returned to Africa, although he had to pay his own way, as the Company, which had promised to do so, reneged. He managed yet another journey. As Jasanoff has shown, Black as well as white Loyalists scattered across the globe, including some with New Jersey connections.

Conclusion Beginning in 1775–1776, New Jersey Loyalists moved behind British lines, most into New York City. Some concerned about Patriot activities left quietly, others were forced to do so by local and state authorities. When the war ended, they were shocked that the British had lost, and horrified by the terms of the Peace Treaty. Many felt betrayed. Then the British began removing their soldiers and evacuated thousands of the remaining Loyalists. Because most of the irreconcilable Loyalists had already left New Jersey, usually they departed from New York City. Some went to England where they stayed or moved on, others went directly to Canada. The “irreconcilables” who became permanent exiles after the Revolution, share several common attributes, even as each had their own individual experiences. While the cases given here are examples, and many more could be provided, what stands out is how often they were monarchists, Anglicans, and had prior and subsequent military service. William Franklin was a king’s man, Cortlandt Skinner a monarchist, and they, Jonathan Odell, and others were Anglicans. Several resented how they were treated by Patriots, including Bernardus LaGrange and James Moody. Lady Catherine Skinner Robinson many years later remembered the terror of her childhood rough treatment, but Moody and others also dished it out. In the end, these Loyalist exiles lost land, income, their homes (including furniture and mementos), and the comfort of familiar places and friends. In the long run some did well, but for others this was a disaster. But then for many who lived in New Jersey that was the consequence of the Revolutionary War no matter what side they took. It is also worth noting that the exiles resemble merchants, bureaucrats, and military officers from Britain itself, who became involved in the “second” empire. They lived and served in the Caribbean, India, Canada, and elsewhere, also with mixed results. This was a changing and volatile world.49

7

Loyalists Part II Remained or Returned The stories of Loyalists who remained are diverse, some very interesting, but most others are lost to us. Like the exiles as well as Patriots and Quakers, in this nasty civil war, at times they paid a significant price for their loyalty. They were caught in British, Hessian, Loyalist, and Patriot raids. Their property was damaged, destroyed, and confiscated.1 Yet, as noted in chapter 6, in the end most Loyalists remained and some later returned. A few discussed here used the money they obtained from the Royal Loyalist Claims Commission to purchase property in the United States (rather than staying in England or departing for Canada or elsewhere). Others tried to reclaim their lost property or just started over. Of course, slaves who sympathized with the British, or fought for them, had no choice if they ended up in Patriot hands—they stayed. Those who were part of forfeited estates were usually sold to new masters. Sadly, some who were promised their freedom in return for serving in their master’s stead, were cheated out of their goal (see the previous discussion of Patriot Blacks in chapter 2). The stories of those who remained or returned after the Revolution are sometimes unexpected, with family ties often part of the explanation.

Remained Abraham Beach There were an estimated eleven Anglican clergymen in New Jersey in 1775, but only four in 1783, with just two of those ministering (Abraham Beach and Uzal 158

Loyalists Part II: Remained or Returned • 159

FIG. 26 The Reverend Abraham Beach (1740–1828), painting by Ralph Earle (1794). Beach was the Anglican minister at Christ Church in New Brunswick, New Jersey, and a Loyalist during the Revolution. He tried to care for area congregants during the war, and afterward remained in the country and helped form the Episcopal Church of the United States. (Source: Rutgers Preparatory School.)

Ogden). Apparently, just the Reverend Abraham Beach (1740–1828) in New Brunswick, with whose story this book began, stayed throughout the war. Beach was born in Connecticut, graduated from Yale in 1757, and then after several years felt the call of religion. He traveled to England, where he was ordained in 1767, returned, and under the direction of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel (SPG) served congregations in New Brunswick and nearby. In 1768, he married Antje (Anne) Van Wickle, and they lived on Elm farm, her family’s

160 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

FIG. 27 Mrs. Anne Van Wickle Beach (n.d.), painting by Ralph Earle (1794). The orphaned

daughter of a local Dutch couple she married the minister in 1768, providing him with ties to local Patriots, and connections to the founders of Queens College and preparatory school (now Rutgers University and Rutgers Preparatory School). (Source: Rutgers Preparatory School.)

property, outside of town. As noted in the introduction he suspended holding services after the Declaration of Independence, resumed them while the British controlled the area in the winter and spring of 1776–1777, but stopped again when they left. Beach continued to attend to Anglicans (whites and Blacks) within a forty-mile radius, traveling through a war zone to baptize, marry, and

Loyalists Part II: Remained or Returned • 161

bury them. He resumed conducting services after 1780, when he was assured from England that he could leave out the traditional prayers for the health of the King, royal family, and members of Parliament. Other prayers were not substituted. In the fall of 1781 Beach wanted a permit from Governor William Livingston to go into New York City to retrieve some church plate from Bernardus Lagrange but was refused. Levinus Clarkson, a vestryman of Christ Church, then wrote to support the request, but it was again denied. Apparently, Livingston did not trust Beach, and thought he could receive the plate without making a personal trip. Rather the governor believed it was a cover for the real business, which was to discover “how far it shall and may be lawful for him to assume the appearance of a Good Citizen here without forfeiting his stipend elsewhere” (from the SPG). Livingston noted New Jersey’s policy of religious toleration but added, “It will certainly be expected of all Congregations in this State to be good Subjects & to pray for the State they live in (which I believe no good subjects have ever hesitated to do).” The reply reflects Livingston’s long-standing distrust and dislike of Anglicans, his respect for toleration policies, and expectation of support for the Patriot government. When the war was over, Beach stayed in the United States, serving in New York City but keeping the farm in New Jersey. There are several possible explanations for Beach’s remaining. He married a local Dutch woman and worked with the liberal Dutch Reformed leaders who founded Queens Grammar School (now Rutgers Preparatory School) and Queens College (now Rutgers University), serving on its Board of Trustees along with Reverend Jacob Rutsen Hardenberg (1736–1790), who participated in the Patriot government; Frederick Frelinghuysen (1753–1804) in the Patriot military; Dr. John Cochran (1730–1807), a surgeon and then director of hospitals for the Continental army; Reverend John Leydt and Reverend Johannis M. van Harlingen, both Dutch Reformed ministers; and William Ouke, the mayor of New Brunswick. The Dutch in the Raritan valley, unlike some of those in northern New Jersey, members of the Coetus faction influenced by the evangelicalism of the Great Awakening, were most often Patriots during the Revolution. Perhaps his Patriot friends influenced him. In 1784 Beach was among those who called a meeting to discuss what should happen to the Anglican Church, and it was held in Christ Church in New Brunswick. This was the beginning of the Episcopal Church of the United States, which no longer recognized the monarch as head of the church, but rather had its own American bishops. The first one, Samuel Seabury (1729–1796), who had served in New Brunswick in the 1750s, then as a Loyalist chaplain for the British forces in New York City during the war, had remained afterward. He was later consecrated in Scotland, which had a separate hierarchy. Beach himself left for Trinity Church in New York City. He wrote to English authorities that he could not afford to remain in New Jersey—he was no longer being paid by the SPG, and his congregants had lost so much property they could not manage to pay him. One report in early 1777 stated that the town was “almost entirely

162 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

destroyed.”2 Beach reported that he had been subsisting on the produce of the farm, but he had many children (six born between 1769 and 1779, four girls, Hannah, Maria, Ann, and Cornelia, two boys, Abraham and Evart) to support and needed an income. He then served as the assistant rector of Trinity Church until he retired (he probably then prayed for the health of the new nation), spending summers on the farm in New Jersey. At that point he returned and spent the rest of his life there. It remained in the family until 1958, when it was sold to Rutgers Preparatory School at the time it separated from the university and needed a new home. Ann Van Wickle Beach’s parents are still buried there.3

Andrew Bell Andrew Bell (1757–1843) served with the British. He was prepared to leave but was later encouraged to stay, settling in Perth Amboy after the war. Bell’s story is particularly noteworthy. In this case, the father and son were both Loyalists, but not the daughter Cornelia (1755–1783). He had studied law with Cortlandt Skinner, who with the Revolution became one of the most prominent Loyalists in the state. While the father, John Bell, remained at Bellfield, the family estate in Bridgewater, the son went into New York City. There he spent seven years serving as secretary to Sir Henry Clinton and later Sir Guy Carleton, both high-ranking British officers. He was at the Battle of Monmouth, though apparently not as an officer. At one point he wrote his sister, much to her relief, that he had decided not to take a British commission. In 1778 after the father died, the family property, now in the son’s name, was confiscated. The mother lived in various places during the war, including Philadelphia and New York, not with her husband, though why is unclear, and she kept in touch with both children—as they did with each other sending letters across the lines. Cornelia moved in with the family of Judge Anthony White (1717–1787) at Union in Lebanon Township (for part of this time, while the British occupied the town, Buccleuch Mansion, the White family home in New Brunswick, was used by Lord Cornwallis). The judge had married Elizabeth Morris, a daughter of Governor Morris; he was a Loyalist. His son, Anthony Walton White (1750– 1803), was a Patriot who served in the Continental Army throughout the war, including time as one of Washington’s aides (and later as a general during the Whiskey Rebellion). The three daughters were Cornelia’s friends. One of them, Euphemia White (1746–1832), later became William Paterson’s second wife. Cornelia had found a relatively peaceful refuge in the middle of the war. Her letters indicate that while she lived there, they socialized, played cards, and entertained a variety of people, including John Penn (1729–1795), described as a moderate Loyalist, the deposed proprietary governor of Pennsylvania, and Benjamin Chew (1722–1810), the proprietary chief justice of that colony. Both were on parole, and Penn was married to Ann Allen whose family had invested in the nearby Union ironworks. When the war was over both men and their families remained in Pennsylvania, and Chew later served as the chief justice of the state.

Loyalists Part II: Remained or Returned • 163

During this time Cornelia wrote her brother that she had a right to her own views on the war: “I’ll not trouble you with any more of my politics; they are so disagreeable to you. Every rational creature, you know, has a right to think, and everyone cannot be of the same opinion.” Then, apparently fearing that as a woman she had gone too far thus violating contemporary conventions, she added, “I am not a politician. I detest it in a female character as much as [you], but we must say something, [even] if it is nonsense.” Her comments reveal divisions within the family, and they hardly seem like nonsense under the circumstances.4 The letters also show her deep love for a younger brother, and the strength of their family tie despite the political disagreements. William Paterson visited and courted Cornelia Bell while she lived with the White family. He was a graduate of the College of New Jersey, had studied law with Richard Stockton, and during the war was the state’s attorney general responsible for prosecuting Loyalists. When she married Paterson in 1779, she wrote her brother saying she hoped he would approve. When the Bell estate was confiscated, Paterson and his wife rescued some of the furniture in the house by buying it from the agent in charge of forfeited property. Throughout the war she tried to keep in touch with her brother, and after several failed efforts toward the end managed to meet him for three days in New York in July 1783. Soon after that visit she gave birth to her third child (the second had died after an illness). Unfortunately, Cornelia died four days later, leaving behind a young daughter and the newly born son. As the war came to an end Andrew Bell saw no future for himself either in England or in the United States, but he concluded that he had to leave. Before she died Cornelia had tried to change his mind. After her death Paterson urged his brother-in-law to stay for the sake of the two children she had left behind. He wrote: “You have, indeed the most inviting objects, the tenderest ties, to draw you into Jersey: a niece, a Cornelia too, lovely as the morning; a nephew, who promises to be everything that a father, that an uncle in the flush of fondness, can wish.” Andrew Bell, angry that his patrimony had been “ungenerously and unjustly wrested from me,” filed an application with the British Loyalist Claims Commission for his lost property (he requested £624.7 and received £456), but he remained in the United States. He moved to Perth Amboy in 1786, where he spent the rest of a long and successful life. Four years earlier he had married Susanna Moore, a widow, but they never had any children.5 A Federalist, he unsuccessfully sought an appointment as collector of the port of Perth Amboy from George Washington in 1789. Asking for the position again, from President John Adams in 1800, he succeeded, only to be removed a short time later when Jeffersonian Republican Thomas Jefferson came into office. From 1804 to 1842 he served as the surveyor-general for the East Jersey Proprietors, and he was involved in the Episcopal Church. When he died his executor was another William Paterson, one of Cornelia’s grandsons, a lawyer who later served as the mayor of Perth

164 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

Amboy for more than thirty years. That William Paterson commented upon his great-uncle’s death that he had become “a thorough American and patriot.”6 Andrew Bell’s story is one of love and loss, and reconciliation.

Ministers The Reverend Samuel Cooke (1723–1795) was the Anglican minister in Monmouth County from 1751 to 1775, when he went to England on a personal visit. In 1768 he had written to the SPG that he was “happy in America,” in both “public and private” life, and wished to remain. But that was before the war intervened. He returned from England in 1776, but to New York City as a chaplain to British forces. Seven of his children had remained behind, and when his property was forfeited in 1779 a daughter bought the family farm. At the end of the war, some, but not all, of the children joined him in Canada. Unfortunately, he and his son Michael drowned there in 1795 in a boating accident. Others in the family apparently remained in New Jersey.7 Many of the Loyalist Dutch from the Conferentie faction remained after the war. This included the Reverend Warmoldus Kuypers and numerous members of his congregation at Hackensack. The minister was born in Holland, lived in Curaçao, before moving to New Jersey. There he preached in Dutch, and openly said little about the war. But one son was a suspected Loyalist, while he advised the other, seventeen-year-old Elias Kuypers, to go into New York City where he spent the war working in the British Naval Office. When the British raided the village in March  1780, they took between fifty and sixty captives, then released two taken by “mistake.” The son complained to British authorities that his father had been “obliged to march above twenty miles (in the hard wintry season) tho’ excessive weak and in bad state of health, and having his home plundered and himself beat and ill treated” until the mistake was realized when the minister “was permitted to return home to a distressed family.” Then, “Amongst all these sufferings, he still persevered in his loyalty and remained with his congregation in hopes of doing good.” With the peace treaty son Elias Kuypers asked the British for help for his father, both financial and asylum, because otherwise he would have to leave New Jersey. But instead, the Reverend Warmoldus Kuypers remained, along with many members of his congregation.8 Additional cases of those who stayed have been discussed in other chapters. For example, both James Parker, who returned to Perth Amboy, and Sarah Low Wallace to New Brunswick, were discussed in chapter 4 on Straddlers. Obviously, there are many more stories because most Loyalists remained after the war. They have probably escaped notice because they were not active, their property was not taken (or if it was, they, like Patriots started over), and they blended into the landscape. They and their descendants have left few or no written records useful in tracing their stories. Perhaps this has been part of a deliberate effort to obscure the role they played in the Revolution, not seen as an admirable one in the years after the war.

Loyalists Part II: Remained or Returned • 165

Returnees In her book Liberty’s Exiles Maya Jasanoff begins and ends with the Loyalist Beverley Robinson family (originally from Virginia and then after 1748 New York’s Hudson Valley). Covering more than three generations she shows how they disbursed through parts of the British empire. But she ends with Beverley Robinson Jr., the son who had settled in Canada and then went from there in 1816 to visit two of his sons (they had returned in 1796 and 1802) and his grandchildren, where ironically this staunch Loyalist died suddenly and was buried in New York City.9 Another intriguing example is Peter van Schaack, who went to King’s College with John Jay (1745–1829), married to William Livingston’s daughter Sarah van Brugh Livingston (1756–1802). Both Jay and his wife were strong Patriots, and they spent much of the war in Spain, where he was the American ambassador. Schaack was a Loyalist who left for London in 1778. But he found England corrupt and wrote that he wanted to return to “his country.” When he did in 1785 Jay was waiting on the dock in New York City to welcome him.10 There are also examples of New Jersey Loyalists who surprisingly returned, some quickly like van Schaack, but others even later than this part of the Robinson family.

Reverend Thomas Bradbury Chandler Among the most intriguing is Thomas Bradbury Chandler (1726–1790), born into a prosperous Connecticut family of Congregationalists, who graduated from Yale in 1745. But he then studied theology with Samuel Johnson and converted to Anglicanism, becoming the SPG minister of St. John’s Church in Elizabethtown. He married local resident Jane Elliott (1733–1801), and they had five children. The oldest was William (1756–1784), a 1774 graduate of Kings College, who served in the New Jersey Volunteers. The youngest, Mary, was born that same year. Before the Revolution Chandler was a leading advocate of an Anglican bishop for the colonies and an important participant in the debate over that position in the 1750s and 1760s. In 1761 Chandler wrote Anglican officials in England that he was getting along with local dissenters, but then reported the following the next year: “As to Roman Catholics we have none in this Province. The Chief Enemies of the Church are the English Dissenters of different denominations.”11 He wanted to write a pamphlet to counter these “enemies,” eventually writing a number of them because his pamphlets provoked responses in pamphlets by the Reverend Charles Chauncy, John Adams, William Livingston, Charles Lee and others, and then he replied to them. He also participated in two meetings of colonial Anglican ministers that were held in New Jersey to further the goal of obtaining a colonial bishop, one in 1765 at Perth Amboy, and the other in 1766 at Elizabethtown. Chandler first wrote An Appeal to the Public in Behalf of the Church of England in America. Wherein the Original Nature of the Episcopal Office are briefly

166 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

FIG. 28 Reverend Thomas Bradbury Chandler (1726–1790). Oil painting, by an unknown

artist. Chandler was the Anglican minister at Saint John’s Church in Elizabethtown, a Loyalist who supported appointment of an American bishop and the continuance of the monarchy, advocating both in a series of pamphlets. He spent the war years in England, but then returned to his family and church in New Jersey. (Source: American Paintings and Sculpture, ac.1920.5, Yale University Art Gallery. Gift of Clarence Winthrop Bowen, B.A. 1873, M.A. 1876, Ph.D. 1882.)

considered, Reasons for Sending Bishops to America are Assigned, the Plan on which it is proposed to send them is stated, and the objections against sending them are obviated and confuted. . . . (1767) on the need for an American bishop. He wanted to retain the monarchy and strengthen the state church, conservative positions in an increasingly radical time. Chandler argued that an American bishop would save lives as a large percentage of those who went to England for ordination died on their voyages, it would also greatly reduce the costs such trips involved.12 But

Loyalists Part II: Remained or Returned • 167

he also apparently hoped that he would be the one chosen as the first bishop for the colonies. During the Stamp Act Crisis Chandler warned of the dangers from the “mad men” and “fanatics” of New England, leaders of the opposition. While admitting that the British government was wrong to pass the Stamp Act, he maintained that loyalty to the Crown and Great Britain was the best source of happiness for the colonies. Further, only by establishing the Anglican church in all the colonies could republicanism be prevented. He argued that “Episcopacy and monarchy are, in their Frame and Constitution, best suited to each other. Episcopacy can never thrive in a Republican Government, or Republican Principles in an Episcopal Church. For the same Reasons, in a mixed Monarchy, no Form of Ecclesiastical Government can so exactly harmonize with the State, as that of a qualified Episcopacy.” Publicly in his pamphlets he reassured those of other Protestant persuasions that an Anglican establishment and a colonial bishop would not restrict them, as the bishops would not have political positions (in England they sat in the House of Lords) or power to create religious courts and issue marriage licenses, nor would all colonists be taxed to support the church. However, his more private writings indicate that that was exactly what he wanted: a replication of the church as it existed in England. In private he obliquely said this in a 1767 letter to the Bishop of London that he sent along with a copy of his first pamphlet.13 As controversy revived between British authorities and colonists, and intensified after the 1773 Tea Act, Chandler was vocal in his criticisms of the growing Patriot movement and adamantly opposed to independence. In 1774, after the First Continental Congress met, his Friendly Address for All Reasonable Americans on the Subject of Our Political Confusions; in Which the Necessary Consequences of Violently Opposing the King’s Troops and of a General Non-importation are Fairly Stated appeared; the Elizabethtown Association ordered it burned. It was also burned in Maryland, rural New York, and banned for sale in Philadelphia and Norfolk. One of his arguments was that “the ill consequences of open disrespect to government are so great that no misconduct of the administration can justify or excuse it.”14 In 1775 he wrote What Think Ye of the Congress Now? or an Enquiry, How Far Americans are Bound to Abide by and Execute the Decisions of the Late Congress, a forty-eight-page screed condemning opposition to the British government, and making clear he thought the rebels were the real tyrants. In it he reprised the frequent Loyalist theme that the colonies could never win against British might as they were “without fortresses, without discipline, without military stores, without money.” He warned that they were headed for an “abyss of misery and destruction.” Elizabethtown was probably not the best place to be so openly Loyalist as it was a center of Presbyterian leaders increasingly holding different strong views (the Reverend James Caldwell and members of his congregation). Feeling threatened by the local Sons of Liberty Chandler left for New York City, where he

FIG. 29 Anti-bishop cartoon, An Attempt to land a bishop in America (London, 1768). Before the Revolution there was an effort by Anglican ministers, particularly in the mid-Atlantic, to obtain a bishop for the American colonies. In New Jersey, the Reverend Thomas Bradbury Chandler and the Reverend Jonathan Odell were supporters. Presbyterians, including Governor William Livingston, were strongly opposed. (Source: https://www.loc.gov/item /99401080/ Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C.)

Loyalists Part II: Remained or Returned • 169

briefly stayed with John Tabor Kempe and his wife Grace Coxe Kempe. Then he boarded a ship for England in mid-May 1775, leaving his family behind (except for his son who would fight with British forces). His wife and daughters remained but she was regarded with much suspicion by George Washington and other Patriot leaders because of her frequent contacts with Loyalists or their sympathizers. Despite his distrust of all women (including his own relatives) who wanted to cross enemy lines, Governor William Livingston apparently did in 1778 make an exception for “Mrs. Chandler whose son was said to lie at the Point of death.” The son survived, at least until the end of the war, but Chandler’s property was forfeited March 19, 1779. The next month General William Maxwell, commander of the New Jersey Brigade of the Continental army, wrote to the state legislature from Elizabethtown urging action, noting that “in the way of giving intelligence to the enemy I think her in the first place. There is not a tory that passes in or out of New York or any other way, that is of consequence, but that waits on Mrs.  Chandler; and mostly all the British officers going in or out on parole or exchange, wait on her. . . . I think she would be much better in New York, and to take her baggage with her, that she might have nothing to come back for.15 This Patriot thought the Loyalist Reverend’s Loyalist wife was acting as a spy. The Patriots wanted her in New York behind enemy lines, but she apparently did not leave. In England Chandler spent his time visiting with Anglican church authorities and other Loyalists. He missed his family, especially the infant daughter he described as “but a Green Gosling when I left her” but kept busy reading and accumulated some twenty-two boxes of books. All along he continued to believe the colonists would lose and was upset when Lord Cornwallis surrendered at Yorktown, seeing it as a “blow,” and he felt betrayed by the Peace Treaty. Then ironically when the war ended and Chandler was offered the coveted position as an American bishop, this the first one was in Nova Scotia, he declined, saying that he had not seen his family for eight years. By the time he returned it was ten years, his son had died in England, a daughter in America, and his health was deteriorating. He did though have a pension from the British government. Chandler went back to Elizabethtown to, for him, a surprisingly warm welcome from a variety of local residents. He reported an “amazing crowd” that included “old and young, black and white, male and female, whig and tory, Church man and Dissenters, not only from this but from all the neighboring towns,” perhaps an exaggeration but clearly reflecting that he was then glad to be home. Yet he reported back to British church officials on the dire state of religion, noting that it had “suffered more than the State, by the late Revolution. It is no longer under the control of British authority; it now wants [lacks] the Support and patronage of the Society [SPG]; it has lost a large proportion of its Clergy by death and expulsion, and their places are unsupplied.” Like a number of other Loyalists, he thought the new country would fail writing a friend that “independency has been ruinous” and that a “large majority” were repenting.16 Despite

170 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

this he went on to help organize the new Episcopalian Church, the American version of the Anglican Church without the monarch at its head. Dying in 1790 he did not live to see the success of either the church or the country. The Reverend Ezra Stiles (1727–1795), a Congregationalist, Patriot, and the then president of Yale College, where once they had been students together, wrote on hearing of his passing, that Chandler had been a good scholar, but “became a most bigoted high Churchman” and was “Acrimonious, bitter and uncharitable to all Christian Sects but his own.” Clearly Chandler both held strong feelings and aroused them in others, but he suppressed them sufficiently to return to his family and the new United States.17

Reverend Uzal Ogden An Anglican minister in Sussex county, the Reverend Uzal Ogden (1744–1822) fled for a short time to New York City, but he returned before the war was over. He then held services without the customary prayers for the king and Parliament. Apparently, one historian concluded that although he never openly expressed support for the Revolution, he “secretly held patriot sympathies.” The evidence was in his return and then remaining in New Jersey. After the war he was rector of Trinity Church in Newark, replacing the Reverend Isaac Browne (1709–1787), who had gone into New York City in 1777, and then after the war to Canada. The original church, built in 1743, was severely damaged during the war after being used as a hospital by both sides. Ogden helped raise the money to rebuild it in 1810.18 David Ogden The Ogden family was among many in New Jersey divided by the war. David Ogden (1707–1798), a 1728 graduate of Yale, an Anglican, prominent lawyer and judge, member of the royal council, was resented for representing the East Jersey Proprietors and landowners in title disputes. During the Newark riots in 1770 his property was targeted, and two barns were destroyed. He then filed for bankruptcy and resigned from the legislature. To aid him Governor William Franklin appointed him a justice of the peace. This Ogden had five sons. He and three sons were Loyalists, the other two and his brothers Jacob and Aaron Ogden (1756–1830) were Patriots. Of the Loyalist sons Isaac went to Canada, where he became an admiralty judge; Nicholas also went to Canada, but then returned after his father’s death; Peter went to London. Abraham (1743–1798) and Samuel (1746–1810) were the Patriots, who retained some of the family’s property. While the British were in Newark at the end of 1776 David Ogden worked to get residents to take the oath of loyalty to the king. Then in early January 1777 he and two of his sons fled to New York. Continental troops looking for the Loyalist members of this family ransacked his home destroying some of his property and scattering his legal papers, including important documents relating to the East Jersey proprietors. Expecting the British to win the war he wrote a plan

Loyalists Part II: Remained or Returned • 171

for an American parliament, that would supervise those colleges, which had been “the grand nurseries of the late Rebellion, instilling into the tender minds of youth principles favorable to republican, and against monarchical government, and other doctrines incompatible to the British Constitution.” He remained in the city until 1783, when he left for England. Like Bernardus LaGrange he was disliked and threatened by New Jersey neighbors, but unlike him Ogden returned. In 1790, he and his son Peter came back together—only to Long Island not New Jersey. David Ogden used his compensation from the Royal Loyalist Claims Commission, £9,415 and a pension, to purchase the land there (surely not what they intended be done with the money, but then he was not alone in using the funds in such a way). After his death at ninety-two in 1802, his son Nicholas returned from Canada, sold the Long Island property, and moved back to Newark. Other family members had remained in Newark and other parts of New Jersey, probably an explanation for those who returned.19

John Hinchman An example of a returnee but from south Jersey is John Hinchman of Gloucester County who was a Quaker, judge, sheriff, and member of the assembly from 1769 to 1775. In 1777 he joined the British, was disowned by the Quakers, was indicted for treason by the Patriot government, but escaped. He went behind British lines, and then later to Nova Scotia, although apparently not for long. After his house in Canada was destroyed in a fire, he returned to Timber Creek, where he died in 1787. His wife had predeceased him, and he returned to her property.20 Judge Frederick Smyth Frederick Smythe/Smyth (1731/2–1815) was the royally appointed chief judge of colonial New Jersey from 1764 to 1776, and an East Jersey proprietor, a defender of the law who strongly opposed the Revolution. On April 4, 1775, he ended his instructions to a Middlesex County grand jury with a warning: “for if People unhappily misguided and bewildered are hastening towards a precipice, they ought surely to be thankful to anyone who will hang out lights to save them from destruction.” In his comments he also said, “Liberty must ever be founded in Law, and protected by it.” And “that by our Constitution this Supreme and absolute Power is lodged in Parliament.” A year later he lectured another grand jury about the “Mercy and Magnanimity” of George III “our Gracious Monarch.” In reply they “dissented from your Honor’s opinion” maintaining instead that liberty “is built on the Rights of human Nature.” Smythe spent the war years living quietly in New York City. By December 1778 he was disillusioned enough with the British administration of the city, the course of the war, and how it was conducted, that he wrote, “I have seen our affairs year after year growing from bad to worse and little prospect of any amendment. I think it high time to

172 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

terminate the war in this country.” Smythe’s disappointment in British rule was shared by many Loyalists in Staten Island. They warmly welcomed soldiers in 1776, but by 1783 applauded when they left, having suffered disregard and destruction during the occupation. When the war was over, Smythe did not make a claim for lost property, but he did receive compensation for income from judicial service not paid during the war. He received £500 per year for that, and a £240 pension. William Franklin objected to this because Smythe had not taken an active part in the war, but the compensation was granted because the British government had wanted him in the city as a symbol of continued royal authority. In the end while Smythe remained, he moved to Pennsylvania. This may have been because, unlike the other examples discussed, he had no long-standing family ties to anyone in New Jersey.21

Doctors Several examples show that apparently doctors, in short supply, were more likely than others to be welcomed back to their original communities, even if they had been active Loyalists.22 But then while serving they took care of the wounded and the sick (although some probably took up arms as did Patriot physician and soldier General Hugh Mercer, who died from injuries sustained during the Battle for Princeton in January 1777). Absalom Bainbridge (1743–1807) a College of New Jersey graduate, was raised on a farm in nearby Maidenhead, and lived in a rented house in Princeton. A physician from a Patriot family, he instead became a Loyalist, perhaps influenced by his wife Mary Taylor of Perth Amboy and her Loyalist family. He aided the British when they were in Princeton and then left with them in January 1777. He spent much of the war on Long Island with the Loyalist Third New Jersey Volunteers. His property, including the farm, was confiscated. After the war he went to England, where he applied for compensation from the British government and received £2,250 plus £140 per year for lost income. He then returned to Long Island, and later settled in New York City. Two of his sons later served in the U.S. Navy. His story resembles that of David Ogden as he came back but not to his birthplace. Bainbridge House, owned by Princeton University, has been used as a museum by the Historical Society Princeton. It is now being repurposed by the university.23 Dr. Uzal Johnson (1751–1827) was born in Newark, studied medicine at Kings College and received his degree in 1772. He practiced in his hometown until 1776, when he was a commissioned a surgeon in a Patriot regiment, but after the Declaration of Independence switched allegiance to the British. Then he was commissioned in the Loyalist New Jersey Volunteers, and served throughout the war, from 1780 in the southern campaign. After battles he treated the wounded from both sides. Johnson was captured at the battle of Kings Mountain in South Carolina. His journal’s brief notes shed light on how Loyalist prisoners of war

Loyalists Part II: Remained or Returned • 173

were treated by locals as they were marched away after battles. Sometimes it was very roughly and other times with much kindness, but then he was a doctor. He was first paroled, and then exchanged early in 1781, after which he returned to Staten Island and continued serving with the New Jersey Volunteers. Johnson’s personal property was confiscated in 1779, including whatever medicines and medical equipment he had left behind. However, with the war over he married Jane Wilmot, returned to Newark, and started over. Probably an Anglican before the war, afterward he was a vestry member of the Episcopalian Trinity Church in town, yet in 1786 he contributed to a fund to rebuild the First Presbyterian Church, headed by the Reverend Alexander MacWhorter, which had been damaged during the war. Johnson apparently reconciled with his neighbors, developed a successful practice, became president of the Essex County Medical Society, and earned enough money to purchase several properties in the city.24 Dr. John Laurence/Lawrence (1747–1830) graduated from the College of New Jersey in 1764, then in 1768 with the College of Philadelphia’s medical school’s first class. He practiced medicine in Monmouth County and then Perth Amboy. His father was the Monmouth County surveyor of the 1743 dividing line between East and West Jersey. In the Revolution members of this Lawrence family were Loyalists—his father, the doctor, and Elisha another son. Dr. John Lawrence was arrested on July 8, 1776 and paroled into New York City, where he treated prominent Loyalists (including Elizabeth Downes Franklin and later her husband William Franklin), and served in the local militia. At the end of the war his brother went into exile, but he returned to New Jersey. He did not resume his medical practice but lived out his life in Upper Freehold, with two unmarried sisters on property they had inherited.25 Another example is Dr.  James van Beuren/ Buren of Hackensack, who early in the war served first one side, then the other. Imprisoned twice by the Patriots, he was released the first time at the request of his female patients, and the second time he took the Oath of Allegiance and Abjuration. Then in 1778 he rejoined the British. His property was confiscated, and after the war he went to Nova Scotia, but in 1792 he returned but to Passaic County and practiced medicine there.26

The Voughts Interesting because we know more about them, and because they returned later, are members of the Vought family, farmers from Clinton in western Hunterdon County. Some family members, and neighbors, either worked in the Union Iron works owned by William Allen and Joseph Taylor, Philadelphia merchants, or supplied them with farm produce. Iron manufacturers in Morris County were Presbyterians who did not like British mercantile restrictions on what they could produce. But the Allens and Taylors were Pennsylvania Loyalists, and the Voughts and many of their neighbors were descendants of German Palatine refugees— Lutherans and monarchists. The Voughts, father Christoffel and his son John,

174 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

FIG. 30 Vought House in Clinton, New Jersey, 2021 photograph. Built by his father Christoffel Vought in 1759, the home and farm of prominent Hunterdon County Loyalist John Vought was confiscated by the New Jersey government under Governor William Livingston. The property was auctioned in the spring of 1779. John Vought rose to the rank of captain in the New Jersey Volunteers before the close of the war. Afterward the family moved to Canada, and they later returned to the United States, but not to New Jersey. (Source: Courtesy of William J. Connell.)

in June 1776 got into a fight with Thomas Jones, the local militia captain, a tavern owner, and Patriot. Arrested, held in Trenton for several days, they were then fined and released. In December 1776 they joined the British in New Brunswick with about fifty of their neighbors, all angered by pressure from local Patriots to join the “common cause.” The Voughts served through the war, stationed with British forces in Staten Island. Their farm and house were confiscated in 1779, and in 1783 they left for Canada with other refugees. John Vought brought the family back in 1792, but to Albany, New York, where they managed to reclaim property that had been purchased before the war. They did not return to New Jersey. The family remained in the Hudson Valley, and a grandson later fought in the War of 1812 against England.27 Today their house in Clinton is being restored as a Loyalist museum. Other examples include John Redman Coxe, previously discussed with the Coxe family, who returned to Philadelphia to study medicine and later to practice there. George and Frederick Weaver were Salem County brothers who left for New Brunswick, Canada. Between them they had nineteen children of whom

Loyalists Part II: Remained or Returned • 175

at least ten returned to the United States. Six went to Maine, three to Minnesota, and one to Wisconsin. While discussing Bergen County Loyalists, Ruth M. Keesey estimated that of those who left for Canada and England perhaps ten returned. This included one son of William Bayard (1729–1804), and another of Joris Doremus, son of Hendrick Doremus. There is also John Skinner, who later returned to Perth Amboy, and Stephen Kemble who came back to New Brunswick thirty years after the war, but an even longer time lapsed for the Edeson/Edison family. Thomas Edison’s family originally came from Holland to Elizabethtown, New Jersey about 1730—a widow and her young son John Edeson. Loyalists during the Revolution, afterward they left for Nova Scotia and in 1811 moved to Bayham township in what was then Upper Canada. His father Samuel Edison Jr. married Nancy Elliott, who had been born in the United States. Caught up in the 1837 rebellion he was cited for treason, and his estate confiscated. The family fled to Ohio where Thomas Edison (1847–1931), the youngest child, was born. He later established laboratories in Newark, Menlo Park, then West Orange, as well as a home in Llewellyn Park (also in West Orange) New Jersey. This is the longest drawn-out tale of return found, but there could be others.28

Returned and Got Back Property Another returnee was Michael Kearny who served in the Loyalist militia. He was arrested, then paroled. Released from parole he went into New York City. His wife Elizabeth Lawrence Kearny stayed behind in Perth Amboy. In 1783 or 1784 he returned and “retrieved” a lot, then built a house on it. Her brother James Lawrence and their son Lawrence Kearny later had important naval careers.29 The Zabriskie family were longtime residents of Bergen County. Jan (John) Zabriskie (?–1774) was a merchant who shipped flour ground in his grist mill to New York City, and brought back items to sell locally. By the time of his death the family house at New Bridge had been enlarged to an impressive twelve rooms, with seven fireplaces. His son Jan J. Zabriskie Jr. was a Loyalist arrested in July 1777; he later went into Manhattan. The property was confiscated in 1781. Two years later the New Jersey legislature awarded the house and grist mill with forty acres to General Baron von Steuben (1730–1794), the Prussian volunteer who famously trained the Patriot army while it was camped at Valley Forge. Under the terms of the grant the general had life rights and was supposed to occupy the house “in person.” However, in 1785 he obtained a clear title paying for the property, and then in 1788 he sold it to Zabriskie Jr.’s son (1768?–1793), also named Jan. The house was purchased by the state of New Jersey in 1928.30 John van Dike (Vandike, Van Dyke, Van Dych) (1747–1811) was a Loyalist from Somerset County, even though his father (who died at the Battle of Monmouth) and the rest of his family were Patriots. He was accused of serving in the New Jersey Volunteers, but claimed he had only crossed the lines for a prisoner exchange and not to join the enemy. Patriot forces had evidence that

FIG. 31 Von Steuben House, exterior, 1965–66. Located on the Hackensack River at Historic New Bridge Landing Park, River Edge, Bergen County, New Jersey. This house was built in 1752 and then expanded by the Zabriskie family. Confiscated in 1781 as Loyalist property it was gifted in 1783 to General Baron von Steuben for his service to the Continental army. It was later sold back to a Zabriskie son. (Source: Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Parks and Forestry, Photographs Filed by Subject, ca. 1930’s-1970s. New Jersey State Archives, Department of State.)

Loyalists Part II: Remained or Returned • 177

contradicted this, as does information he submitted to the Royal Claims Commission for compensation. He had married his first cousin, Rebecca van Dike, daughter of Roliff/Roeleff/Roeliff van Dike and Catherine van Dike, whose brother Henry van Dike (1743–1817) was a colonel in the Somerset County militia and tried to help them. There were eight children: Roeliff, Margaret, Catherine, Ann, Rebecca, Elizabeth, Sara, and John. John van Dike’s property was confiscated, but later possibly restored or regained, what is clear is that he returned. Part of this complex story appears in a long series of cases in the records of the New Jersey Supreme Court from 1779 to 1804 involving extended members of the family, and numerous prominent state lawyers and judges. John van Dike was accused of treason and “convicted of joining the enemy,” and his estate was forfeited in July 1777. In September his wife petitioned the state council and assembly on his behalf, while he was held a prisoner. In addition, he appealed his conviction asking for “removal of a judgment on inquisition” based on “errors,” and a bond was posted by his brother-in-law/cousin Henry van Dike and Abraham Duryee. Two years later the state sued both men over the bond (unpaid and possibly forfeited because he went back to serving the British). It was not until 1784–1785 that the state’s two former Commissioners of Forfeited Estates in Somerset County, Frederick Frelinghuysen and Hendrick Wilson, brought suit against Rebecca van Dike for trespass and the sale of goods from the property confiscated in 1777 after John van Dike “had joined the Army of the King.” They also brought suit against her father (his uncle) for trespass and debts from the estate’s “goods sold at auction” on the same date but unpaid. Family members and friends, did sometimes step up and purchase forfeited estates and household goods in an effort to save them, but they usually paid. Members of this family, including the children of John and Rebecca van Dike, were involved in cases concerning “trespass and ejectment” and “cutting of trees” on disputed land until at least 1804; they both sued and were sued. Several things can be teased out of the records. Despite his denials, John van Dike clearly was a Loyalist who served with British forces. His property was confiscated but exactly what happened then is not clear, because while his name is on the list of those with forfeited estates in Somerset County, it does not (as is usual) list a purchaser. He returned, probably more than once, as he is listed in a 1782 case that involved trading with the enemy in 1780 (delivering “Veal and Poultry” to Sandy Hook), and is listed along with his wife as appearing as a “defendant” in a 1785–1788 trespass case. He apparently collected £1,189 from the British Royal Claims Commission and kept his New Jersey property. Also, for the van Dikes family ties mattered (although in 1803 Rebecca and her children sued brother/uncle Henry). The extended family tried to protect her, the property, and the children, and were willing and accustomed to going to court to do so. They retained at least some property, or continued to use it illegally, cutting timber, perhaps living, or squatting, on the land. In several cases

178 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

she is listed as “tenant in possession.” The van Dikes also illustrate how sometimes the complications from the Revolution continued for many years.31

Loyalists: Summary and Conclusions The stories discussed in this chapter, and the previous ones on Straddlers and Irreconcilables lead to some interesting questions and observations. Loyalist women, as well as sometimes Patriot ones, were caught during and then after the Revolution between old traditional legal concepts and the hints of new emerging ones. They were either feme sole, independent, or feme covert, married and subsumed into his (father, husband, or guardian’s) legal identity. The Revolution raised several questions not definitively answered at the time. Could they have an allegiance of their own independent of their fathers or husbands, be a Patriot rather than a Loyalist or the reverse? Could they have their own political opinions (as Cornelia Bell hesitantly asserted)? Could they claim dower rights in lands that had been confiscated (as did Sara Low Wallace), or lands that had originally been in their name (as did Grace Coxe Kempe)? Could they somehow hold on to their property (as did Theodosia Bartow Prevost Burr, and Rebecca van Dike)?32 Because this was a time when laws and ideas began to change, the answers could vary according to time and place. Powerful and influential friends could also affect the outcome and explain the exceptions (such as Theodosia Bartow Prevost Burr’s success and Elizabeth Graham Ferguson’s failure to keep property). Efforts by Loyalists to regain confiscated property years later were fraught with problems. Ownership had been transferred to numerous purchasers, almost all of whom were Patriots. Historians have noted that this helped gain support for the new revolutionary governments even as it also helped spread ownership, and the new titles were connected to the survival of the revolutionary state governments. New owners could and did resort to the courts to protect their claims. The states generally did not like the idea of now returning property. In the few cases where New York did so it paid compensation and required the Loyalist claiming dower rights to quickly resign their old titles, thus clarifying those of the new owners. There and in New Jersey, as elsewhere, legal cases continued for many years. Another question was when a Loyalist became an “alien.” Before the Declaration of Independence there was no United States. When did the Loyalist soldier join British forces? Jacob van Buskirk did so before July 4, 1776, so he could be considered a British soldier rather than an American traitor. Where did the Loyalist wife claiming dower rights live? Sara Low Wallace never joined her husband in England. Daniel Coxe V maintained he was not an alien and therefore entitled to inherit from his aunt Rebecca Coxe, even though he had previously asserted that he was loyal to Britain and worthy of compensation from the Royal Claims Commission. Then his wife Sarah Redman Coxe successfully argued fifty

Loyalists Part II: Remained or Returned • 179

years after the Revolution that her dower share of his property should be returned to her. Sometimes the questions were complicated, and the legal thinking of the judges convoluted. As noted in the conclusions of the last chapter there are several striking characteristics about the Loyalists, especially the number who were Anglicans. But not all were Anglicans; there were also conservative Dutch (Kupers), German Lutherans (Voughts), and some Quakers. Another is their numbers and strength in New Jersey undoubtedly aided by its location next to New York City and Staten Island, both captured by the British early in the war and held until the bitter end, as well as Philadelphia when the British were there. Sometimes it is easier to understand the irreconcilable Loyalist exiles than those who remained or returned. Monarchists, they were strongly opposed to independence, and therefore fought for the empire. Their property had been confiscated. Family, friends, neighbors, left with them. They either did not want to return or feared the reaction and retaliation if they tried. Perhaps more interesting, are those who stayed or returned. Why did they do so, and what were some of the consequences? Several explanations come to mind. Many agreed that the British imperial laws after 1765 (from the Stamp Act on) were wrong, a violation of colonial constitutional rights, but independence went too far. They were monarchists, conservative, fatalists (seeing a Patriot victory as impossible). But when the British lost, these Loyalists did not want to leave. Some had watched how the British fought the war and were struck by their arrogance, military incompetence, and failure to provide civilian government in places when they gained control (for example in New York City), or protection for supporters where they lost it. In the middle of battles, searching for forage, British and Hessian soldiers failed to distinguish between friend and foe, often as a result alienating their own supporters. Loyalist Lieutenant Colonel Stephen Kemble wrote as early as October 1776, “The Hessians destroy all the fruits of the Earth without regard to Loyalists or Rebels.” It was “no wonder” he continued that “the Country people refused to join us.”33 Finally, for some, ties with family and old friends, even if they had been on the other side during the conflict, kept them connected leading to their staying (as did Andrew Bell) or returning. At times they were from families that had been in New Jersey, or the larger region, for at least a hundred years. What were the consequences of this? William Livingston unhappily noted, “I have seen Tories members of Congress, Judges upon tribunals, Tories representatives in our Legislative councils, Tories members of our Assemblies.” For him this meant an increase in “self-interest” and diminishing of “patriotism.”34 Livingston was not happy seeing former enemies return to political and judicial positions. What, besides his discomfort/dismay, and that of other Patriots, were the results? As the more conservative members of the population, were these men more likely to be Federalists in the 1790s? In 1808, as political divisions again increased, this time in the shadow of the Napoleonic Wars, John Quincy Adams

180 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

of Massachusetts switched political parties and became a Jeffersonian Republican. He stated that the Federalists were “the political descendants in direct line from the tories of our Revolutionary war and hold most of their speculative opinions.”35 Some former Loyalists in New Jersey clearly were Federalists—for example Andrew Bell, as well as John Rutherford and James Parker discussed in chapter 4 on “straddlers.” If they all had left would this have been a much more radical country? Probably. It must of course also be noted that conservative Patriots became members of the Federalist party in the 1790s. Examples include William Paterson, Elias Boudinot, Richard Stockton’s son the “Duke,” and others. And nationally George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, John Adams (John Quincy Adams’s father), along with many others. Livingston was also probably not happy with the Reverend Abraham Beach staying and Reverend Thomas Bradbury Chandler returning. Both were important for the transformation of the Anglican Church into the Episcopalian Church of the United States. Livingston had fought against the church and appointment of a bishop in both colonial New York and New Jersey. It was Beach who in 1783 wrote to Anglican ministers elsewhere about planning for the future. The group met first in New York City in 1783, then twice in New Jersey in 1784, followed by a meeting in Philadelphia the following year. Disagreements between northern high church (favoring hierarchy) and southern low church members (where there was a long history of local control) delayed agreement until 1789 when the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States was formally established. The first bishop in New Jersey (1815) was the Reverend John Croes (1762–1832), who served at Christ Church in New Brunswick—where Beach had been minister. Born in Elizabethtown, as a young man during the war he had served in the Patriot military.36 However, what was established after the war was not the state church Chandler had wanted. In reality it fit better with the separation of church and state that had always existed in New Jersey and would become true of the United States as a whole after the war when those states still having established churches, funded by taxes, moved toward ending that connection. When the Revolution started nine colonies had established churches. New Jersey was never one of those. The last state to disestablish was Massachusetts in 1833.

8

Epilogue In April  1783, with the arrival of the news of the preliminary Peace Treaty, William Peartree Smith (1723–1801), a fellow member of the First Presbyterian Church of Elizabethtown, wrote to Elias Boudinot, president of the Confederation Congress then meeting in Princeton. He started with, “The Glorious work is completed!” noting it was, he hoped, an “auspicious day,” and he ended his letter with “a little laughing mocking Picture”: The Conscious Tory hangs his humbled Head, Or sneaks to Scotia with his axe and spade; Reluctant—there to weep ’mid Fogs or Frost— His Friends, his Family, his Country lost. There toils and sweats beneath inclement skies, Envies the once damn’d Rebel—curses George and dies.

But then, having heard of what today is called the “Newburgh Conspiracy” and apparently before sending the original letter, he added more, including “a melancholy Reflection or two amid this general Burst of Joy.” He wondered what would come next, worried about the problems the country faced, and hoped that God would not “suffer us now to sink.” Smith had graduated from Yale in 1742, studied law but did not practice, then moved to Elizabethtown in 1757. He was a friend of William Livingston and had been an early and consistent supporter of the Revolution, serving as mayor of the town, and member of the state Council of Safety, at considerable personal financial cost. His daughter, Catherine Smith (1750–1797), had married Elisha Boudinot (1749–1819), brother of Elias. 181

182 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

FIG. 32 William Peartree Smith (1723–1801). A lawyer, Presbyterian, Patriot, and Elizabethtown resident, Smith rejoiced when the war ended with an American victory. But he was also concerned about what would happen in an uncertain future. (Source: Painting by John Wollaston (ca. 1710–ca. 1767), Princeton University Art Museum.)

In 1783, after all that had transpired during the war, he had some thoughtful questions about the future.

Facing the Future Smith’s concerns were shared by the Reverend John Witherspoon and Governor William Livingston, along with others. That same April the minister gave a

Epilogue • 183

sermon of thanksgiving in which he warned his listeners that they should not “poison” the blessing of liberty, rather, “Let us endeavour to bring into, and keep credit and reputation, everything that might serve to give vigour to an equal republican constitution. Let us cherish a love of piety, order, industry, and frugality. . . . Let us in public measures put honour upon modesty and self denial, which is the index of real merit.” A month later, Livingston echoed these sentiments in an address to the legislature, stating, “Let us now shew ourselves worthy of the inestimable blessing of Freedom by an inflexible attachment to public Faith and national honour. Let us establish our Character as a Sovereign State on the only durable Basis of impartial and universal Justice.”1 The three hoped that victory would be worth the costs, and that their new country along with the values they held important would survive. Robert Middlekauf in The Glorious Cause, his overview of the Revolution, concluded that “in a sense no one in America escaped the war, even in those areas remote from it.”2 New Jersey was never remote. Its historians have said for generations, and this book has emphasized, that the Revolution in New Jersey was a bitter civil war, that it was expensive in terms of lives and property. The costs were personal for these men, enormous for the state. There was destruction all around them. Many towns and villages had sustained substantial damage, including Bordentown, Bound Brook, Connecticut Farms, Elizabethtown, Hackensack, Kingston, Morristown, Newark, New Brunswick, Perth Amboy, Princeton, Springfield, Toms River, Trenton, Westfield, Woodbridge, and many more places. When the British occupied New Brunswick, “Homes were rifled, stores plundered, houses dismantled, and barns, dwellings, and churches sacked or burnt to the ground.” Five churches, 142 buildings, were damaged or destroyed. Of 150 families some two-thirds suffered losses. Between 10,000 and 14,000 soldiers had been quartered in the town and across the Raritan river in Piscataway. Princeton was described as “a deserted village; you would think it had been desolated with the plague and an earthquake, as well as with the calamities of war.” When the British marched through Westfield on June 16, 1777, they plundered ninety-two households and did over £8,700 worth of damage. After the Continental army left Morristown, the area was “as bare as if it had been swept by a plague of locusts.” Trees were cut down and used to build huts for the soldiers, along with fires for warmth and cooking.3 During the war livestock, wagons, and crops were consumed by both sides. Mills, shipyards, salt works, and taverns were destroyed. There was also the psychological damage of battered women, crippled men. Soldiers often went unpaid, while inflation ate up the estates of even wealthy men, such as William Livingston. Paper money was worthless. Formerly rich Loyalists were now expatriated. Both sides used the few large buildings that were available, including churches, as hospitals, barracks, and even stables. The British deliberately targeted Presbyterian churches, and in the Raritan valley also Dutch ones, desecrating and even burning them throughout the state (for example, in Mt. Holly, Elizabethtown,

184 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

and Millstone). At the Anglican Church in Elizabethtown gravestones became fireplaces or tables for Patriot soldiers, the organ’s pipes were melted down and made into bullets, but the building survived.4 The British burned the courthouses in Bergen, Elizabethtown, and Somerset. The war was costly for the colleges that became Princeton and Rutgers. In the Battle of Princeton, January 1777, Nassau Hall, which housed the College of New Jersey, was damaged by cannons and gunfire. It was also used as a hospital and barracks (by both sides during the war). Queens College disbanded during periods of the war, its tiny faculty serving either in the Patriot military or the government; students were set adrift. Also, schoolhouses (academies) in Elizabethtown and Newark were destroyed during raids. The material damage was enormous. No one then or recently has figured out how to add it all up. The total number of soldiers, sailors, civilians, Patriots, Loyalists, Native Americans, British, and Hessians who lost their lives in the fighting, and from the diseases spread by armies repeatedly marching through the area, has also never been fully calculated. It is known, though, that in proportion to the population, except for the Civil War, more Americans died in the Revolution than in any other war. With the largest number of battles and skirmishes New Jersey has the unfortunate distinction of having had the largest number of fatalities.5 In some places, such as Hunterdon, Middlesex, Monmouth, and Morris Counties, alarms constantly required militia to repeatedly turn out, leaving families and farms behind.6 Fighting, being wounded, and particularly being imprisoned, severely affected the lives of many who survived. Internment in the British prison ships in New York Harbor, as well as in the Provost and sugarhouses on shore, took many lives or ruined the health of still more. Edwin  G. Burrows in his recent study concluded that it is possible that more died in the prison ships (from disease, starvation, crowding, and mistreatment) than from battlefield wounds.7 The war produced refugees, most obviously the irreconcilable Loyalist exiles, but also at times Patriots fleeing approaching British and Hessian forces (and from New York and Philadelphia when they controlled them). It left widows and orphans and displaced the elderly. During and at the end of the war, Loyalists left, but so too did bright young Patriots, whose homes were destroyed or damaged during the war (for example, Francis Hopkinson, Jonathan Dickinson Sergeant, and Reverend Theodore Romeyn). They left New Jersey for places with less destruction. The war was also costly for the British. They lost their American colonies, soldiers, sailors, ships, and military equipment, and they increased the national debt. Some, but not all, politicians, generals, and admirals lost their reputations. All in a war that a recent historian has argued was unwinnable. They underestimated the opposition, the impact of distance, as well as the enormous resources needed to fight the war in America, and then even more needed when it expanded into a global conflict. Unwillingness to grant independence prolonged the war.8

Epilogue • 185

Americans seldom think about the economic costs of this war. One estimate is that it took the new United States twenty-five years or longer to recover, to replace all that had been destroyed. There are estimates that the “performance of the economy . . . fell by 46 percent” (in the Great Depression it was 42 percent); incomes declined by 30 percent. Paradoxically, a war that began with a dispute over taxes (and their constitutionality) led to increases in taxes used to pay off the debts it left behind. In New Jersey, where the war lasted for eight long years, the economic impact was particularly severe.9 This war was costly, no matter what side was taken. New Jersey collected approximately two thousand reports of damages but had no money to pay any of the claims. Insurance was rare and did not cover the cases. Ironically, some of the Loyalists were more fortunate. The British Claims Commission spent several years in England and Canada sorting through approximately three thousand reports of losses, rejected many claims, and then paid a fraction of the rest. But they did reimburse some Loyalists for their losses. Those who moved to Britain’s North American provinces received free land and for several years supplies to help them get settled. Poet William Kirby (1817–1906) later wrote the following of the Loyalists: Not dropping like poor fugitives they came In exodus to our Canadian wilds, But full of heart and hope, with heads erect And fearless eyes, victorious in defeat.10

This was clearly a different perspective than that of William Peartree Smith. But it should also be noted that despite the optimism of Kirby’s poem, numerous Loyalists returned to the United States. They fled harsh winters and had difficulties adjusting. William Peartree Smith, Reverend John Witherspoon, and Governor William Livingston were aware that going forward there were many reasons for concern. Exiled Loyalists like Bernardus LaGrange and returnee Thomas Bradbury Chandler were convinced that the new nation would fail. But those who remained or returned to New Jersey picked up the pieces and worked on solutions. The years immediately after the war were difficult with combined plagues of economic recession, decreased trade, and a faltering Confederation government. The Constitution of 1787 was ratified quickly and unanimously in New Jersey, and then New Jersey was the first state to ratify the Bill of Rights. While these did not solve all the problems, the 1790s ushered in significant improvements.

Moving On When the war ended it left a contradictory legacy of hatred and forgiveness. Philip Freneau hated the British for the rest of his life. The Patriot Dutch in the

186 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

Hackensack Valley did not forgive their Loyalist neighbors. Yet, within five years of the bitter war, laws against Loyalists were repealed or unenforced, and some were reintegrated into political participation.11 Benjamin Franklin did not forgive his son, William Franklin, but his daughter, Sally Franklin Bache, did forgive her half-brother. William Livingston complained when he could not control members of his own family during the war, including his wife and daughters, who sent supplies (illegally) to other family members behind British lines in New York City. Several even visited there. While he criticized others (such as Walter Rutherford) for their divided loyalties, clearly sometimes, even in the middle of this very divisive war, for certain members of the Livingston clan, family ties counted more than patriotism. Forgiveness afterward was then easier. For surviving members of the Franklin, Livingston, Van Dike, and other families discussed in this book, fraternal relationships were stronger than political divisions. Loyalists, straddlers, Quakers, those who refused an oath of loyalty to the Patriot government during the war, all were disenfranchised. But afterward, despite some efforts to suppress voting and their election to office, they did return as political participants and officeholders. Examples include James Parker (mayor of Perth Amboy), John Covenhoven, and Samuel Tucker (elected to the legislature), along with others. A 1796 map of Newark indicates that sometimes this could be true for neighbors as well as family. It shows the people and businesses on Broad Street in the center of town. This included the Reverend Urzal Ogden, former Loyalist Anglican now Episcopalian minister, and the Reverend Alexander MacWhorter, Patriot Presbyterian minister, and their two churches. Also present were Loyalist doctor Urzal Johnson and Patriot physician William Burnet. There is G. (George?) Pintard “Gentleman” and Elisha Boudinot a judge. The well to do and prominent (the “Ogden Mansion”), along with two farmers, two shoemakers, two weavers, a hatter and cabinet maker, also a saddlery and three taverns. The rebuilt Newark Academy, offices of the Sentinel of Freedom (Centinal of Freedom) and Newark Gazette, and the home of General John N. Cummings, a bank president (there were no newspapers or banks in New Jersey before 1776).12 Loyalists and Patriots, old businesses and new, all living together thirteen years after the war ended.

Losses and Gains The Revolution did not end slavery or racism, make women politically or economically equal, or provide economic security for all. Nearly 250 years later we have yet to do all of that. The rhetoric and experience of the Revolution, the emphasis on equality and Blacks who fought, helped make abolition increasingly an issue. Presbyterian minister the Reverend Jacob Green and Quaker legislator

FIG. 33 Map of Newark in 1790s. This map shows the churches, homes, and businesses on

Broad Street in Newark shortly after the Revolution. Living together were a mix of former Patriots and Loyalists. (Source: Original in Barber & Howe, Historical Collections of State of New Jersey (1845), 193. Downloaded from Flickr.)

188 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

John Cooper both pointed out the contradictions between fighting for freedom and holding slaves. In early 1776 when Green wrote Observations on the Reconciliation of Great Britain and the Colonies, advocating independence, in a footnote he passionately commented, “What a dreadful absurdity! What a shocking consideration, that people who are so strenuously contending for liberty, should at the same time encourage and promote slavery! And being thus guilty, expose themselves to the judgements of Heaven! May slavery cease in America!” In a 1778 Fast Day Sermon, during prayers for peace, he warned the new nation “shall have inward convulsions, contentions, oppressions, and even calamities, so that our liberty will be uncomfortable, till we wash our hands from the guilt of negro slavery.” His and Cooper’s arguments for abolition had little traction during the war, but support increased afterward.13 The fact that under the Constitution of 1776 women and Blacks with property could, and some did, vote, was a precedent that was referenced for over a century after their right to do so was removed by law in 1807. As capitalism emerged in the nineteenth century, economic well-being became more widespread, but it has never included everyone. The number of Native Americans in New Jersey declined after the war, but their descendants are still with us today. By modern criteria, the American Revolution was a real revolution with a rupture from the past (a new country), regime change (no king), alterations in the structure of government and society. All are signifiers for those who study the global history of revolution. There was rupture, for no longer were there British citizens, but now American ones. Political and economic laws no longer came from king and Parliament. During the Revolution and Confederation period the states had the final say; the Constitution added a stronger national government, but it was a long time before it was really powerful. There was regime change, with monarchy replaced by a republic. The structure of New Jersey’s government resembled that of the past. There was still a governor, a twohouse legislature, and a court system carried over from the past (that lasted until 1947). But governors were selected by the legislature, and members of the Council (upper house) were elected, neither any longer imposed from afar. The members of the legislature elected by those worth £50 property (all property not just land) were often new men who had gained experience and prominence during the war, replacing Loyalist leaders who had become exiles or lost wealth and status (the Skinners are an example). The Revolution itself opened opportunities for participation—in committees of correspondence, Sons of Liberty, the Continental Association, the local militia, state forces, the Continental army, Provincial Congresses, and then the new legislature.14 Except for the military most of these positions now required election. In 1790 the two alternating colonial capitols of Burlington and Perth Amboy were replaced by one located in Trenton. Presbyterians were more important, Quakers and Anglicans (now Episcopalians) less so, while the number of Methodists increased.

Epilogue • 189

FIG. 34 The Horse America, throwing his master (Westminster: Published by William White, 1779). This cartoon of August 1, 1779, illustrates what would be one of the consequences of the Revolution. The rider on the horse is George III, and he is being thrown off by “America.” After 1783 there was a republic and no king. (Source: https://www.loc.gov /item97514739/ British Cartoon Prints Collection, Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division. LC-USZC4-5286.)

The Revolution also left a legacy worth remembering today. New Jersey’s Constitution of 1776 included three provisions the authors thought so significant that every member of the legislature had to sign an oath protecting them until the state’s second constitution was written in 1844. Religious freedom that included both toleration and no state church, regular (annual) elections, and trial by jury. Before the Revolution, proposals for a colonial Anglican bishop were viewed as a threat to the colony’s history of religious freedom that went back to its seventeenth-century founding and to the growing diversity of its churches. There was no set timing for elections, and legislatures could be called into session or dismissed by the royal governor. In 1776 Francis Hopkinson noted that under the then new constitution “Elections are now of greater Importance, if possible, than here to fore” because “the Source of all Government originates with the People at large.” Finally, Parliamentary laws passed between 1765 and 1776 included provisions for courts without juries and moving trials to Britain. The 1774 Administration of Justice Act was referred to as the “Murder Act” by those convinced it meant British officers who killed someone would never be convicted in overseas courts.15 Now jury trials held locally are considered fundamental rights by most Americans. Before everyone today drowns in the dark

190 • Taking Sides in Revolutionary New Jersey

historiographical interpretations that are current, we need to remember some of the positive developments that came out of the war. Hopefully, this book will convince readers that Americans during the Revolution did not all agree; thus the present age is not the only one with bitter divisions. The different sides taken in that war came from those with genuine beliefs, while those who shifted had a variety of reasons including because they were caught in a difficult time and bad place. There were adamant Patriots, divided Quakers, straddlers, and opportunists, irreconcilable Loyalists, as well as those who returned. They were “caught in the cross-fire”—sometimes literally as were the Anglican Reverend Abraham Beach, Presbyterian doctor Moses Bloomfield, Quaker Ann Cooper Whitall, and Swedish minister Nicolas Collin. Others were more figuratively caught, including for example the pacifist Quakers, and the former British officer Walter Rutherford. We also need to remember that then and now war creates refugees and prisoners, who are often treated badly, and need help. That disease has appeared before, and wreaked havoc with lives. That history is not just about white men. Women, Blacks, Native Americans participated too—and on various sides. Finally, that although history is really complicated, trying to understand it can give us a better perspective on the present.

Acknowledgments This book started about twenty years ago with Richard Stockton and my curiosity about his experience. Over time it has expanded as an effort to understand others caught in the same difficult period. Work was completed in the middle of the pandemic, which restricted additional research while providing time to write. In the process numerous debts have been acquired. Naming everyone is difficult, so I apologize for anyone inadvertently left out. I thank my family, especially Jon/Jonathan Lurie (for reading more drafts than anyone should), my son David B. Lurie for suggestions, and my grandson Zachery J. Silbergleit for his endless questions, as well as my friends Jonathan Mercantini and Richard Veit for suggestions and reading the draft manuscript. I also thank the staffs of Rutgers University Special Collections (especially David Kuzma, Fernanda Perrone, Christine Lutz, Tara Maharjan, Helena van Rossum, and Al King), and Alexander Library reference specialist Tom Glynn. I am grateful to the staff of the New Jersey State Archives (especially Joseph Klett, Veronica Calder, Vivian Thiele, Joanne Nestor, and Ellen Callahan), and to members of the New Jersey Historical Commission (staff Sara Cureton, Niquole Primiani, Shawn Cristafulli, Greer Luce, Madeleine Rosenberg, and commissioners Margaret Westfield, Kate Marcopul, Michael Zuckerman, and Kevin Tremble) for joining my excitement in new discoveries. Thanks also to the staff at Morristown National Historic Park (Thomas Ross, Anne DeGraaf, Thomas Winslow, and Eric Olson), and at Crossroads of the American Revolution as well as the many who answered my questions or just listened to me talk about the topic. This includes Deborah Mercer, Jerry Frost, Graham Hodges, Jean Sonderlund, Sheila Skemp, Mark Nonestied, and his staff at the Middlesex County Division of Historic Sites and History Services. In addition: Dermot Quinn, Larry Greene, Richard Paterson, Beth Allen, John Chambers, Paul Clemens, Paul Israel, Joanne Rajoppi, Richard Hunter, and many more. I am grateful to all 191

192 • Acknowledgments

who helped me obtain images, their institutions are noted in the captions. Questions asked at presentations given at Lebanon College, Rutgers University, and Seton Hall University were useful. The Seton Hall University History Symposium on “Revolutions” (February 2020), provided a provocative discussion on just what makes a revolution. Two Seton Hall University students’ insights helped me, the veteran who defended Richard Stockton, and the graduate student who did the math on the Loyalists faster than I could, putting their story in a different perspective. At Rutgers University Press Peter Mickulas and staff, as well as the staff at Westchester Publishing Services. I am especially grateful for the careful reading given by copyeditor Diane Ersepke. Finally, I would like to thank those who preceded me, and whose spade work was invaluable, particularly Larry Gerlach and Carl Prince.

Notes Preface 1 Maxine N. Lurie, “Letter/s from a New Jersey Loyalist: Bernardus [Barnardus]

2

3 4

5

LaGrange, England to the Reverend Abraham Beach, America, 1783–1792,” New Jersey Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal 5, no. 1 (Winter 2019): 284–298. Elm Farm today is the location of Rutgers Preparatory School, located in Somerset, between Eastern Avenue and the Raritan River. Anne Van Winkle’s parents are buried in a small cemetery on the grounds. Beach did not note if they were slave or free, but most in Middlesex and Monmouth Counties at that time were probably slaves. Amandus Johnson, trans., The Journal and Biography of Nicholas Collin, 1746–1831 (Philadelphia: The New Jersey Society of Pennsylvania, 1936), 244–245. Emphasis added. Nearly 250 years later H. W. Brands has titled a book Our First Civil War: Patriots and Loyalists in the American Revolution (New York: Doubleday, 2021). Mary Beth Norton, 1774: The Long Year of Revolution (New York: Vintage, 2020) argues that the revolution began earlier than recognized and with people divided as today.

Chapter 1

Overview of the Revolution in New Jersey

1 Larry R. Gerlach, Prologue to Independence: New Jersey in the Coming of the

American Revolution (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1976), 36.

2 Constitution of 1776, in Julian P. Boyd, Fundamental Laws and Constitutions of

New Jersey, 1664–1964 (Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand, 1964), 156; The painting story in Don Oberdorfer, Princeton University: The First 250 Years (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1995), 28–29; and Mark A. Noll, Princeton and the Republic, 1768–1822: The Search for a Christian Enlightenment in the Era of Samuel Stanhope Smith (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989), 84. William Livingston to Walter Rutherfurd, Morristown, 15 January 1778, Carl Prince et al., eds., Papers of William Livingston, vol. 2 (Trenton, NJ: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1980), 185–188.

193

194 • Notes to Pages 2–3

3 Leonard Lundin, Cockpit of the Revolution: The War for Independence in New Jersey

(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1940), 450.

4 Eric Hinderaker, Boston’s Massacre (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard

5

6

7

8

9

University Press, 2017); Serena Zabin, The Boston Massacre: A Family History (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2020); Benjamin Carp, The Defiance of the Patriots: The Boston Tea Party and the Making of America (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2010); Ruma Chopra, Unnatural Rebellion: Loyalists in New York City during the Revolution (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2011); Judith Van Buskirk, Generous Enemies: Patriots and Loyalists in Revolutionary New York (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002). On Lee see Dominick R. Mazzagetti, Charles Lee: Self before Country (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2013); and Philip Papas, Renegade of the Revolution: The Life of General Charles Lee (New York: New York University Press, 2014). On Bergen see Todd W. Braisted, Bergen County Voices from the American Revolution: Soldiers and Residents in Their Own Words (Charleston, SC: History Press, 2012); on Monmouth see Michael Adelberg, The American Revolution in Monmouth County: The Theatre of Spoil and Destruction (Charleston, SC: History Press, 2010); on Hunterdon see Larry Kidder, A People Harassed and Exhausted: The Story of a New Jersey Militia Regiment in the American Revolution (Scotts Valley, CA: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2013). On battles see Mark Lender and Gary Stone, Fatal Sunday: George Washington, the Monmouth Campaign, and the Politics of Battle (Norman: Oklahoma University Press, 2016); Joseph Bilby and Katherine Bilby Jenkins, Monmouth Courthouse: The Battle That Made the American Army (Yardley, PA: Westholme, 2010); and Edward G. Lengal, The Battles of Connecticut Farms and Spring field (Yardley, PA: Westholme, 2020). Lundin, Cockpit of the Revolution, 452; Adrian C. Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley: The Jersey Dutch and the Neutral Ground (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1962, rev. 1980), 15, 108, 215; Gerlach, Prologue to Independence, 358; James Gigantino II, ed., The American Revolution in New Jersey: Where the Battlefield Meets the Homefront (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2015). Michael A. McDonnell and David Waldstreicher, “Revolution in the Quarterly? A Historiographical Analysis,” William & Mary Quarterly 3rd ser., 74, no. 4 (2017): 633–666; Jane Kamensky, “Process Story: Two Cheers for the Nation: An American Revolution for the Revolting United States,” Reviews in American History 47, no. 3 (September 2019): 308–318. In addition to Colin G. Calloway, The American Revolution in Indian Country: Crisis and Diversity in Native American Communities (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1995), see also Patrick Griffin, American Leviathan: Empire, Nation, and Revolutionary Frontier (New York: Hill & Wang, 2007). On New Jersey see Gregory Evans Dowd, “Declarations of Dependence: War and Inequality in Revolutionary New Jersey, 1776–1815,” New Jersey History, vol. 103 (1985): 47–67; Lorraine E. Williams, “Caught in the Middle: New-Jersey’s Indians and the American Revolution,” in New Jersey in the American Revolution, ed. Barbara Mitnick (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2005), 101–112; Richard S. Grimes, The Western Delaware Indian Nation, 1730–1795: Warriors and Diplomats (Bethlehem, PA: Lehigh University Press, 2017). Robert G. Parkinson, “Janus Revolution,” William & Mary Quarterly 3rd ser., 76, no. 3 (July 2019): 547.

Notes to Pages 3–7 • 195 10 While the recent dark view of the revolution is striking, it can be found earlier and

11 12 13

14

15

16

17 18

19

20 21

22

more extensively. For an example see Bernard Bailyn, The Barbarous Years: The Conflict of Civilizations 1600–1675 (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2012). Gregg L. Frazer, God against the Revolution: The Loyalist Clergy’s Case against the American Revolution (Lawrence: Kansas University Press, 2018), 209. Harry Ward, Between the Lines: Banditti of the American Revolution (Westport, CT: Praeger, 2002). On New Jersey as a nasty civil war see especially Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley; Michael Adelberg’s writings on Monmouth County; Ward, Between the Lines; David J. Fowler, “Egregious Villains, Wood Rangers, and London Traders: The Pine Robber Phenomenon in New Jersey During the Revolutionary War” (PhD diss., Rutgers University, 1987); and Holger Hoock, Scars of Independence: America’s Violent Birth (New York: Crown, 2017). For a brief discussion of New Jersey and the Revolution see John Fea, “Revolution and Confederation Period: New Jersey at the Crossroads,” in New Jersey: A History of the Garden State, ed. Maxine N. Lurie and Richard Veit (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2012), 64–89; for a brief discussion of the war in New Jersey see Mark E. Lender, “The ‘Cockpit’ Reconsidered: Revolutionary New Jersey as a Military Theater,” in New Jersey in the American Revolution, ed. Barbara Mitnick (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2005), 45–60. William L. Kidder, “A Disproportionate Burden on the Willing,” in The American Revolution in New Jersey: Where the Battlefield Meets the Homefront, ed. James Gigantino II (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2015), 13–31. Estimates in Howard Peckham ed., The Toll of Independence: Engagements and Battle Casualties of the American Revolution (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974), 130–134, tables; David C. Munn, Battles and Skirmishes of the American Revolution in New Jersey (Trenton, NJ: Bureau of Geology and Topography, NJDEP, 1976). Alfred Hoyt Bill, New Jersey and the Revolutionary War (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1964), vii. Figures for New Jersey towns and villages are estimated differently in various sources; for examples see Gerlach, Prologue to Independence, 13; Lundin, Cockpit of the Revolution, 11–16. For cities elsewhere see Carl Bridenbaugh, Cities in Revolt: Urban Life in America 1743–1776 (1964; reprint New York: Capricorn Books, 1955), 216–217. For the importance of urban places see Benjamin L. Carp, Rebels Rising: Cities and the American Revolution (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007). Thomas Purvis, Proprietors, Patronage, and Paper Money (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1986); Michael Batinski, The New Jersey Assembly, 1738–1775 (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1987); Brendan McConville, Those Daring Disturbers of the Peace: The Struggle for Property and Power in Early New Jersey (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1999). Instructions from the Queen, 1702, Boyd, Fundamental Laws, 131; Gerlach, Prologue to Independence, 23. For an overview see Thomas J. Archdeacon, New Jersey Society in the Revolutionary Era (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975). On produce see Peter O. Wacker and Paul G. E. Clemens, Land Use in Early New Jersey: A Historical Geography (Newark: New Jersey Historical Society, 1995). David S. Cohen, “How Dutch Were the Dutch of New Netherland?” New York History, 62 (1981): 43–60; Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley, 9.

196 • Notes to Pages 8–15

23 For slave statistics see Giles R. Wright, Afro-Americans in New Jersey: A Short

History (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1988), 21, 80–86.

24 On Indians see Williams, “Caught in the Middle: New Jersey’s Indians and the

25

26

27

28

29

30

31 32

33 34 35 36

American Revolution,” in Mitnick, 101–112; Calloway, The American Revolution in Indian Country, 36–42; and Grimes, The Western Delaware Indian Nation, 163–225. Mark Edward Lender and James Kirby Martin, eds., Citizen Soldier: The Revolutionary War Journal of Joseph Bloomfield (Original 1982, Yardley, PA: Westhome, 2018 reprint), 12, 81–86, 90–92, 94–99. Hinderaker, Boston’s Massacre. On barracks built in New Jersey, and the provisions made for troops there see John Gilbert McCurdy, Quarters: Accommodation of the British Army and the Coming of the American Revolution (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2019), 39–43, 57–63, 82–83, 110–112, 123–124, 168–174, 210, 226–227. Farley Grubb, “Colonial New Jersey’s Provincial Fiscal Structure, 1704–1775: Spending Obligations, Revenue Sources, and Tax Burdens during Peace and War,” Financial History Review 23, no. 2 (August 2016): 133–163. Resolutions in Larry R. Gerlach, New Jersey in the American Revolution, 1763–1783: A Documentary History (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975), 22–24; Gerlach, Prologue to Independence, 113–141; Edmund S. Morgan and Helen M. Morgan, The Stamp Act Crisis: Prologue to Revolution (New York: Collier Books, 1963). Maxine N. Lurie, “The First in a Long History of New Jersey Protests against Taxes,” New Jersey Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal 1, no.1 (Winter 2018): 179–200. Gerlach, Prologue to Independence, 134; Joseph S. Tiedemann, “A Tumultuous People: The Rage for Liberty and the Ambiance of Violence in the Middle Colonies in the Years Preceding the American Revolution,” Pennsylvania History 77, no. 4 (2010): 397–398. Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 32–59. Carp, Defiance of the Patriots; John Fea, The Way to Improvement Leads Home: Philip Vickers Fithian and the Rural Enlightenment in Early America (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008), 143–149; Lender and Martin, Citizen Soldier, 4–5; Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 100–102; Gerlach, Prologue to Independence, 198–201; Linda K. Kerber, Women of the Republic: Intellect & Ideology in Revolutionary America (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1980), 39. In some accounts it is Susan Livingston who disposes of the tea. Philip Papas, That Ever Loyal Island: Staten Island and the American Revolution (New York: New York University Press, 2007), 30. Thomas Paine, Common Sense, https://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding -documents/primary-source-documents/common-sense/. Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 209–212. It was not submitted to the voters for ratification. Poem quoted in Mary Beth Norton, 1774: The Long Year of Revolution (New York: Vintage, 2020), 299. For other examples see Richard F. Hixson, Isaac Collins: A Quaker Printer in 18th Century America (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1968), 56–57, quote 4; Robert G. Parkinson, The Common Cause: Creating Race and Nation in the American Revolution (Durham: University North Carolina Press, 2016), 53; Maxine N. Lurie, “Letter/s From a New Jersey Loyalist: Bernardus [Barnardus] LaGrange, England to the Rev. Abraham Beach, America, 1783–1792,” New Jersey Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal 5, no. 1 (2019): 284–298n10; Thomas

Notes to Pages 15–19 • 197

37

38

39

40

41

42

43 44

45

46 47

Randolph Tarred and Feathered, December 6, 1775, Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 169; Lender and Martin, Citizen Soldier, 9, 43. Gerlach, Prologue to Independence, 53–61, 120, 398–400n. 53, 54, 65; Jeffrey M. Dorwart, Cape May County, New Jersey: The Making of an American Resort Community (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1992), 47–50. 1776 Constitution, Boyd, Fundamental Laws, 155–163; Maxine N. Lurie, “New Jersey: Radical or Conservative in the Crisis Summer of 1776?” in New Jersey in the American Revolution, ed. Barbara Mitnick (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2005), 31–43. Edward R. Turner, “Women’s Suffrage in New Jersey, 1790–1807,” Smith College Studies in History 1, no. 4 (July 1916): 165–187; Rosemarie Zagarri, Revolutionary Backlash: Women and Politics in the Early American Republic (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007); Jan E. Lewis, “Rethinking Women’s Suffrage in New Jersey, 1776–1807,” Rutgers Law Review 63, no. 3 (2011): 1016–1035; Linda Garbaye, “Women’s Voting Rights in 18th-Century New Jersey. Electoral Reforms: Opacity and Transparency,” Revue de la Societe d”etudes anglo-americaines des XVII et XVIII Siecles [Anglo-American Social Studies Review of the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries], 69 (2012): 230–245. An Appeal to the Militia, in Hamilton Schuyler, “Revolution,” in A History of Trenton, 1679–1929, vol. 1, ed. Edwin Robert Walker et al. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1929), 129. Cogil quote in David J. Fowler, “These Were Troublesome Times Indeed,” in New Jersey in the American Revolution, ed. Barbara Mitnick (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2005), 22; Barton quote in Pauline Maier, American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1997), 156, 273n4; Letter to Adams, in Lurie, “New Jersey: Radical,” 36; Peter Charles Hoffer and Williamjames Hull Hoffer, The Clamor of Lawyers: The American Revolution and Crisis in the Legal Profession (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2018), vii. For a brief discussion of divisions in New Jersey see Lundin, Cockpit of the Revolution, 70–108. In practice it was more complex than the Adams estimate of thirds. See discussion in chapter 6. Carl E. Prince, William Livingston: New Jersey’s First Governor (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975), 11. James H. Levitt, New Jersey’s Revolutionary Economy (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975); James H. Levitt, For Want of Trade: Shipping and the New Jersey Ports, 1680–1783 (Newark: New Jersey Historical Society, 1981). On the iron industry see James M. Ransom, The Vanishing Ironworks of the Ramapos: The Story of the Forges, Furnaces, and Mines of the New Jersey—New York Border Areas (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1966). There is a vast literature on the ideology of the Revolution. The best known are the works of Bernard Bailyn, Ideological Origins of the American Revolution (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University, 1967); Gordon Wood, The Creation of the American Republic, 1776–1787 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1969). For the division among lawyers see Hoffer and Hoffer, The Clamor of Lawyers. Lender and Martin, Citizen Soldier, 38. Howard sign in Linda Grant DePauw, New Jersey Women and War (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1976), 11–12; Joan Hoff, Law, Gender, and Injustice: A Legal History of U.S. Women (New York: New York University Press, 1991), 90–94; Kerber, Women of the Republic, 115–136.

198 • Notes to Pages 19–24

48 Emphasizing the impact is Alan Heimart, Religion and the American Mind, from

49

50

51

52 53

54 55 56 57

the Great Awakening to the Revolution (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1966); Kevin Phillips, 1775: A Good Year for Revolution (New York: Penguin, 2012), 67–90. Seeing none is Jon Butler, Awash in a Sea of Faith: Christianizing the American People (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990) and Katherine Carte Engel, “Connecting Protestants in Britain’s Eighteenth-Century Atlantic Empire,” William & Mary Quarterly 3rd ser., 75 no. 1 (2018): 64–70; Katherine Carte Engel, “Revisiting the Bishop Controversy,” in The American Revolution Reborn, ed. Patrick Spero and Michael Zuckerman (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2016), 132–149. On the general importance of religion and the Revolution in New Jersey see Wallace Jamison, Religion in New Jersey: A Brief History (Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand, 1965), chap. 3; Edward J. Cody, Religious Issues in Revolutionary New Jersey (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975). J. David Hoeveler, Creating the American Mind: Intellect and Politics in the Colonial Colleges (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2002), 101–127, 195–201, and the chapters on the Revolution 241–345; Mark Boonshoft, “The Great Awakening, Presbyterian Education, and the Mobilization of Power in the Revolutionary Mid-Atlantic,” in The American Revolution Reborn, ed. Patrick Spero and Michael Zuckerman (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2016). For figures used here see James McLachlan et al., eds., Princetonians: A Biographical Dictionary, vol. 3 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1981), xxxiv. See also Noll, Princeton and the Republic, 32–33, 50, 81; Sheldon S. Cohen and Larry R. Gerlach, “Princeton in the Coming of the American Revolution,” New Jersey History, vol. 92 (1974): 69–92; Joseph S. Tiedemann, “Presbyterianism and the American Revolution in the Middle Colonies,” Church History 74, no. 2 (2005): 306–344. Richard P. McCormick, Rutgers: A Bicentennial History (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1966), 1–35, quote 15; John W. Beardslee III, “The Dutch Reformed Church and the American Revolution,” Journal of Presbyterian History, 5 (1976): 165–181; “John Taylor,” in Princetonians, vol. 2 (1980), 111–114. Nancy Rhoden, Revolutionary Anglicanism: The Colonial Church of England Clergy during the American Revolution (New York: New York University Press, 1999), 1, 89; James Bell, A War of Religion: Dissenters, Anglicans, and the American Revolution (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), 202–203; Jamison, Religion in New Jersey, 63, 65. Alfred Lyon Cross, The Anglican Episcopate and the American Colonies (Hamden, CT: Archon Books, 1902, 1964 reprint), 159. On Paterson, see Gerlach, Prologue to Independence, 251; Witherspoon quotes in S. Scott Roher, Jacob Green’s Revolution: Radical Religion and Reform in a Revolutionary Age (University Park, PA: Penn State University Press, 2014), 141. See also Mark A. Noll, “Observations on Reconciliation of Politics and Religion in New Jersey: The Case of Jacob Green” Journal of Presbyterian History, 54 (1976): 217–237; Gideon Mailer, John Witherspoon’s American Revolution (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2017), 259–268. Bill, New Jersey and the Revolutionary War, 26. Bill, 1; Lundin, Cockpit of the Revolution, 192. For a general source on the war see Bill, New Jersey and the Revolutionary War. On retreat across New Jersey and the Battle of Trenton, see William M. Dwyer, The Day Is Ours! An Inside View of the Battles of Trenton and Princeton, November 1776–January 1777 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1998); Arthur S. Lefkowitz, The Long Retreat: The Calamitous American Defense of New Jersey 1776

Notes to Pages 25–29 • 199

58

59

60

61 62

63

64

65

66

67 68

69

70

(Metuchen, NJ: The Upland Press, 1998); David Hackett Fischer, Washington’s Crossing (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004). John W. Jackson, The Pennsylvania Navy 1775–1781: The Defense of the Delaware (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1974); Bilby and Jenkins, Monmouth Courthouse; Lender and Stone, Fatal Sunday. Quote from Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley, 277; Todd W. Braisted, Grand Forage 1778: The Battle around New York City (Yardley, PA: Westholme, 2016). Matthew H. Ward, “Joshua Huddy: The Scourge of New Jersey Loyalists,” Journal of the American Revolution (October 2018) https://allthingsliberty.com/2018/10 /joshua-huddy-the-scourge-of-new-jersey-loyalists/; Katherine Mayo, General Washington’s Dilemma (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1938); Hoock, Scars of Independence, 335–357; William Fowler Jr., American Crisis: George Washington and the Dangerous Two Years after Yorktown, 1781–1783 (New York: Walker, 2011), 62–67, 72–79; for the last incident see Lender, “The ‘Cockpit’ Reconsidered,” 45. Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 317–319. Jared C, Lobdell, “Six Generals Gather Forage: The Engagement at Quibbletown, 1777,” New Jersey History, vol. 102 (1984), 1–2; Jared C. Lobdell, “Two Forgotten Battles of the Revolutionary War,” New Jersey History, vol. 85 (1967): 225–234; Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley, repeated incidents; Braisted, Grand Forage 1778; Lender, “The ‘Cockpit’ Reconsidered,” 52–53. Gregory F. Walsh, “‘Most Boundless Avarice’: Illegal Trade in Revolutionary Essex,” in American Revolution in New Jersey, ed. James Gigantino II (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2015), 32–53. Documented in letters in the papers of William Livingston and of George Washington. Emphasis on violence in Hoock, Scars of Independence; Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley; Adelberg, The American Revolution in Monmouth County. Sergeant Thomas McCarty quoted in Robert Middlekauf, The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution, 1763–1789, rev. ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), 512–513; Hancock House website, state.nj.us/dep/parksandforests/historic /hancockhouse/hancockhouse-index.htm; Hoock, Scars of Independence, 243–268. Major Henry Lee Jr. to George Washington, August 22, 1779, Founders Online, National Archives https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/03-22-02 -0174. Williams, “Caught in the Middle,” 108–110; Calloway, The American Revolution in Indian Country, 36–42. Graham Russell Hodges, Slavery and Freedom in the Rural North: African Americans in Monmouth County, New Jersey, 1665–1865 (Madison, WI: Madison House, 1997), 104, 112n29. MacWhorter, March 12, 1777, in Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 296–298; Gerlach dismisses this as “hearsay” and “propaganda.” See also Hoock, Scars of Independence, 164–177; and Sharon Block, Rape and Sexual Power in Early America (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2006), 230–237, 244–245, who calls it a “propaganda tool.” In contrast DePauw, New Jersey Women and War, 18–20, and Mary Beth Norton, Liberty’s Daughters: The Revolutionary Experience of American Women, 1750–1800 (Boston: Little, Brown, 1980), 202–203, emphasize that the charges were documented. Lender, “The ‘Cockpit’ Reconsidered,” 58; Jackson, The Pennsylvania Navy 1775–1781; Franklin W. Kemp, A Nest of Rebel Pirates , 2nd ed. (Basto, NJ: Basto

200 • Notes to Pages 29–35

Citizens Committee, 1993); Michael S. Adelberg, “‘Long in the Hand and Altogether Fruitless’; The Pennsylvania Salt Works and Salt-Making on the New Jersey Shore during the American Revolution,” Pennsylvania History: A Journal of Mid-Atlantic Studies 80, no. 2 (Spring 2013): 215–242; Eleanor H. McConnell, “Blasting, Scrapping, and Scavenging: Iron and Salt Production in Revolutionary New Jersey,” in American Revolution in New Jersey: Where the Battlefield Meets the Homefront, ed. James Gigantino II (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2015), 61–70. 71 Mark E. Lender, New Jersey’s Revolutionary Soldiers (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975); Middlekauf, The Glorious Cause, 502–517; John Shy, A People Numerous and Armed: Reflections on the Military Struggle for American Independence (New York: Oxford University Press, 1976), 163–179; Charles Patrick Neimeyer, America Goes to War: A Social History of the Continental Army (New York: New York University Press, 1996), 18–20, 26. 72 Christopher Sparshott, “Loyalist Refugee Camp: A Reinterpretation of Occupied New York, 1776–83,” in The Consequences of Loyalism: Essays in Honor of Robert Calhoun, ed. Rebecca Brannon and Joseph S. Moore (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 2019): 61–74; Matthew P. Dziennik, “New York’s Refugees and Political Authority in Revolutionary America,” William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 77, no. 1 (January 2020): 65–96.

Chapter 2

Patriots Part I: The Adamant and Determined

1 Harry Ellison, Church of the Founding Fathers of New Jersey. A History: The First

2

3 4 5

6

Presbyterian Church of Elizabeth, New Jersey 1664–1964 (Cornish, ME: Carbrook Press, 1964), 59b–59c; Joseph F. Tuttle, Revolutionary Forefathers of Morris County (Address for the Centennial, July 4, 1876), 6–7, he was quoting a recent issue of the New York Observer. Ellison, Church of the Founding Fathers, 61a–61c. The author of the poem is David Chandler, no known relation to the Reverend Thomas Bradbury Chandler (discussed in chapter 7). The names of the eighty-three men appear on pages 57–58. James McLachlan et al., eds., Princetonians: A Biographical Dictionary, vol. 3 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1981), xxxiv. For a discussion of their reasons see Dennis P. Ryan, New Jersey’s Whigs (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1976). Michael A. McDonnell, “War Stories,” in The American Revolution Reborn, ed. Patrick Spero and Michael Zuckerman (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2016), 13–14, 321–322n10; Howard Peckham, ed., The Toll of Independence: Engagements and Battle Casualties of the American Revolution (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974), 130–134. The book counts 239 incidents in New Jersey, but this is way below more recent estimates of nearly 600 in the state. The book provides estimates using Continental army reports that did not include state and local militia forces. For an estimate of the number from the state who served see Larry R. Gerlach, New Jersey in the American Revolution, 1763–1783: A Documentary History (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975), 325. Ruth Bogin, Abraham Clark and the Quest for Equality in the Revolutionary Era, 1774–1794 (Rutherford, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1982); Ruth Bogin, “New Jersey’s True Policy: The Radical Republican Vision of Abraham Clark,” William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 35, no.1 (1978): 100–109; Ruth Bogin, “To Oppose Tyranny in All Its Strides’: Abraham Clark, Guardian of Individual

Notes to Pages 36–40 • 201

7

8

9

10

11

12

Liberties,” in New Jersey in the American Revolution, vol. 3, ed. William C. Wright (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1976), 57–72; Ann Clark Hart, “The Family of Abraham Clark, Signer of the Declaration of Independence,” in Genealogies of New Jersey Families from the Genealogical Magazine of New Jersey, vol. 1 (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1996), 145–153; David Whitney, ed., Founders of Freedom in America: Lives of the Men Who Signed the Declaration of Independence . . . (Chicago: J.G. Ferguson, 1964), 68–69. For the letters to Dayton see Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 218–219, 223–224. Cleon S. Hammond, John Hart: the Biography of a Signer of the Declaration of Independence (Newfane, VT: Pioneer Press, 1977), 83–90 on debts left at his death; Whitney, ed., Founders of Freedom, 109–110. Information on the relation to Stockton courtesy of Joseph Klett. James D. Magee, Bordentown 1682–1932: An Illustrated Story of a Colonial Town (Bordentown, NJ: Bordentown Register, 1932), quotes 39, 43. Hopkinson’s house still exists. For the complete “Battle of the Kegs” poem see Samuel Kettle, ed., Specimens of American Poetry (1829) at https://www.bartleby.com/96/64.html. On Hopkinson see Colin Wells, Poetry Wars: Verse and Politics in the American Revolution and Early Republic (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2018), 76–78; George Hastings, The Life and Works of Francis Hopkinson (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1926); Maxine N. Lurie and Marc Mappen, eds., Encyclopedia of New Jersey (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2004), 386–387; Whitney, ed., Founders of Freedom, 120–122. On his in-laws see Lincoln Diamant, ed., Elizabeth Ellet’s Revolutionary Women in the War for American Independence (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1848, 1998 reprint). “On the Independence Controversy,” Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents , 198–200; see also “Thoughts on American Liberty” of 1774, Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents , 85–87; Varnum Lansing Collins, President Witherspoon (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1925); Ashbel Green, The Life of the Revd John Witherspoon , ed. Henry L. Savage (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1973 reprint), Carlton quote, 2; Mark A. Noll, Princeton and the Republic, 1768–1822: The Search for a Christian Enlightenment in the Era of Samuel Stanhope Smith (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989), 28–56; Gideon Mailer, John Witherspoon’s American Revolution (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2017); Jeffrey Morrison, John Witherspoon and the Founding of the American Republic (Notre Dame, IN: Notre Dame University Press, 2005); L. Gordon Tait, The Works of the Rev. John Witherspoon, vol. 1 (Bristol, UK: Thoemmes, 2003, original edition 1802), introduction; Maxine N. Lurie, “New Jersey Intellectuals and the United States Constitution,” Journal of Rutgers Universities Libraries vol. 50, no.2 (December 1987): 82–86. “John Dickinson Sergeant,” Princetonians, vol. 1 (1976), 407–411; Letter to Adams in Bogin, Abraham Clark and the Quest for Equality, 40; William M. Dwyer, The Day Is Ours! An Inside View of the Battles of Trenton and Princeton, November 1776–January 1777 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1998), 89–90; Varnum Lansing Collins, A Brief Narrative of the Ravages of the British and Hessians at Princeton in 1776–77 (Princeton, NJ: University Library, 1906), 4–5. Philip Skene, a British officer captured first in Canada and then at Saratoga, was exchanged twice. See T. Cole Jones, Captives of Liberty: Prisoners of War and the Politics of Vengeance in the American Revolution (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2020), 60, 98; Mark Edward Lender and James Kirby Martin, eds., Citizen

202 • Notes to Pages 41–45

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

Soldier: The Revolutionary War Journal of Joseph Bloomfield (Yardley, PA: Westhome, 1982, 2018 reprint), 113. Adrian C. Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley: The Jersey Dutch and the Neutral Ground (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1962, reprinted 1980), 25, 119–120, quotes 143, 213; Donald Whisenhunt, ed., Delegate from New Jersey: The Journal of John Fell (Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press, 1973), introduction, 6–12, on son, 164. The journal covers Fell’s service in Congress. Carl Prince et al., eds., The Papers of William Livingston, 5 vols. (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1979–1988); Dennis Ryan, “William Livingston,” in The Governors of New Jersey: Biographical Essays (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2014), 101–106; David A. Bernstein, “William Livingston: The Role of the Executive in New Jersey’s Revolutionary War,” in New Jersey in the American Revolution vol. 2, ed., William C. Wright (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1973), 12–29; Carl E. Prince, William Livingston: New Jersey’s First Governor (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975); James J. Gigantino II, William Livingston’s American Revolution (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2018); Kean University NEH Project, Williamlivingstonsworld, https://www.kean.edu/history/make-history-kean/neh-william-livingstons -world; Lurie, “New Jersey Intellectuals,” 66–71; Richard P. McCormick, “The First Election of Governor William Livingston,” Proceedings New Jersey Historical Society, 92 (April 1974): 92–99. Today his house, Liberty Hall, serves as a museum and is located on the campus of Kean University. Carl Prince ed. et al, Papers of William Livingston (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1980), vol. 2, 41–47, 137–140, and on his pseudonymous writings, Prince, Papers of William Livingston, vol. 2, 3–6. The poem was printed August 26, 1777, the essay December 17, 1777. The poem has been credited to Hopkinson, but the editors of the Livingston papers, and Wells, Poetry Wars, 59–64, argue it was Livingston as does Robert G. Parkinson, The Common Cause: Creating Race and Nation in the American Revolution (Chapel Hill: University North Carolina Press, 2016), 343–344. For Burgoyne’s Proclamation see https://teachingamericanhistory .org/library/document/general-burgoynes-proclamation/; for the complete 171-line poem and Livingston’s comments after the surrender at Saratoga see https://www .americanrevolution.org/war_songs/warsongs46.php. New Jersey Gazette, August 27, 1780, signed “Z.” Thanks to Kean University student Nicole Skalendo who found the complete poem. A few lines are quoted in Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley, 273–275, who mistakenly thought it was by Livingston’s daughter because the version he saw was signed “A Lady.” February 5, 1778, letter to Laurens, Papers of Livingston, vol. 2, 211. See also Theodore Thayer, Colonial and Revolutionary Morris County (Morristown, NJ: Morris County Heritage Commission, 1975), 196; Carl Prince, “William Livingston,” in From Oratory to Scholarship: Two Centuries of Talks on the American Revolution Given Before the Society of the Cincinnati in the State of New Jersey, comp. Denis B. Woodfield et al. (NJ: Society of the Cincinnati in the State of New Jersey, 2008; distributed by the University of Virginia Press), 339–344. “William Livingston,” in Franklin Bowditch Dexter, Biographical Sketches of the Graduates of Yale College with Annals of the College History: October, 1701—May, 1745 (New York: Henry Holt, 1885), 682–686; quotes 684. Jones’s History was written while he was an exile in England but was not published until 1879. On Livingston and his relatives during the war in New York or New Jersey, and their wanting to visit one another, see Judith L. Van Buskirk, Generous Enemies:

Notes to Pages 45–50 • 203

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

Patriots and Loyalists in Revolutionary New York (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002), 66–67, 171; Gigantino, William Livingston’s American Revolution, 112–113, 122–124, 163, 174. “Alexander MacWhorter,” Princetonians, vol. 1 (1976), 194–199; William H. Shaw, comp., History of Essex and Hudson Counties in New Jersey (Philadelphia: Everts & Peck, 1884) vol.1, 52. Quote in Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 296–298; and Frank Urquhart et al., A History of the City of Newark, New Jersey, vol. 1 (New York: Lewis Historical Publishing, 1913), 307–309. “James Caldwell,” Princetonians, vol. 1 (1976), 259–262. Information on the children from Norman F. Baydon, Reverend James Caldwell: Patriot, 1734–1781 (Caldwell, NJ: Caldwell Bicentennial Committee, 1976), 70–71; and courtesy of Joanne Rajoppi. “Nathaniel Scudder,” Princetonians, vol. 1 (1976), 46–47 quotes the Elegy; Larry R. Gerlach, Prologue to Revolution: New Jersey in the Coming of the Revolution (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1976), 448n21; Letter to the legislature sent from Freehold, July 13, 1778, is in Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 412–414, quote 413. Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley, 84–86, 122, 230–231, image of the “Inventory of his goods taken by the British,” 85; Adrian C. Leiby, The United Churches of Hackensack and Schraalenburgh (River Edge, NJ Bergen County Historical Society, 1976), 147–228, quotes 165, 217; “Theodore Romeyn,” Princetonians, vol. 1 (1976), 521–525; Inventory of Goods of Reverend Dirck Romelyn Taken by the British Army, November 1776. Completed December 5, 1782, and signed by witnesses February 27, 1783. Legislature, Inventories of Damages by the British and Americans in New Jersey, 1776–1782. New Jersey State Archives, Department of State. Lurie and Mappen, eds., Encyclopedia of New Jersey, 283; Leonard Lundin, Cockpit of the Revolution: The War For Independence in New Jersey (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1940), 289–292; David J. Fowler, “David Forman,” Dictionary of American Biography, vol. 8 (1999), 257–258; David J. Fowler, “‘Loyalty Is Now Bleeding in New Jersey’: Motivations and Mentalities of the Disaffected,” in The Other Loyalists: Ordinary People, Royalism, and the Revolution in the Middle Colonies, 1763–1787, ed. Joseph S. Tiedemann et al. (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2009), 57–61; Michael S. Adelberg, The American Revolution in Monmouth County: The Theater of Spoil and Destruction (Charleston, SC: History Press, 2010), 105–109, 121–143, quotes at 124, 130, 142. “Francis Barber,” Princetonians, vol. 1 (1976), 608–611; Carl van Doran, Mutiny in January (Clifton, NJ: J.A.M. Kelley, 1943, reprint 1973), 220; Mark Boonshoft, “The Great Awakening, Presbyterian Education, and the Mobilization of Power in the Revolutionary Mid-Atlantic,” in The American Revolution Reborn, ed. Patrick Spero and Michael Zuckerman (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2016), 168. For Anderson, Murray, and Mulford see the Revolutionary Neighbors website, accessed April 6, 2020, https://revolutionarynj.org/rev-neighbors/ephraim -anderson/; https://revolutionarynj.org/rev-neighbors/joseph-murray/; https:// revolutionarynj.org/rev-neighbors/lieutenant-david-mulford/; George F. Scheer, ed., Joseph Plumb Martin, Private Yankee Doodle: Being a Narrative of Some of the Adventures, Dangers and Sufferings of a Revolutionary Soldier (New York: Eastern Acorn Press, 1962), 95. Fred B. Rogers, “The Old Barracks at Trenton: Military Hospital of the Revolution,” Journal of the Medical Society of New Jersey 55, no. 4 (1958): 177; David Cowen,

204 • Notes to Pages 51–55

28

29

30 31

32 33

34

35 36

37

Medicine in Revolutionary New Jersey (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1976), 22, 25. Exhibits at Morristown National Historic Park; Elizabeth A. Fenn, Pox Americana: The Great Smallpox Epidemic of 1775–82 (New York: Hill and Wang, 2001); S. Scott Rohrer, Jacob Green’s Revolution: Radical Religion and Reform in a Revolutionary Age (University Park, PA: Penn State University Press, 2014), 177–178; Thayer, Colonial and Revolutionary Morris County, 171; Tuttle, Revolutionary Forefathers, 5–6; “Elizabeth King Horton,” Revolutionary Neighbors website, accessed March 23, 2020, https://revolutionarynj.org/rev-neighbors/elizabeth-king-horton/. John Fea, The Way of Improvement Leads Home: Philip Vickers Fithian and he Rural Enlightenment in Early America (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008), 126–128, 204; “Philip Vickers Fithian,” Princetonians, vol. 2 (1980), 216–221. “Theodosia Ford” Revolutionary Neighbors website, accessed March 23, 2020. https://revolutionarynj.org/rev-neighbors/theodosia-ford/ Frederick W. Bogert, Bergen County New Jersey History and Heritage: The Revolutionary Years, 1776–1783 (Bergen County Freeholders, 1983), 35; Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley, 156. Ellison, Church of the Founding Fathers, 77–78. Alan Gilbert, Black Patriots and Loyalists: Fighting for Emancipation in the War for Independence (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012); Clement Alexander Price, Freedom Not So Far Distant: A Documentary History of Afro-Americans in New Jersey (Newark: New Jersey Historical Society, 1980), 52, 64–67, 72–73; Giles Wright, “Moving Towards Breaking the Chains: Black New Jerseyans and the American Revolution,” in New Jersey in the American Revolution, ed. Barbara Mitnick (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2005), 122–123, 129–130; Graham Russell Gao Hodges, Black New Jersey: 1664 to the Present (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2019), 34–44; Philip S. Foner, Blacks in the American Revolution (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1975), 59; Charles Patrick Neimeyer, American Goes to War: A Social History of the Continental Army (New York: New York University Press, 1996), 72–88; Eric Olson, “African-American Soldiers in Jockey Hollow, 1779–1780,” Park Ranger/Historian’s manuscript, Morristown National History Park, Morristown, NJ, 2021. Black Loyalists are discussed in chapter 6. On Cromwell, see Lurie and Mappen, eds., Encyclopedia of New Jersey, 184; Stives in Elaine Buck and Beverly Mills, If These Stones Could Talk: African American Presence in the Hopewell Valley, Sourland Mountain, and Surrounding Regions of New Jersey (Lambertville, NJ: Wild River Books, 2018), 42–55, 135–141, 160–161, 172–180. This book has lists of others who served, but little specific information on them except for Stives. For another example see Kenneth E. Marshal, “Tough, Rugged, and Evolving Masculinity: Harry Compton, an Enslaved and Free Black Man in Eighteenth-and Early Nineteenth-Century New Jersey,” New Jersey Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal 7, no. 1 (Winter 2021): 107–144. On Caesar, see Ethel M. Washington, Union County Black Americans (Charleston, SC: Arcadia, 2004), 17. Claim to the Loyalist Claims Commission, Bernardus LaGrange Papers, 1721–1797, AC 1453, Folder A (3), Special Collections and University Archives, Rutgers University Libraries; William Schleicher and Susan Winter, “Patriot and Slave: The Samuel Sutphen Story,” New Jersey Heritage Magazine 1, no. 1(Winter 2002): 30–43. Laws quoted by Peter O. Wacker, “New Jersey’s Revolutionary War Damage Claims,” in From Oratory to Scholarship: Two Centuries of Talks on the American

Notes to Pages 56–61 • 205

38 39

40

41

Revolution Given Before the Society of the Cincinnati in the State of New Jersey, comp. Denis B. Woodfield et al. (NJ: Society of the Cincinnati in the State of New Jersey, 2008; distributed by the University of Virginia Press), 348; amounts in Richard P. McCormick, Experiment in Independence: New Jersey in the Critical Period 1781–1789 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1950), 20–21; map of places and tables of crops destroyed in Peter O. Wacker and Paul G.E. Clemens, Land Use in Early New Jersey: A Historical Geography (Newark: New Jersey Historical Society, 1995), 141, 143, 178, 181, 197. Jeffery M. Dorwart, Cape May County, New Jersey (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1993), 58; Inventories of Damages by the British and Americans in New Jersey, 1776–1782 SLE00003, New Jersey State Archives. Romeyn claim; Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley, 68; on Bonnel see Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 322–324. Hamilton Schuyler, “Trenton and Trentonians in the Revolutionary Era,” in Edwin Robert Walker et al, History of Trenton, vol. 1 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1929), 135; for Fitch see also Wikipedia. Petty’s Run Archaeological Site: Iron, Steel, Cotton and Paper in Historic Trenton (Trenton, NJ: Hunter Research, 2014) 1:4–8, 4–60, 2:B-5. Original document Benjamin Yard’s 1782 Claims for Damages by Patriots. RG Legislature, Inventories of Damages by the British and Americans in New Jersey, 1776–1782, Box 4—Damages done by the Americans, no. 34 bound volume, New Jersey State Archives. See also Joseph R. Klett, “Benjamin Yard,” Genealogical Magazine of New Jersey, 64 (1989): 137–143, quote 140. Richard Haskett, “William Paterson, Attorney General of New Jersey: Public Office and Private Profit in the American Revolution,” William & Mary Quarterly 3rd ser., 7 no. 1 (1950): 26–38; Michael S. Adelberg, “Destitute of Almost Everything to Support Life: The Acquisition and Loss of Wealth in Revolutionary Monmouth County, New Jersey,” in The American Revolution in New Jersey: Where the Battlefield Meets the Homefront, ed. James J. Gigantino II (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2015), 109–130. The lack of before and after tax records makes comparison of the impact of the Revolution on wealth difficult.

Chapter 3

Patriots Part II: In the Maelstrom

1 There is no book-length biography of Stockton, but there are several brief summa-

ries. See especially “Richard Stockton,” Princetonians: A Biographical Dictionary, ed. James McLachlan et al., vol. 1 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976), 7–11; Larry R. Gerlach, Richard Stockton: Rebel with a Cause (Galloway Township, Stockton State College, 1977); Alfred H. Bill, A House Called Morven: Its Role in American History, rev. ed. Constance M. Greiff (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1978), 18–51; Constance M. Greiff and Wanda S. Gunning, Morven: Memory, Myth & Reality (Princeton, NJ: Historic Morven, 2004), 26–77. 2 For examples see Frederick Bernays Wiener, “The Signer Who Recanted,” American Heritage 26, no. 4 (June 1975): 22–25; David Hackett Fischer, Washington’s Crossing (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 163–165. Edwin G. Burrows, Forgotten Patriots: The Untold Story of American Prisoners during the Revolutionary War (New York: Basic Books, 2008), 113–116, puzzles over Stockton and what happened, but he concludes he was a Patriot. 3 The college started in Elizabethtown, moved to Newark, and then Princeton. Before it moved there was competition over its location between New Brunswick and

206 • Notes to Pages 61–64

4 5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

Princeton. Typescript Minutes of the Proceedings of the Trustees of the College of New Jersey, vol. 1, Mudd Library, Princeton University, show Richard Stockton and a brother later paying the remainder of their father’s pledge of money. On house see especially Greiff and Gunning, Morven. Rush to Jonathan Bayard Smith, April 30, 1767, in Lyman H. Butterfield, Letters of Benjamin Rush, vol. 1 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1951), 40; see also Greiff and Gunning, Morven, 31–32. Stockton was very active on the bench, often the only judge besides Chief Justice Frederick Smyth sitting on cases. New Jersey Supreme Court Minute Book, Burlington 1775–, New Jersey State Archives. Anton Hermann Chroust, “The Lawyers of New Jersey and the Stamp Act,” American Journal of Legal History, 6 (1962): 286–297; Larry R. Gerlach, Prologue to Independence: New Jersey in the Coming of the Revolution (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1976), 115–145; Edward Q. Keasby, The Courts and Lawyers of New Jersey 1661–1912, vol. 1 (New York: Lewis Historical Pub. Co., 1912), 367–384. For Stockton’s letter to Robert Ogden and the New Jersey resolutions see Larry Gerlach, New Jersey in the American Revolution, 1763–1783: A Documentary History (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975), 12–13, 22–24; Gerlach, Prologue to Independence, 106–107, 417n95. Stockton knew his was an extreme view and asked Ogden to “burn” the letter. Gerlach, Richard Stockton, 3, argues that Stockton took “what was for the time an extremely radical position” and might have been the author of the radical article opposing the Stamp Act that appeared in the New Jersey Gazette. Gerlach, Prologue to Independence, 95, 135; Minutes of the Proceedings of the Trustees, 113, 146. He also (unsuccessfully) asked for a grant of 60,000 acres in New York to support the institution. Stockton to Samuel Smith, March 21, 1767, in Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 34–38; Richard Stockton, “An Expedient for the Settlement of the American Disputes,” The Historical Magazine, ser. 2, vol. 4 (1868): 228–229, which includes the letter of December 12, 1774; Sheldon S. Cohen, “Richard Stockton’s Advice on the Resolution of Anglo-American Tensions,” Princeton University Library Chronicle, 43 (1981/82): 171–183; Gerlach, Prologue to Independence, 230–231, 456n7. Richard P. McCormick, “The First Election of Governor William Livingston,” Proceedings New Jersey Historical Society, 65 (1947): 92–100; Carl E. Prince et al., eds., The Papers of William Livingston, vol. 1 (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1979), 131–133. Worthington C. Ford, et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress (Washington, DC: U.S.G.P.O., 1906), vol.5:543, 562, 640, 741, 747, 808, 812, 822, 828. September 7th letter was to a committee investigating the “miscarriages in Canada.” Stockton served on committees dealing with the military, but there is no evidence that he held a military commission. They sent a report back to Congress on November 10; Journals Continental Congress, vol. 6 (1906), 958. Stockton to Clark, from Saratoga, Oct. 28, 1776, Ac. 582b Stockton Papers, Box 8 folder 17, Historical Society of Princeton. Journals Continental Congress, vol. 6, 975–976. Stockton’s signature is not on this committee’s report because his capture intervened. New Jersey Legislature Letter to Congress, Journals Continental Congress, vol. 6, 1002. Also appointed were Jonathan Dickinson Sergeant, John Witherspoon, Abraham Clark, and Jonathan Elmer.

Notes to Pages 65–68 • 207 14 Joan Hoff, Law, Gender and Injustice: A Legal History of U.S. Women (New York:

15

16 17 18

19

20

21

22 23

24

New York University, 1991), 80, 92. But “at least” Massachusetts, New York, and Connecticut did require women to take oaths. July 14, 1776, September 19, 1776, November 30, 1776, Proclamations, Early American Imprints #43035, 14782, 14783; Ruma Chopra, Unnatural Rebellion: Loyalists in New York City during the Revolution (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2011), 237n25, 26, 27, 34; Ira D. Gruber, The Howe Brothers and the American Revolution (New York: W.W. Norton, 1972), 146–150, 194–195, 197–198, 205, 238, 243–244. On oaths and the Revolution see Michael Kammen, “The American Revolution as a Crise de Conscience: The Case of New York,” in Society and Freedom: The Coming of the Revolution in Virginia, Massachusetts, and New York, ed. Richard Jellison (New York: W.W. Norton, 1976), 125–189. Hamilton Schuyler, “Revolution,” in A History of Trenton, 1679–1929, vol. 1 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1929), 116. John E. O’Connor, William Paterson, Lawyer and Statesman, 1745–1806 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1979), 91. On Philadelphia see Anne M. Ousterhout, A State Divided: Opposition in Pennsylvania to the American Revolution (New York: Greenwood, 1987), 170; Anne M. Ousterhout, The Most Learned Women in America: The Life of Elizabeth Graeme Fergusson (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2004), 199, 217; on Charleston see Carl P. Borick, Relieve Us of This Burden: American Prisoners of War in the Revolutionary South, 1780–1782 (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2012); Donald F. Johnson, “Ambiguous Allegiances: Urban Loyalists during the American Revolution,” Journal of American History 104, no. 3 (December 2017): 614, 618–622. George S. Mott Doremus, The American Revolution and Morris County: Place and Influence of the County in the great American Struggle (Rockaway, NJ: Record Print, 1926), 22; Theodore Thayer, Colonial and Revolutionary Morris County (Morristown, NJ: Morris County Heritage Commission, 1975), 159. George Washington, Proclamation Concerning Persons Swearing British Allegiance, 25 January 1777 and relevant notes, accessed September 9, 2020, https:// founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/03-08-02-0160. Witherspoon’s letter is quoted in a footnote in Edmund C. Burnett, Letters of Members of the Continental Congress, vol. 2 (Washington, DC, 1923), 243n. It was included to explain the reference in a letter from Abraham Clark to John Hart. In his letter Witherspoon repeated a story that Stockton had been on his way to obtain “a protection when he was taken” (i.e., turn himself in). But Witherspoon added that Stockton denied this, and then he dismissed the tale because it had been told by an unreliable person. It is also contradicted by the later prosecution of a local Loyalist (Von Mater) for betraying Stockton and Covenhoven. Stockton was captured; he did not turn himself in. This confusing story is also quoted in Bill, A House Called Morven, 42–43. February 8, 1777, Journals Continental Congress vol.7 (1907), 243. As noted later the New Jersey legislature made similar statements about Garritse and Covenhoven. See illustration. Oath of Abjuration and Allegiance, SEDSL006, Box 1–36, Folder #66. Department of Education, New Jersey State Library, Bureau of Archives and History Series: Manuscript Collection, 1680–1970s. New Jersey State Archives, Department of State. On Walton, Heyward, Middleton, and Rutledge see David C. Whitney ed., Founders of Freedom in America: Lives of the Men Who Signed the Declaration of Independence (Chicago: J.G. Ferguson, 1964), 219–221, 113–114, 160–161, 200–202.

208 • Notes to Pages 68–76

25 Kammen, “The American Revolution,” 125, 156. Officer quoted by Christopher

26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

34

35 36 37 38

39

40

41

Sparshott, “Loyalist Refugee Camp: Reinterpretation of Occupied New York, 1776–83,” in The Consequences of Loyalism: Essays in Honor of Robert M. Calhoun, ed. Rebecca Brannon and Joseph S. Moore (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2019), 68. Susan Burgess Shenstone, So Obstinately Loyal: James Moody, 1744–1809 (Montreal, Canada: McGill-Queens University Press, 2000), 56. See chapter 5. Judith Van Buskirk, Generous Enemies: Patriots and Loyalists in Revolutionary New York (Philadelphia: University Pennsylvania Press, 2002), 78–81. Borick, Relieve Us of This Burden, 87, 89. Kammen, “The American Revolution,” 157. Borick, Relieve Us of This Burden, 94. Pauline Maier, American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1997), 153. December 18,1776, Letter to Lund Washington, quoted in Leonard Lundin, Cockpit of the Revolution: The War for Independence in New Jersey (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1940), 192. Stephen Wickes, History of Medicine in New Jersey, and of Its Medical Men, From the Settlement of the Province to A.D. 1800 (Newark, NJ: Martin R. Dennis & Company, 1879), 149–151; Mark Edward Lender and James Kirby Martin, eds., Citizen Soldier: The Revolutionary War Journal of Joseph Bloomfield (Yardley, PA: Westholme, 1982, 2018 reprint), xv, 2–4, 16, 33n72, 122–125; Carl E. Prince, “Joseph Bloomfield,” in The Governors of New Jersey (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2014), 112–115; McCormick, “The First Election,” 153. Quote on slaves in Giles R. Wright, Afro-Americans in New Jersey: A Short History (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1988), 23. Borick, Relieve Us of This Burden, xi–xii. Borick, 90–95. Richard B. Morris, The Peacemakers: The Great Powers and American Independence (New York: Harper & Row: 1965), 264–267, 376–382. Mary Silliman’s War (1994 TV film), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v =UT2 _Np7Jx0o; Joy Day Buel and Richard Buel Jr., The Way of Duty: A Woman and Her Family in Revolutionary America (New York; W.W. Norton, 1984), 145–171. A Narrative of Col. Ethan Allen’s Captivity (1779), 107, https://books.google.com /books/about/A_Narrative_of_Col_Ethan_Allen_s_Captivi.html?id =k3sDAAAAYAAJ ; Edwin P. Hoyt, The Damndest Yankees: Ethan Allen & His Clan (Brattleboro, VT: Stephen Greene Press, 1976); “Ethan Allen,” Wikipedia, accessed October 15, 2020. Burrows, Forgotten Patriots, xi, 197–199, 201–202. He notes his numbers are estimates. See also William R. Lindsey, “Treatment of American Prisoners of War during the Revolution,” Emporia State Research Studies 22, no. 1 (1973): 1–32. The numbers suggested by Howard Peckham, The Toll of Independence: Engagements and Battle Casualties of the American Revolution (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974), 132, are lower. Harry Hayden Clark, ed., Poems of Philip Freneau (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1929), 25, 31; Philip Morin Freneau, Some Account of the Capture of the Ship “Aurora” (New York: New York Times, Eye Witness Accounts, 1971); “Philip Freneau,” Princetonians, vol. 2 (1980), 149–156; Mary Weatherspoon Bowden, Philip Freneau (Boston: Twayne, 1976), 40, 62; Jacob Axelrod, Philip Freneau, Champion of

Notes to Pages 76–80 • 209

42

43

44 45 46

47

48

49 50

51 52 53

Democracy (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1967), 101–115; Burrows, Forgotten Patriots, 168–175, 310. The treatment of those held in England was better. There local sympathizers tried to help, as did Benjamin Franklin then in France. Fischer, Washington’s Crossing, 367–379; Charles H. Metzger, SJ, The Prisoner in the American Revolution (Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1962), 301; Lindsey, “Treatment of American Prisoners,” 32; Larry G. Bowman, Captive Americans: Prisoners during the American Revolution (Athens: Ohio University Press, 1976), 5, 87, 124, 133; Burrows, Forgotten Patriots, xi; Borick, Relieve Us of This Burden; T. Cole Jones, Captives of Liberty: Enemy Prisoners and the Violence of the American Revolution (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2020), 248. Denver Brunsman, “‘Executioners of Their Friends and Brethren’: Naval Impressment in the Atlantic Civil War,” in The American Revolution Reborn, ed. Patrick Spero and Michael Zuckerman (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2016), 82–104, criticizes American treatment of captured sailors. For an example from Morristown see “Tory Prisoners Describe Conditions in the Morris County Jail, Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 246–247; Thayer, Colonial and Revolutionary Morris County, 152–155, 191. Betsy Knight, “Prisoner Exchange and Parole in the American Revolution,” William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 48, no. 2 (1991): 201–222. Quote and description from Benson J. Lossing, Field-Book of the American Revolution, vol. 2 (New York: Harper, 1855), 658–661. Butterfield, Letters of Benjamin Rush, vol. 1, 123. Rush wrote his wife Julia, Stockton’s daughter, on January 31, 1777, that Congress had passed a resolution protesting her “Papa’s harsh treatment” and had threatened “to inflict similar indignities upon some tory prisoners.” Butterfield, Letters of Benjamin Rush, 133. Resolution, Journals Continental Congress, vol. 7, 12–13; Hancock to Washington, Papers of George Washington, War Series, vol. 8, 3–4. Two days later the Executive Committee wrote Washington, “We suppose the Report about Mr Stockton to be totally false but Your Excellency will no doubt know that matter perfectly;” Papers of George Washington, 21. It is not clear whether they are referring to Stockton being in a “common jail,” or that they knew he had accepted a British pardon. Burrows, Forgotten Patriots, 82–83, 115. Witherspoon later asked Benjamin Franklin’s help for a son imprisoned in England, where he was badly treated. See Sheldon S. Cohen, Yankee Sailors in British Gaols: Prisoners of War at Forton and Mill, 1777–1783 (Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1995) 196, 200. Rush to Richard Henry Lee from Princeton, January 7, 1777, Butterfield, Letters of Benjamin Rush, vol. 1, 126. Stockton to Elisa Ferguson, Stockton Family Additional Papers, Princeton University Special Collections, Box 2 folder 7 (original at the Historical Society of Pennsylvania). Votes & Proceedings of the General Assembly of New Jersey (1777) Evans #15466, 53, 54, 58, 68–69, 91–92. On Tucker and Covenhoven see also chapter 4. There is no date on the letter, but it must have been very early in 1777, before Rush saw how Congress did in fact act. Letter quoted in Greiff and Gunning, Morven, 34. General Orders of Feby 3rd 1777, Papers of Washington, War Series, vol. 8, 228; February 25, 1777, Journals Continental Congress, vol. 7, 156. The following July they paid Clymer $130 for his and Stockton’s expenses on the same trip; Journals Continental Congress, vol. 7, 587. January 30, 1777, Votes and Proceedings General Assembly of New Jersey (1777), 54. Evans #15466. Hopkinson resigned to work for the Pennsylvania government. David A. Bernstein, ed., Minutes of the Governor’s

210 • Notes to Pages 80–83

54

55

56

57 58

59 60

61

62

63 64 65

66

Privy Council 1777–1789, vol. 1 (Trenton: New Jersey State Archives, 1974), 42. Stockton was given part of this “in Lieu of a Warrant issued by Governor Franklin about 3rd June 1776, supposed to be lost.” See Supreme Court Minutes Burlington 1775–, New Jersey State Archives, 233. Stockton is listed as the lawyer for Somerset County writs at that September 1777 session, which was held in Princeton. If he wanted to continue practicing law, he had to take the oath. For cases afterward (1778, 1779) in Burlington and Middlesex Counties see Supreme Court Case Files 1704–1844, #15282, 19223, New Jersey State Archives. Minutes Council Safety, 178. The wording “called before” probably meant called into the room. In cases where individuals were required to attend, it is noted that a warrant had been issued. It is worth noting that it had met in Princeton before this. The others present were John Mehelm from Tewksbury, Hunterdon County; John Imlay from Mansfield, Burlington County; and Benjamin Manning from Piscataway, Middlesex County. Robert Troup and Aaron Burr considered studying law with Stockton, but 1780 was too late as he was seriously ill. See Bill, A House Called Morven, 47. New Jersey Supreme Court Minutes Book; David J. Fowler, “Price v. The Sloop Success,” Genealogical Magazine of New Jersey, 80, January 2005, 14–16. An example of the disruption caused by the war is in the records of the Monmouth County Court of Commons Pleas, which apparently did not meet for 14 months, from July 1776 (the old royal court) to October 1777 (new state court); Monmouth County Archives, s.2400.2 Box 49. Minutes of the Proceedings of the Trustees, vol. 1, 215; vol. 2, 217, 218, 221, 223. After the British left Princeton in early January 1777 the college was used by the Patriots first to house troops and then as a military hospital. On efforts to repair see Robert Stockton 1778 letter on damages, and Charles Pettit 1779 estimate of them, Stockton Family Additional Papers, Princeton University Special Collections, Box 2 folder 49; Journals Continental Congress, vol. 8 (1907), 558. A description of the commencement appeared in the newspapers, Archives of the State of New Jersey, 2nd ser., 3 (Trenton, 1906), 669–671. See also: Mark A. Noll, Princeton and the Republic, 1768–1822: The Search for a Christian Enlightenment in the Era of Samuel Stanhope Smith (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989), 12; “Richard Stockton Jr.,” Princetonians, vol. 2 (1981), 277–278. No copy of the speech has survived. Letters of Stockton to his wife, and Annis Boudinot Stockton to Elizabeth Graeme Ferguson November 30, 1778, December 9, 1778, July 10, 1779, Stockton Family Additional Papers, Princeton University Special Collections, Box 1 folder 5, Box 2 folders 12, 13; Rush to his wife, Butterfield, Letters of Benjamin Rush, vol. 1, 245, 248; Bill, A House Called Morven, 47–50. Emphasis added. Letter to Richard Henry Lee, Butterfield, Letters of Benjamin Rush, vol. 1, 128. Rush did not say his information was from Stockton, but it probably was. “John Beatty,” Princetonians, vol. 2 (1980), 3–8; Wikipedia, accessed August 8, 2020. From George Washington to Elisha Boudinot, March 29, 1777, Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/03-09 -02-0011. Elias Boudinot, Journal or Historical Recollections of American Events during the Revolutionary War (Philadelphia: F. Bourguin, 1894), 90–100, on his trip into New York City; Burrows, Forgotten Patriots, 84–87, 120–132, 177; Bowman, Captive

Notes to Pages 83–89 • 211

67

68

69

70 71

Americans, 68–77; Donald W. Whisenhunt, Elias Boudinot (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1976). Lyman H. Butterfield, “Morven: A Colonial Outpost of Sensibility. With Some Hitherto Unpublished Poems by Annis Boudinot Stockton,” Princeton University Library Chronicle 6, no. 1 (1944–1945): 1–16; Carla Mulford, “Political Poetics: Annis Boudinot Stockton and Middle Atlantic Women’s Culture,” New Jersey History, 111 (1993): 66–110; Carla Mulford, ed., Only for the Eye of a Friend: The Poems of Annis Boudinot Stockton (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1995); Martha J. King, “‘A Lady of New Jersey’: Annis Boudinot Stockton: Patriot Poet in an Age of Revolution,” in Women in the American Revolution: Gender, Politics, the Domestic World, ed. Barbara B. Oberg (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2019), 103–127. Her name appears on a list of New Jersey women collecting money to aid soldiers in the Continental army, newspaper from July 4, 1780 in Archives State of New Jersey 2nd ser., vol. 4 (Trenton, NJ, 1914), 486–489. Bill, A House Called Morven, 53. Also earlier, after Yorktown, she wrote, “If we woman [sic] cannot fight for our beloved Country, we can pray for it. . . .” Annis Boudinot Stockton to Elias Boudinot, October 23, 1781, Stockton Family Additional Papers, Princeton University Special Collections, Box 1 folder 9. Samuel Smith, Sermon on the Death of the Hon. Richard Stockton (Trenton, NJ: Isaac Collins, 1781), Rutgers University Special Collections; Mulford, Only for the Eye, 99. After 1781, on the anniversary of his death, she wrote poems to honor him. New Jersey Gazette, March 14, 1781 in Archives State of New Jersey, 2nd ser., vol. 5 (Trenton, 1917), 203–204. Gerlach, Prologue to Independence, 487n62; George W. Corner, ed., The Autobiography of Benjamin Rush (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1948), 147. Usually when this is quoted (e.g., Bill, A House Called Morven, 37, and Fischer, Washington’s Crossing, 163–164) the words after “timid” are left out.

Chapter 4

Straddlers, Trimmers, and Opportunists

1 John E. O’Connor, William Paterson, Lawyer and Statesman, 1745–1806 (New

Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1979), 101.

2 Donald F. Johnson, “Ambiguous Allegiances: Urban Loyalties during the American

3

4 5

6

Revolution,” Journal of American History, 104 (December 2017): 610–631; Michael Adelberg, “The Loyalism of Edward and George Taylor,” New Jersey History 123, no. 1–2 (Spring/Summer 2005): 3–37. Larry R. Gerlach ed., New Jersey in the American Revolution, 1763–1783: A Documentary History (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975), 364–365; Rebecca Yamin, Rediscovering Raritan Landing: An Adventure in New Jersey Archeology (Report prepared for the New Jersey Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration, 2011), 64–65. At that time, there were two James Parkers in New Jersey. The other was a printer who died in 1770. William Livingston to Walter Rutherfurd, Morristown, 15 January 1778, Carl Prince et al. eds., Papers of William Livingston, vol. 2 (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1980), 185–188. Bopeep is described by the editors as “a game of concealment, sudden advances, and frightened withdrawal,” 187n3. Charles Wolcott Parker, “Shipley: The Country Seat of a Jersey Loyalist,” New Jersey Historical Society Proceedings, 16 (1931): 117–138, quotes 129.

212 • Notes to Pages 90–97

7 “John Rutherford,” Princetonians: A Biographical Dictionary, ed. James McLachlan

8

9

10

11

12

13 14

15

16 17

et al., vol. 3 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1981), 107–112; letter to the legislator, Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 265–267; Maxine N. Lurie and Joanne R. Walroth, eds., The Minutes of the Board of Proprietors of the Eastern Division of New Jersey from 1764 to 1794, vol. 4 (Newark: New Jersey Historical Society, 1985), xl–xli, 258–260, 279n11, 483. David Hackett Fischer, Paul Revere’s Ride (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994), 96, 386, 387; John Alden, General Gage in America (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1948), 247, 249, 250, argues against her doing that, and comments on the Kemble family. Vincent Flanagan and Gerald Kurland, “Stephen Kemble, New Jersey Loyalist,” New Jersey History, 90 (1972): 5–26; Thomas Winslow, Morristown National Historic Park; Edward Alfred Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey: Their Memorials, Petitions, Claims etc. from English Records (Boston: Gregg Press, 1927, reprint 1972), 118–119; Theodore Thayer, Colonial and Revolutionary Morris County (Morristown, NJ: Morris County Cultural and Heritage Commission, 1975), 195–196. Richard Waldron, “‘A True Servant of the Lord’: Nils Collin, the Church of Sweden, and the American Revolution in Gloucester County,” New Jersey History 126, no. 1 (2011): 96–103; Amandus Johnson, trans., The Journal and Biography of Nicholas Collin, 1746–1831 (Philadelphia: The New Jersey Society of Pennsylvania, 1936) includes a biography in the introduction, quotes from 243–246. Johnson, 249, 250–251; David J. Fowler, “‘Loyalty Is Now Bleeding in New Jersey’: Motivations and Mentalities of the Disaffected,” in The Other Loyalists: Ordinary People, Royalism, and the Revolution in the Middle Colonies, 1763–1787, ed. Joseph S. Tiedemann et al. (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2009), 56, 72n54. The Middlesex County Division of Historic Sites and History Services, which administers the Lowe House Museum, has accumulated a treasure trove of material on the Lowe family culled from a wide variety of sources in New York, New Jersey, and the British National Archives. I am indebted to Mark Nonestied and his staff, who shared with me sixty-three scans of what they have collected. These included copies of letters (to the British Claims Commission and others), wills, newspaper notices, plus Nicholas Low’s report as estate executor. The name Cornelius appears in multiple generations of the family and among cousins, making identification sometimes difficult. Washington’s letter of August 16, 1776, to the New Jersey legislature is quoted in Charles H. Metzger, S.J., Prisoners in the American Revolution (Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1962), 6, 24n22. On Isaac Low see also Robert Ernst, “Isaac Low and the American Revolution,” New York History 74, no. 2 (April 1993), 133–157; Julie Miller, “Petition of a Revolutionary War Loyalist [Isaac Low],” July 2017, blog.loc.gov/loc/2017/07 new acquisition; Richard Werther, “Patriots Turned Loyalist: The Experiences of Joseph Galloway and Isaac Low,” Journal of the American Revolution (February 2018), https://allthingsliberty.com/2018/02/patriots-turned-loyalist-experiences-joseph -galloway-isaac-low/ . It is not clear when or where his wife died. They apparently had trouble proving the loan. Maya Jasanoff in Liberty’s Exiles, American Loyalists in the Revolutionary War (New York: Knopf, 2011) used Nicholas Low’s Papers at the Library of Congress; for information and source of the quotes above see 28, 33, 123, 125–127, 134, 136–138, footnotes 385, 387–388. There are also papers at the Clements Library, University of

Notes to Pages 97–102 • 213

18

19

20

21

22

23

24 25

26

27

Michigan. For lawyers elsewhere helping Loyalists retain or recover property see Sally E. Hadden, “Lawyering for Loyalists in the Post Revolutionary War Period,” in The Consequences of Loyalism: Essays in Honor of Robert M. Calhoon, ed. Rebecca Brannon and Joseph S. Moore (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2019), 135–147. However, the Hartshorne name does not appear in the state records of confiscated estates, New Jersey State Archives, SDEA 1006. Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 89, lists two family members, but says their property was not confiscated. Courtesy of Richard Veit: Draft report by Dennis Bertland, Richard Veit, and Janice Armstrong, for National Register of Historic Places, Portland Place (2011); Richard Veit, James Cox, Michael Gall, Archaeological Investigation, Portland Place, Middletown Township, Monmouth County, New Jersey (Prepared for Monmouth County Park System, August 13, 2013). See also Finding Aid for the Hartshorne Family Papers, Coll. 900, Monmouth County Historical Association; “The Story of the Hartshorne Family Dates Back to 1676,” The Two River Times, October 16, 2016. The parsonage has been moved closer to the Wallace house, and both are today part of a state historical site. Information from Paul Soltis, and the New Jersey DEP Wallace House website. Stephen Conway, “The British Army, ‘Military Europe,’ and the American War of Independence,” William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., vol. 67 no.1 (January 2010), 79–80. John Fabiano speculates that Theodosia spied for George Washington. Victoria Harty argues that she had a child with Burr before they married. See also “Letter from William S. Livingston to Col. Aaron Burr,” July 10, 1782, New Jersey Historical Society Proceedings, 2nd ser., vol. 1 (1867–1869), 90, quoted below. Henry Bischoff, A Revolutionary Relationship: Theodosia Prevost, Aaron Burr and the Hermitage (HoHoKus: Friends of the Hermitage, 2004); Henry Bischoff, “A Resourceful Woman in Revolutionary Bergen County: Theodosia Prevost at the Hermitage,” in The Revolution in Bergen County: The Time That Tried Men’s Souls, ed. Carol Karels (Charleston, SC: History Press, 2007), 92–96; Larry Kidder, ed., Meet Your Revolutionary Neighbors (Trenton: Crossroads of the American Revolution, 2015), quote 67; Victoria Harty, “A Revolutionary Woman: Theodosia Prevost of the Hermitage during the American Revolution,” presentation at New Jersey Women Make History Conference, November 1, 2019. On Burr see Princetonians, vol. 2 (1980), 192–204; Nancy Isenberg, Fallen Founder: The Life of Aaron Burr (New York: Viking, 2007). Anne M. Ousterhout, The Most Learned Woman in America: A Life of Elizabeth Graeme Fergusson (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2004). Kidder, Meet Your Revolutionary Neighbors, 25–28; Adrian C. Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley: The Jersey Dutch and the Neutral Ground (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1962, rev. 1980), 141–142n32 and 33, 201n4. Poem in Stedman and Hutchinson, comps., A Library of American Literature, vol. 3 (1891) at https://www.bartleby.com/400/poem/461.html; Wallace Brown and Hereward Senior, Victorious in Defeat: The American Loyalists in Exile (New York: Facts on File, 1984), 4. Aesop’s Fables reference is to “The War between the Beasts and the Birds,” listed in Oxford World Classics as Perry, no. 566. Harry Ward, Between the Lines: Banditti of the American Revolution (Westport, CT: Praeger, 2002); Fowler, “Loyalty Is Now Bleeding in New Jersey”; David J.

214 • Notes to Pages 103–108

28

29

30

31

32

33 34 35

36 37 38 39

Fowler, “Egregious Villains, Wood Rangers, and London Traders: The Pine Robber Phenomenon in Revolutionary New Jersey” (PhD diss., Rutgers University,1987). William Schleicher and Susan Winter, “Palm Sunday Surprise: The Battle of Bound Brook,” New Jersey Heritage Magazine, 1, no. 2 (Spring 2002), 38–43; Francis M. Marvin, The Van Horne Family History (Englewood, NJ: Bergen Historical Books, 1929, 1995 reprint), 118–119. Marvin L. Brown Jr., ed., Baroness von Riedesel and the American Revolution; Journal and Correspondence of a Tour of Duty, 1776–1783 (Williamsburg, VA: Early American Institute, 1965), 91–93, 95 (accessed on Internet Archive). On the Convention army see T. Cole Jones, Captives of Liberty: Enemy Prisoners and the Violence of the American Revolution (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2020), 139–186. Joseph P. Tustin, trans. and ed., Diary of the American War: A Hessian Journal. Captain Johann Ewald, Field Jager Corps (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1979), 365–374. Appendix 2 has nine letters he wrote to her in French. Kidder, Meet Your Revolutionary Neighbors, 34–36; William M. Dwyer, The Day Is Ours! An Inside View of the Battles of Trenton and Princeton, November 1776-January 1777 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1998), 173–180, 380: Lauren Lambs, Michael J. Gall, and Richard F. Veit, “Status Creation and Maintenance among the Delaware Valley Elite: The Rise and Fall of the Field Family,” Historical Archaeology, 54 (May 2020): 375–403. Votes & Proceedings of the General Assembly of New Jersey (1777), 53, 54, 58, 68–69, 91–92; Votes and Proceedings of the General Assembly of New Jersey (1779), 180. Evans #15466, 16398; Papers Livingston, vol. 1, 205–206. Hamilton Schuyler, “Revolution” in History of Trenton, vol. 1 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1929), 138–139; Richard P. McCormick, Experiment Independence: New Jersey in the Critical Period, 1781–1789 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1950), 96n83; Leonard Lundin, Cockpit of the Revolution: The War for Independence in New Jersey (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1940), 159–160. Schuyler, “Revolution,” 132–134; Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley, 107. Hunt’s family relationship to Yard courtesy of Joseph Klett. Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley, 225–226. Fowler, “Loyalty Is Now Bleeding in New Jersey,” 60–63; David J. Fowler, “‘These Were Troublesome Times Indeed’: Social and Economic Conditions in Revolutionary New Jersey,” in New Jersey in the American Revolution, ed. Barbara Mitnick (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2005), 29. Fowler, “Loyalty Is Now Bleeding in New Jersey,” 58–59. See also Ward, Between the Lines. Helen Almy West, History of Hamilton Township (Trenton, NJ: Trenton Printing, 1954); information courtesy of Robert Craig. “George Morgan White Eyes,” discussed with the Class of 1789, Princetonians, vol. 4 (2014): 442–452, quote 445. Lorraine E. Williams, “Caught in the Middle: New-Jersey’s Indians and the American Revolution,” in New Jersey in the American Revolution, ed. Barbara Mitnick (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2005), 101–112; Colin G. Calloway, The American Revolution in Indian Country: Crisis and Diversity in Native American Communities (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 36–42, 292, 294; Richard S. Grimes, The Western Delaware Indian Nation, 1730–1795: Warriors and Diplomats (Bethlehem, PA.: Lehigh University Press, 2017), 163–235, quote 183.

Notes to Pages 110–116 • 215

Chapter 5 The Society of Friends (Quakers) 1 The most comprehensive figures are in the work of Arthur J. Mekeel, The Relation of

2

3

4 5 6 7 8 9

10

11

Quakers to the American Revolution (Lanham, MD: University Press of America: 1979), but these are estimates. Not all meeting minutes have survived, he only looked at the men’s meetings because they were subject to the draft, and he assumed only they paid taxes. See especially 330; Rufus Jones, Quakers in the American Colonies (London: Macmillan, 1911), preface. Richard P. McCormick, Experiment in Independence: New Jersey in the Critical Period, 1781–1789 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1950), 48; William Kashatus III, Conflict of Conviction: A Reappraisal of Quaker Involvement in the American Revolution (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1990), 102. Julian P. Boyd, ed., Fundamental Laws and Constitutions of New Jersey, 1664–1964 (Princeton: D. Van Nostrand, 1964), 156–163; Larry Gerlach, ed., New Jersey in the American Revolution: A Documentary History (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975), 364. Carl Prince, ed., Papers of William Livingston, vol. 2 (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1980), 347, 353–354n16. In Pennsylvania John Roberts and Abraham Carlisle had helped the British and were executed for treason. February 13, 1777, Papers of Livingston, vol. 1 (1979), 1, 223. Mekeel, The Relation of Quakers, 91. Mekeel, 137–138. Quote John Adams to Abigail Adams, September 8, 1777; see also Thomas McKean, Chief Justice of Pennsylvania to John Adams, September 19, 1777, and the editorial notes accompanying both letters in Adams Papers Digital Edition, Massachusetts Historical Society. Background information in Mekeel, The Relation of Quakers, 173–184, 198–199; Anne Ousterhoust, A State Divided: Opposition in Pennsylvania to the American Revolution (New York: Greenwood, 1987), 165–168. Included among those arrested at this point were non-Quakers John Penn, and Benjamin Chew paroled to New Jersey, who are discussed in chapter 7. Margaret Hill Morris, Journal Kept during a Portion of the Revolutionary War, for the Amusement of a Sister (Philadelphia: G.S. MacManus Co., 1836, 1949 reprint), see especially xii, 46–49, 52–53, 57–58, 75; on medical practice see Susan Hanket Brandt, “Marketing Medicine: Apothecary Elizabeth Weed’s Economic Independence during the American Revolution,” in Women in the American Revolution: Gender, Politics, and the Domestic World, ed. Barbara B. Oberg (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2019), 72; William M. Dwyer, The Day Is Ours! An Inside View of the Battles of Trenton and Princeton, November 1776-January 1777 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1998), 127–129, 170–173. For a different version of where she hid Odell see Kacy Tillman, “Constructing Female Loyalism(s) in the Delaware Valley: Quaker Women Writers of the American Revolution,” in The Consequences of Loyalism: Essays in Honor of Robert M. Calhoon, ed. Rebecca Bannon and Joseph S. Moore (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2019), 50–51. Today the Whitall House is a historic site located in National Park, a town on the Delaware River. “Ann Cooper Whitall” in Past and Present: Lives of New Jersey Women, ed. Joan Burstyn (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1997), 39–41; Crossroads Revolutionary Neighbors, https://revolutionarynj.org/rev-neighbors /ann-cooper-whitall/; John W. Jackson, The Pennsylvania Navy 1776–1781: The

216 • Notes to Pages 116–124

12

13 14 15

16 17 18

19

20

21 22 23 24

25

Defense of the Delaware (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1974), 192–193, and for damages 438–439n71. On eighteenth-century farming in New Jersey see Peter O. Wacker and Paul G. E. Clemens, Land Use in Early New Jersey: A Historical Geography (Newark: New Jersey Historical Society, 1995). Florence Dehuff Friel, ed., The Diary of Job Whitall, Gloucester County, New Jersey, 1775–1779 (Woodbury, NJ: Gloucester County Historical Society, 1992), 85, 113. “Joseph Moore,” Revolutionary Neighbors, https://revolutionarynj.org/rev -neighbors/joseph-moore/. Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 73; Rudolph J. Pasler and Margaret C. Pasler, The Federalists (Rutherford, N.J.: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1974), 210–211. Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 379–387; fuller texts of exchange in the Papers of Livingston, vol. 2, 380–390, 399–404. Frank H. Stewart, “Quakers of the Revolution,” New Jersey Society of Pennsylvania Yearbook (1921); Mekeel, The Relation of Quakers, 294–313. Mekeel, 164–165. Stewart, “Quakers of the Revolution,” lists about forty Quakers who were disowned, most for military service with the Patriots, one for serving in the British army, but he does not always provide reasons. Charles Wetherill, History of the Religious Society of Friends Called by Some the Free Quakers, in the City of Philadelphia (1894) at qhpress.org, Part II on Revolutionary Period, Appendix List of Members; William Kashatus III, Conflict of Conviction: A Reappraisal of Quaker Involvement in the American Revolution (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1990) , appendix 6, 164–165, also lists the names of the Free Quakers in 1785; Mekeel , The Relation of Quakers, 283–293; Marla R. Miller, Betsy Ross, and the Making of America (New York: Henry Holt, 2010), 237–252; Susan Garfinkel, “This Separation Forced on US: Philadelphia Free Quakers and the Revolution,” video of a talk at the Library of Congress https://www.loc.gov /item/webcast-5293/; Religious Society of Free Quakers Records 1781–1975 mss. #289.6.So22p, American Philosophical Society (includes 1785 membership list); “This Separation Forced on US,” 1781 Broadside, Manuscript Division, httpp:// www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/vc006501. Mekeel, The Relation of Quakers, see especially appendices 334–337, although the figures also appear in the text. He assumed these were all male, but also noted that not all minutes from Quaker meetings in the period survived. He used minutes from Shrewsbury, Rahway, Plainfield, Haddonfield, Salem, Evesham, Kingswood, Chesterfield, Great Egg Harbor, and Mount Holly. Also see McCormick, Experiment in Independence, 48; Kashatus, Conflict of Conviction, 102. Quoted in Miller, Betsy Ross, 241; on Ross see 416n1. Including Isaac Collins discussed below the author estimates that seven of those on the 1785 list of members had a New Jersey connection, but the number may be higher. Examples in Petty’s Run Archaeological Site: Iron, Steel, Cotton and Paper in Historic Trenton, vol. 1 (Trenton: Hunter Research, 2014). Richard F. Hixson, Isaac Collins: A Quaker Printer in 18th Century America (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1968), 82–83, 97, 135–136; Richard F. Hixson, The Press in Revolutionary New Jersey (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1976); Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 423–425. David Hackett Fischer, Washington’s Crossing (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 240; William Stryker, Battles of Trenton and Princeton (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1898), 92.

Notes to Pages 124–129 • 217 26 Catherine Hudak, “Ladies of Trenton: Women’s Political and Public Activism in

27

28

29

30 31

32

33

34

Revolutionary New Jersey,” New Jersey Studies, 1 (2015): 39–78; Hixson, Isaac Collins, 77–78; Hunter Research, Petty’s Run, vol. 1, 8–21, sections 4–31 to 4–60. Hamilton Schuyler, “Revolution” in History of Trenton 1679–1929, vol. 1 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1929), 130–132; all three men are in the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress. The military careers of John Cadwalader and Philemon Dickinson are noted in Mark Edward Lender and Gary Wheeler Stone, Fatal Sunday: George Washington, the Monmouth Campaign, and the Politics of Battle (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2016), 92–96, 101–103. John Dickinson’s “Letters of a Pennsylvania Farmer,” can be found online at Project Gutenberg. There are 126 letters between Philemon Dickinson and George Washington in the Papers of George Washington, at Founders Online, National Archives (originals in Papers of George Washington, University Press of Virginia). These are dated from December 1776 to January 1790. Most are during the war and connected to military activities in New Jersey. They illustrate his active military role. Correspondence between Israel Shreve and George Washington runs through the Papers of George Washington, at Founders Online, National Archives (originals in Papers of George Washington, University Press of Virginia). Included are nearly 100 letters, most on military matters between 1777 and 1781, but then there are also some about purchasing land in 1785 and then from 1795 to 1799 on paying for land. The January 28, 1781, letter is marked Early Access, editing not completed, when accessed on September 30, 2019. See also William Thompson, Israel Shreve: Revolutionary War Officer (Ruston, LA: McGinty Trust Fund Publication, 1979); Carl van Doren, Mutiny in January (Clifton, NJ: J.A.M. Kelley, 1943, reprinted 1973), 209, 222; Harry Ward, General William Maxwell and the New Jersey Continentals (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1997), 58, 122; Lender and Stone, Fatal Sunday. Letter to Mary quoted in Sarah J. Purcell, Sealed with Blood: War, Sacrifice, and Memory in Revolutionary America (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002), 18; Col. Israel Shreve, “Journal—From Jersey to the Monongahela, August 11, 1788,” Pennsylvania Magazine History and Biography 52, 1928, 193–204. On the election of 1783 see McCormick, Experiment in Independence, 92n.75. Henry Miller Shreve, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Miller_Shreve, accessed September 22, 2020. Fischer, Washington’s Crossing, 192. Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 437–440, quote 437; Clement A. Price, Freedom So Far Distant: A Documentary History of African Americans in New Jersey (Newark: New Jersey Historical Society, 1980), 61–63. “David Cooper,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Cooper_(abolitionist) , accessed March 24, 2021; Jonathan Sassi, presentation at the American Philosophical Society/David Library Seminar, March 24, 2021. Mekeel, Quakers in Revolution, 320–321; Mekeel, “The Quaker-Loyalist migration to New Brunswick and Nova Scotia in 1783,” Friends Historical Association Bulletin, vol. 32 (1943): 65–75. Also 141 from Pennsylvania, two from Long Island. On Moore see Edward Alfred Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey: Their Memorials, Petitions, Claims etc. from English Records (Boston: Gregg Press, 1927, 1972 reprint), 146. David Fowler, “‘Loyalty Is Now Bleeding in New Jersey’: Motivations and Mentality of the Disaffected,” in The Other Loyalists: Ordinary People, Royalism, and Revolution in the Middle Colonies, 1763–1787, ed. Joseph S. Tiedemann et al. (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2009), 52, 54, 63–64; Harry Ward,

218 • Notes to Pages 129–132

Between the Lines: Banditti of the American Revolution (Westport, CT: Praeger, 2002), 104; Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 243–246. 35 Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 337–339. Websites: Hancock House Brochure, New Jersey DEP; Revolutionary Neighbors, Crossroads of the American Revolution; and RevWarNJ. Philip Papas in That Ever Loyal Island: Staten Island and the American Revolution (New York: New York University Press, 2007) noted that the British often did not recognize Loyalists with protections there. 36 Shreve’s letter of March 28, 1778, is in the Papers of George Washington, Founders Online, National Archives.

Chapter 6

Loyalists Part I: The Irreconcilables

1 Letter by “A Mechanic,” in Bernardus LaGrange Papers, AC 1453, Folder A, page 3

2

3

4 5

6

of an 8-page letter, Special Collections and University Archives, Rutgers University Libraries. See Bernard Bailyn, The Ordeal Thomas Hutchinson (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1974). Other authors include Wallace Brown, The King’s Friends: The Composition and Motives of the American Loyalist Claimants (Providence: Brown University Press, 1965); Wallace Brown, The Good Americans: The Loyalists in the American Revolution (New York: Morrow, 1969); Wallace Brown and Hereward Senior, Victorious in Defeat: The American Loyalists in Exile (New York: Facts on File, 1984); Robert Calhoun, Loyalists in Revolutionary America, 1776–1781 (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1973); and William H. Nelson, The American Tory (Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1961, 1980, reprint). Other examples of this are Holger Hoock, Scars of Independence: America’s Violent Birth (New York: Crown, 2017); Robert G. Parkinson, The Common Cause: Creating Race and Nation in the American Revolution (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2016). See discussion in Michael A. McDonnell and David Waldstreicher, “Revolution in the Quarterly? A Historiographical Analysis,” William & Mary Quarterly 3rd ser., 74, no. 4 (2017): 633–666. Thomas N. Ingersoll, The Loyalist Problem in Revolutionary New England (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016), 280. Alan Taylor, American Revolutions: A Continental History, 1750–1804 (New York: W.W. Norton, 2016), 326. Ruma Chopra, Unnatural Rebellion: Loyalists in New York City during the Revolution (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2011), 220, estimates that two-thirds remained in New York. Robert M. Calhoun, “The Reintegration of the Loyalists and Disaffected,” in The American Revolution: Its Character and Limits, ed. Jack P. Greene (New York: New York University Press, 1987), 64, notes a Massachusetts study that showed 627 stayed and 233 returned. Even higher is an estimate that perhaps two-thirds of those who went to Nova Scotia left, though some then went to Upper Canada not the United States; see Brown and Senior, Victorious in Defeat, 51. In comparison a recent book on Connecticut estimates that 6 percent were Loyalists, while another that in one New York county the figure was 99 percent. See Virginia DeJohn Anderson, The Martyr and the Traitor: Nathaniel Hale, Moses Dunbar, and the American Revolution (New York: Oxford University Press, 2017), 94 and n50; Philip Papas, That Ever Loyal Island: Staten Island and the American Revolution (New York: New York University Press, 2007), 1; Jeffrey M. Dorwart, Cape May County, New Jersey: The Making of an American Resort Community (New

Notes to Pages 133–134 • 219

7

8

9

10

11 12

13 14

15

16

Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1992), 50. Also, Concord, Massachusetts had one loyalist, Robert Gross, The Minutemen and Their World (New York: Hill and Wang, 1976), 168. Edward Alfred Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey: Their Memorials, Petitions, Claims etc. from English Records (Boston: Gregg, 1927, 1972 reprint); A. Van Doren Honeyman, “Concerning New Jersey Loyalists in the Revolution,” Proceedings New Jersey Historical Society, 51 (1933): 117–132; C. C. Vermeule, “The Active Loyalists of New Jersey,” Proceedings New Jersey Historical Society, 52 (1934): 87–95; Paul H. Smith, “New Jersey Loyalists and the British Provincial Corps in the War for Independence,” New Jersey History, 87 (1969): 69–78; Dennis Ryan, New Jersey’s Loyalists (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1976). Smith argues for the higher number. See also Larry Gerlach, ed., New Jersey in the American Revolution, 1763–1783: A Documentary History (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975), 231–279. See the study of New York City by Christopher F. Minty, “Reexamining Loyalist Identity during the American Revolution,” in The Consequences of Loyalism: Essays in Honor of Robert M. Calhoon, ed. Rebecca Brannon and Joseph S. Moore (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2019): 33–47. David J. Fowler, “Egregious Villains, Wood Rangers, and London Traders: The Pine Robber Phenomenon in New Jersey during the Revolutionary War” (PhD diss., Rutgers University, 1987); David J. Fowler, “‘Loyalty Is Now Bleeding in New Jersey’: Motivations and Mentalities of the Disaffected,” in The Other Loyalists: Ordinary People, Royalism, and the Revolution in the Middle Colonies, 1763–1787, ed. Joseph S. Tiedemann at al. (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2009), 45–77; Michael Adelberg, The American Revolution in Monmouth County: the Theatre of Spoil and Destruction (Charleston, SC: History Press, 2010). Adrian C. Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley: The Jersey Dutch and the Neutral Ground (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1962, reprinted 1980). Ingersoll, The Loyalist Problem, 248–250. Records of the Commissioners of Forfeited Estates, 1777–1795, New Jersey State Archives, SDEA 1006. The content note explains the process followed, and then lists by county the names of those who lost and those who purchased property. See also Richard P. McCormick, Experiment in Independence: New Jersey in the Critical Period, 1781–1789 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1950), 31–35. Maya Jasanoff, Liberty’s Exiles: American Loyalists in the Revolutionary World (New York: Knopf, 2011), 28. Theodore Thayer, Colonial and Revolutionary Morris County (Morristown, NJ: Morris County Heritage Commission, 1975), 186; William M. Dwyer, The Day Is Ours! An Inside View of the Battles of Trenton and Princeton, November 1776–January 1777 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1998), 43; Hoock, Scars of Independence, 367; Carl E. Prince et al., eds. The Papers of William Livingston, vol. 3 (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1986), 420. See Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, on Milledge, 142, Hatfield, 90, and especially Jouet, 108–112. Paracide—murder of family members. Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 265–272; for the Morristown quote see Mary Beth Norton, The British Americans: The Loyalist Exiles in England 1774–1789 (Boston: Little, Brown, 1972), 190. Ruth Keesay, “New Jersey Legislation Concerning New Jersey Loyalists,” New Jersey History, 79 (1961): 75–94.

220 • Notes to Pages 134–142

17 Michael A. McDonnell, “War Stories,” in The American Revolution Reborn,

18 19

20 21

22

23 24

25 26

27

28 29

ed. Patrick Spero and Michael Zuckerman (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2016), 13–14, 321–322n10. Tye is discussed later in this chapter. On the process see Norton, The British Americans, 197–234. The most extensive lists for New Jersey are in Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, probably neither complete nor totally accurate. Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 109–111. All the royal governors, appointed by the king, were loyalists. But the governors of Pennsylvania and Delaware were appointed by the Pennsylvania proprietors, while those of Connecticut and Rhode Island were selected locally. In Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Delaware the governors were Patriots, as were Pennsylvania’s after its constitution of 1776. The literature on Benjamin Franklin is extensive; on his son see Daniel Mark Epstein, The Loyal Son: The War in Ben Franklin’s House (New York: Ballantine Books, 2017); Larry R. Gerlach, William Franklin: New Jersey’s Last Royal Governor (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975); Larry R. Gerlach, “William Franklin” in The Governors of New Jersey, ed. Michael Birkner, Donald Linky, and Peter Mickulas (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2014), 94–99; Sheila Skemp, William Franklin: Son of a Patriot, Servant of a King (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990); Sheila Skemp, Benjamin and William Franklin: Father and Son, Patriot and Loyalist (Boston: Bedford Books, 1994); Sheila Skemp, The Making of a Patriot: Benjamin Franklin at the Cockpit (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013), 125–150; Willard Sterne, A Little Revenge: Benjamin Franklin and His Son (Boston: Little, Brown, 1984); William Whitehead, Contributions to the Early History of Perth Amboy (New York: D. Appleton Cp., 1856), 185–207; Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 75–80. On the Closter raid see Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley, 213–214. Anderson, The Martyr and the Traitor, 94. Rev. David R. King, comp., The Episcopal Diocese of New Jersey 1785–1985 (Trenton, NJ: Diocesan Bicentennial Commission, 1985), quote 90, on Salem 144; Nancy L. Rhoden, Revolutionary Anglicanism: The Colonial Church of English Clergy during the American Revolution (New York: New York University Press, 1999), 89; Wallace Jamison, Religion in New Jersey: A Brief History (Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand, 1964), 63. Letter to Chandler, Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 244. “The Word of Congress,” appeared September 18, 1779, in Rivington’s Royal Gazette, reprinted in Winthrop Sargent, ed., The Loyalist Poetry of the Revolution (Philadelphia: Collins, 1857), 38–55. The editor also included a brief biography. See also Colin Wells, Poetry Wars: Verse and Politics in the American Revolution and Early Republic (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2018), 69–73, 105–109; James McLachlan et al., eds., Princetonians: A Biographical Dictionary, vol. 1 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976), 109–113. Quoted in Gideon Mailer, John Witherspoon’s American Revolution (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2017), 17. Original in The American Times: A Satire in Three Parts; in Which Are Delineated the Characters of the Leaders of the American Rebellion (London: William Richardson, 1780). Quoted in Dennis Ryan, New Jersey Loyalists (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1976), 25. Quotes in “Jonathan Odell,” Princetonians, vol. 1 (1976), 112.

Notes to Pages 142–151 • 221 30 James Bell, A War of Religion: Dissenters, Anglicans, and the American Revolution

(London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), 202–203.

31 “Leydecker,” Princetonians, vol. 1 (1976), 143–144; Leiby, The Revolutionary War in

the Hackensack Valley, 34–35, 303; Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 134–135.

32 Letters in the papers submitted to the Royal Claims Commission, Bernardus

33

34 35

36

37

38

39

40

LaGrange Papers, 1721–1797, AC 1453, Folder A (3), Special Collections and University Archives, Rutgers University Libraries; also copies in the New Jersey Digital Highway, and Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents 239–242. New York State Museum website had brief biographies by Stefan Bielinski on Omie LaGrange (ca. 1625–1731), Arie LaGrange (1738–1798), and Jacobus [James] LaGrange (1763–1827) when accessed July 10, 2019; Maxine N. Lurie, “Letter/s from a New Jersey Loyalist: Bernardus [Barnardas] LaGrange, England to the Rev. Abraham Beach, America, 1783–1792.” New Jersey Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal 5, no. 1 (2019): 284–298; Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 239–242, 272–274; Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 61–62, 121–124, 238–239. For others see Norton, The British Americans, quote 129. Jasanoff, Liberty’s Exiles, 28–29, 273–274, 338, 369n24. Whitehead, Contributions to the Early History, 99–120; Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 16, 165–169, 275–279; Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 191–193; Todd Braisted, The On-Line Institute for Advanced Loyalists Studies, http://www.royalprovincial.com/, accessed October 25, 2019 ; Letter to his brother in Whitehead, Contributions to the Early History, and in Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents. Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 196–198; Larry Gerlach, “Politics and Prerogatives: The Aftermath of the Robbery of the East Jersey Treasury in 1768,” New Jersey History, 90 (1972): 133–168; Skemp, William Franklin, 122–131; Carl Prince, et al. eds., Papers of William Livingston, vol. 1 (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1979), 83. Because the name Daniel Coxe appears through several generations and branches of the family, distinguishing them is not simple. Daniel Coxe I (?–1686); Dr. Daniel Coxe II (1640–1730) had extensive proprietary land claims in North Carolina as well as New Jersey; Colonel Daniel Coxe III (1673–1739); Daniel Coxe IV (1710–1758); the loyalist discussed here Daniel Coxe V (1741–1826); Daniel Coxe VI (?–1836). Hamilton Schuyler, “Revolution,” in A History of Trenton, 1679–1929, vol. 1, ed. Edwin Robert Walker et al. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1929), 141–143; Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 52–54; David W. Maxey, “Citizenship and the American Revolution: A Resolute Tory’s Abiding Status,” Transactions American Philosophical Society 106, no. 3 (May 2016): ix–x, 1–75, quote 16; Finding Aid for Coxe Family Papers, Historical Society Pennsylvania, https://hsp.org/sites/default /files/legacy_files/migrated/findingaid2049coxe.pdf. Catherine Snell Crary, “The American Dream: John Tabor Kempe’s Rise from Poverty to Riches,” William & Mary Quarterly, v.14 no. 2 (April 1957): 176–195. Joan Hoff, Law, Gender and Injustice: A Legal History of U.S. Women (New York: New York University Press, 1994), 93–94; Linda Kerber, Women of the Republic: Intellect and Ideology in Revolutionary America (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1980), 130–132; Kempe’s Lessee vs. Kennedy, 9 US 173, Supreme Court (1809). It is not known if the Hunterdon County court knew she had signed her property over to her husband when they married. Dr. John Redman Coxe, https://archives.upenn.edu/exhibits/penn-people/biography /john-redman-coxe.

222 • Notes to Pages 151–158

41 See chapter 4 on the Straddlers. Wallace had not left with her husband. 42 Sarah Coxe v. Henry Gullick, Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the

43

44

45

46

47

48 49

Superior Court . . . New Jersey Supreme Court, 10 (1829), 328–331 (Google books citation courtesy New Jersey State Library); Maxey, “Citizenship and the American Revolution,” 2, 70. Thomas L. Purvis, Proprietors Patronage and Money: Legislative Politics in New Jersey, 1703–1776 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1986), 207; Thomas L. Purvis, “Origins and Patterns of Agrarian Unrest in New Jersey, 1755 to 1754,” William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., vol. 39 (1982): 600–627; Brendan McConville, These Daring Disturbers of the Public Peace: The Struggle for Property and Power in Early New Jersey (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1999). Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hacksensack Valley, 79–80, 212–214, 302n40; Papas, That Ever Loyal Island, 96; Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 225–226; Todd W. Braisted, “How George Washington Saved the Life of Abraham van Buskirk’s Son,” Journal of the American Revolution (September 16, 2014), https:// allthingsliberty.com/2014/09/how-george-washington-saved-the-life-of-abraham -van-buskirks-son/. James Moody, Narrative of His Exertions and Sufferings in the Cause of the Government, since the Year 1776 (New York: Eyewitness Accounts, New York Times, 1782 and 1783, 1968 reprint); Susan Burgess Shenstone, So Obstinately Loyal: James Moody, 1744–1809 (Montreal, Canada: McGill-Queens University Press, 2000), 120 for quote on Livingston; Ryan, New Jersey’s Loyalists; Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 234–236; Harry M. Ward, Between the Lines: Banditti of the American Revolution (Westport, CT: Praeger, 2002), 85–101. Jonathan Mercantini shared an unpublished article, “New Jersey in Flux: Governor William Livingston in 1777,” on the capture of members of Moody’s group in that year. Graham Russell Hodges, Slavery and Freedom in the Rural North: African Americans in Monmouth County, New Jersey, 1665–1865 (Madison, WI: Madison House Publishers, 1997), 91–93, 96–104, 106; Graham Russell Gao Hodges, Black New Jersey, 1664 to the Present Day (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2019), 38–40; Graham Russell Hodges, Root & Branch: African Americans in New York and East Jersey, 1613–1863 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1999), 152, 159; Alan Gilbert, Black Patriots and Loyalists: Fight for Emancipation in the War for Independence (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012), 117, 147–148. For figures see Graham Hodges, The Black Loyalist Directory: African Americans in Exile after the American Revolution (New York: Garland, 1996), especially introduction and appendices. On experiences see Gilbert, Black Patriots, 158, 193, 227; Simon Schama, Rough Crossings: The Slaves, the British, and the American Revolution (New York: HarperCollins, 2006); Jasanoff, Liberty’s Exiles, 278–309. Boston King wrote his Memoir in 1798. It is the source of much of the information about him. See Emma Rothschild, The Inner Life of Empires: An Eighteenth-Century History (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2011), the story of the large Johnstone family of Scotland.

Chapter 7

Loyalists Part II: Remained or Returned

1 For a clear sense of the price of loyalty see the discussion in Philip Papas, That Ever

Loyal Island: Staten Island and the American Revolution (New York: New York University Press, 2007), 81–110.

Notes to Pages 162–166 • 223 2 Charles D. Deshler, Memorial Sketch of Old Christ Church New Brunswick, New

Jersey (New Brunswick, NJ: Hisdengsfeld, 1896), 8–9.

3 Maxine N. Lurie, “Letter/s from a New Jersey Loyalist: Bernardus [Barnardus]

4

5

6

7 8

9 10 11

12

LaGrange, England to the Rev. Abraham Beach, America, 1783–1792,” New Jersey Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal 5, no. 1 (2019): 284–298; Letters of Beach to the SPG in Walter Herbert Stowe, ed., “The Reverend Abraham Beach, D.D.: 1740–1828,” Historical Magazine Protestant Episcopal Church, 3, 1934, 76–95; Walter Herbert Stowe, ed., “Additional Letters of the Reverend Abraham Beach: 1772–1791,” Historical Magazine Protestant Episcopal Church, 5, 1936, 122–141; Livingston to Clarkson, Carl Prince et al. eds., Papers of William Livingston, vol. 3 (1986), 330–332. Beach genealogy courtesy of George Stillman. On women’s hesitancy at expressing political views during the Revolution see Linda K. Kerber, Women of the Republic: Intellect & Ideology in Revolutionary America (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1980), 73–85, 105–106; Mary Beth Norton, Liberty’s Daughters: The Revolutionary Experiences of American Women, 1750–1800 (Boston: Little, Brown, 1980), 110–124, 177–194. Andrew Bell had no children unless one credits the mulatto woman Daphne Reeves mentioned by Gordon Bond in To Cast a Freedman’s Vote: Thomas Mundy Peterson and the Intersection of Suffrage and Citizenship (Middlesex County Office of Arts and History, 2018), 10–11. Reeves, a child of a slave owned by Bell and later freed, married Thomas Mundy Peterson in 1844. On Andrew and Cornelia Bell, and William Paterson see J. Lawrence Boggs, ed., “The Cornelia (Bell) Paterson Letters,” Proceedings New Jersey Historical Society, vol. 15 (1930): 508–517; vol. 16 (1931): 56–67, 186–201. Quote from Cornelia, Letter #2, p. 513; William Paterson to Andrew Bell, letter of March 2, 1784, vol. 16, 201; patrimony, 193; on his death vol. 15, 510. John E. O’Connor, William Paterson, Lawyer and Statesman, 1745–1806 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1979); Edward Alfred Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey: Their Memorials, Petitions, Claims etc. from English Records (Boston: Gregg Press, 1927, 1972 reprint), 25–26; Richard C. Haskett, “William Paterson: Counsellor at Law” (PhD diss., Princeton University, 1952), 178–186. For failure to obtain an appointment see Letter to George Washington, July 24, 1789, Founders Online, National Archives, https:// founders.archvies.gov/documents/Washington/05-0-02-0163. For success see Carl E. Prince, New Jersey’s Jeffersonian Republicans: The Genesis of an Early Party Machine, 1789–1817 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1964), 237–238. Frederick Parris, “The Case of Rev. Samuel Cooke: Loyalist,” Monmouth County Historical Association Newsletter, 3, May 1975. Adrian C. Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley: The Jersey Dutch and the Neutral Ground (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1962, rev. 1980), 33–34, 115n41, quote 245, 305–306n53. Emphasis added. Maya Jasanoff, Liberty’s Exiles: American Loyalists in the Revolutionary World (New York: Knopf, 2011), 317–318, 350. Richard M. Ketchum, Divided Loyalties: How the American Revolution Came to New York (New York: John Macrae Books, 2000), 368–370. Samuel Clark, History of St. John’s Church, Elizabethtown, New Jersey from 1703 to the Present (Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1857), 87. This book contains many letters and documents written by Chandler to Anglican authorities before the war. Interestingly this was also a reason given by Dutch Reformed and Presbyterians for establishing colonial colleges to educate their ministers.

224 • Notes to Pages 167–172

13 Alfred Lyon Cross, The Anglican Episcopate and the American Colonies (Hamden,

CT: Archon Books, 1902, 1964 reprint), 166, letter 345–346.

14 There is a debate over whether Chandler or Miles Cooper of New York wrote that

15

16

17

18

19 20

21

22

Loyalist pamphlet. Future General Charles Lee replied with a pamphlet arguing that colonial militiamen could defeat regular British troops. Philip Papas, Renegade of the Revolution: The Life of General Charles Lee (New York: New York University Press, 2014); Dominick R. Mazzagetti, Charles Lee: Self before Country (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2013). James B. Bell, A War of Religion: Dissenters, Anglicans, and the American Revolution (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), 166. The source of the quote clearly believes it was Chandler’s work. Bell’s bibliography, 299–300, lists all of Chandler’s pamphlets. See also Mary Beth Norton, 1774: The Long Year of Revolution (New York: Vintage, 2020), 172–177, 225–228, 293–300. General Maxwell to the Legislature, from Elizabethtown, April 26, 1779, Selections from the Correspondence of the Executive of New Jersey (Newark: 1848), 151–154. On New Jersey’s general effort to expel Loyalist wives see Kerber, Women of the Republic, 51. Scott Rohrer, Jacob Green’s Revolution: Radical Religion and Reform in a Revolutionary Era (University Park, PA: Penn State University Press, 2014), 259; Richard P. McCormick, Experiment in Independence: New Jersey in the Critical Period, 1781–1789 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1950), 50n20; Mary Beth Norton, The British Americans: The Loyalist Exiles in England, 1774–1789 (Boston: Little, Brown, 1972), 255. Frank Gavin, “The Rev. Thomas Bradbury Chandler in the Light of his (unpublished) Diary, 1775–1785,” Church History, 1 (1932): 90–106; Rohrer uses Chandler as a foil for Green. He is also extensively discussed in Bell, A War of Religion; Cross, Anglican Episcopate; and Gregg L. Frazer, God against the Revolution: The Loyalist Clergy’s Case against the American Revolution (Lawrence: Kansas University Press, 2018); Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 41–43. On the governor see Papers of William Livingston, vol. 2 (1980): 332n559, 233. Quotes from Bell, A War of Religion, 89, 166, 169. Edward J. Cody, Religious Issues in the American Revolution (Trenton, NJ: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975), 19. On Brown see Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 33–36. William Shaw, comp., History of Essex and Hudson Counties, vol. 1 (Philadelphia: Everts & Peck, 1884), 48–49; Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 157–165, quote 159. Jeffrey Dorwart, Camden County New Jersey: The Making of a Metropolitan Community, 1626–2000 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2001), 42; Larry R. Gerlach, New Jersey in the American Revolution, 1763-1783: A Documentary History (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975), 259; Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 97–98. Gerlach, New Jersey Revolution: Documents, 127–132, 186–189; Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 202–203; and quoted in Ruma Chopra, Unnatural Rebellion: Loyalists in New York City during the Revolution (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2011), 220. On Staten Island see Papas, That Ever Loyal Island, 7, 81, 109–110; on other occupied cities see Donald F. Johnson, Occupied America: British Military Rule and the Experience of Revolution (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2020). Wade S. Kolb III and Robert M. Weir, Captured at King’s Mountain: The Journal of Uzal Johnson, a Loyalist Surgeon (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2011), xvii.

Notes to Pages 172–178 • 225 23 “Absalom Bainbridge,” James McLachlan et al., eds., Princetonians: A Biographical

24 25 26

27

28

29

30

31

32

Dictionary, vol. 1 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976), 372–375; Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 15–16. See also Revolutionary Neighbors biography, Crossroads of the American Revolution, https://revolutionarynj.org/rev-neighbors /absalom-bainbridge/. Kolb and Weir, Captured at King’s Mountain, preface includes a biography. “John Lawrence,” Princetonians, vol. 1 (1976), 460–462; Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 124–125. Frederick W. Bogert, The Revolutionary Years, 1776–1783: Bergen County New Jersey History and Heritage, vol. 3 (Bergen County Freeholders, 1983), 12; Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 224–225. Jones stated that he “probably” died in Canada, but apparently not. Donald E. Sherblom, The Vought Family: Loyalists in the American Revolution (Annandale, NJ: 1759 Vought House, 2008); Donald E. Sherblom, “A Loyalist Homestead in a World Turned Upside Down,” in James Gigantino II, ed., The American Revolution in New Jersey: Where the Battlefield Meets the Home Front (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2015), 165–189. Example of the Weavers courtesy of Joseph Klett; Ruth M. Keesey, “Loyalism in Bergen County, New Jersey,” William & Mary Quarterly, v.18, no. 4 (1961): 558–576; Tom Deignan, “The Wizard’s Winding Road to New Jersey,” New Jersey Monthly, October 2019, 100. Not all those Keesey noted returned to the state. Robert M. Calhoun, “The Reintegration of the Loyalists and Disaffected,” in The American Revolution: Its Character and Limits, ed. Jack P. Greene (New York: New York University Press, 1987), 69, noted that a large number of the descendants of exiles returned from Canada in the nineteenth century. Donald Johnstone Peck, An American Journey of Hope: Perth Amboy—the Capitol and Port City on Raritan Bay 1683–1790 (Staunton, VA: American History Press, 2013), 126–127; Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 116. This was a prominent Perth Amboy family, but there are several Michael Kearnys. This may be Michael Kearny Jr. (1751–1791), a merchant. Kevin W. Wright, “Steuben House History,” (1998) in two parts at bergencountyhistory.org. Several generations shared the same name, making part of the story difficult to sort out. New Jersey Supreme Court Case Files, 1704–1844, New Jersey State Archives online database, numbers 39212, 13543, 39213, 39214, 39090, 41948, 43486, 43484, 41894, 20120, 41948, 43586; thanks to Vivian Thiele for a list of the cases; see also New Jersey State Archives, Records of the Commissioners of Forfeited Estates, 1777–1795 SDEA 1006, for Somerset County. The editors of the George Washington Papers Project state that John Van Dike was a lieutenant colonel in the Loyalist West Jersey Volunteers. See notes on letter of Israel Shreve to George Washington, May 23, 1779, Founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/03-20-02-0534; Jones, The Loyalists of New Jersey, 232–234. Jones has him going to Nova Scotia, getting money from the Claims Commission, and later returning to New Jersey. Another possibility is that the trespass cases came from disputed land claims resulting from conflicting proprietary titles predating the Revolution. On dower claims see Kerber, Women of the Republic, 127–136; Joan Hoff, Law, Gender, and Injustice: A Legal History of U.S. Women (New York: New York University Press, 1991), 90–94. For an example of another woman who stayed when her husband left, and regained property, see Gregory T. Knouff, “That Abundant Infamous Roach: Breed and Ruth Batcheller, Moderate Loyalism, Language and

226 • Notes to Pages 179–183

33

34

35 36

Domestic Power in Revolutionary New Hampshire,” in The Consequences of Loyalism: Essays in Honor of Robert M. Calhoun, ed. Rebecca Brannon and Joseph Moore (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2019), 148–163. Quoted in Robert G. Parkinson, The Common Cause: Creating Race and Nation in the American Revolution (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2016), 301. Leiby, The Revolutionary War in the Hackensack Valley, 306. For a discussion of this elsewhere see Brett Palfreyman, “The Nonjuror Problem in Pennsylvania,” in The Consequences of Loyalism: Essays in Honor of Robert M. Calhoun, ed. Rebecca Brannon and Joseph Moore (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2019), 164–176. Thomas N. Ingersoll, The Loyalist Problem in Revolutionary New England (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016), 290. Wallace Jamison, Religion in New Jersey: A Brief History (Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand, 1965), 71.

Chapter 8

Epilogue

1 Poem in Larry R. Gerlach, New Jersey in the American Revolution, 1763–1783: A

Documentary History (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975), 319–321; and Richard P. McCormick, Experiment in Independence: New Jersey in the Critical Period, 1781–1789 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1950), 26, other quotes 17–19. “William Peartree Smith,” in Franklin Bowditch Dexter, Biographical Sketches of the Graduates of Yale College with Annuals of the College History: October, 1701–May, 1745 (New York: Henry Holt, 1885), 719–720; Biographical Notes, Elisha Boudinot Papers, Manuscript Group 633, New Jersey Historical Society. On conditions as the war ended and peace arrived see William M. Fowler Jr., American Crisis: George Washington and the Dangerous Two Years after Yorktown, 1781–1788 (New York: Walker, 2011). 2 Robert Middlekauf, The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution, 1763–1789, rev. ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), 560. 3 On New Brunswick: Charles D. Deshler, Memorial Sketch of Old Christ Church New Brunswick, New Jersey (New Brunswick, NJ: Hisdengsfeld, 1896), 8–9; Mary Elizabeth Sheppard, “Joseph Clark’s Diary,” Proceedings of the New Jersey Historical Society, First Series, 9 (1854): 93–110. On Princeton: Benjamin Rush quoted in Varum Lansing Collins ed., A Brief Narrative of the Ravages of the British and Hessians at Princeton in 1776–77 (Princeton, NJ: The University Library, 1906), 4n1. On the College: Mark A. Noll, Princeton and the Republic, 1768–1822: The Search for a Christian Enlightenment in the Era of Samuel Stanhope Smith (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989), 73–74. On Morristown: Joseph F. Tuttle, “Revolutionary Forefathers of Morris County,” Speech July 4, 1876, Special Collections, Rutgers University Libraries. On Newark: A History of the City of Newark, vol. 1 (New York: Lewis Historical Publishing Company, 1913; 1996 reprint), 307–309. On Westfield: Jason R. Wickersty, “A Shocking Havok: The Plundering of Westfield, New Jersey June 16, 1777,” Journal of the American Revolution (July 2015), https://allthingsliberty.com/2015/07/a-shocking-havoc-the -plundering-of-westfield-new-jersey-june-26-1777/. For the costs of the war and what followed see McCormick, Experiment in Independence, 19–24, and James H. Levitt, New Jersey’s Revolutionary Economy (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975).

Notes to Pages 184–188 • 227 4 Samuel Clark, History of St. John’s Church (Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1857), 156–158. 5 Michael A. McDonnell, “War Stories,” in The American Revolution Reborn,

6

7 8

9

10 11

12

13

14

ed. Patrick Spero and Michael Zuckerman (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2016), 13–14, 321–322n10; Howard Peckham, ed., The Toll of Independence: Engagements and Battle Casualties of the American Revolution (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974), 130–134. Barbara Hoskins, comp., Men from Morris County New Jersey Who Served in the American Revolution (Morristown, NJ: Friends of the Joint Free Public Library of Morristown and Morris Township, 1979); Larry Kidder, A People Harassed and Exhausted: The Story of a New Jersey Militia Regiment in the American Revolution (Scotts Valley, CA: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2013). Edwin G. Burrows, Forgotten Patriots: The Untold Story of American Prisoners during the Revolutionary War (New York: Basic Books, 2008). Andrew J. O’Shaughnessy, The Men Who Lost America: British Leadership, the American Revolution, and the Fate of Empire (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2013). John J. McCusker and Russell R. Menard, The Economy of British America, 1607–1789 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1985), 366–367, 373–374; Alan Taylor, American Revolution: A Continental History, 1750–1804 (New York: Norton, 2016), 361; Richard G. Doty, “Promises to Pay, Promises Unkept: How We Won the War and Lost Our Shirts,” Colonial Williamsburg Journal (Summer 2003), https://www.history.org/Foundation/journal/summer03 /pay.cfm; Peter H. Lindert and Jeffry G. Williamson, “American Incomes before and after the Revolution,” Journal of Economic History 71, no. 3 (September 2013): 741, 750–755; John L. Smith Jr., “How Was the Revolutionary War Paid For?” Journal of the American Revolution (February 23, 2015), https://allthingsliberty.com /2015/02/how-was-the-revolutionary-war-paid-for/. Wallace Brown and Hereward Senior, Victorious in Defeat: The American Loyalists in Exile (New York: Facts on File, 1984), 71–74, quote 211. On reintegration see Aaron Nathan Coleman, “Justice and Moderation? The Reintegration of the American Loyalists as an Episode of Transitional Justice,” in The Consequences of Loyalism: Essays in Honor of Robert M. Calhoun, ed. Rebecca Brannon and Joseph S. Moore (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2019), 177–189; Rebecca Brannon, “America’s Revolutionary Experience with Transitional Justice,” in The Consequences of Loyalism, 190–207. Newark Map, John W. Barber and Henry Howe, Historical Collections of the State of New Jersey (New York: S. Tuttle, 1845), 193, from Flickr. On responses after the war see McCormick, Experiment in Independence, 304–306. On Green see David Mitros, Jacob Green and the Slavery Debate in Revolutionary Morris County, New Jersey (Whippany, NJ: Morris County Heritage Commission, 1993), 21; S. Scott Rohrer, Jacob Green’s Revolution: Radical Religion and Reform in a Revolutionary Era (University Park: Penn State University Press, 2014), 210–218. Historians have seen the war as both preserving slavery and foreshadowing its demise. For an example of the differences see chapters by Bruce Bender and James Gigantino II in The American Revolution in New Jersey: Where the Battlefield Meets the Home Front, ed. James Gigantino II (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2015), 131–164. The argument that the Revolution was a real one has also recently been made by Patrick Spero, Frontier Rebels: The Fight for Independence in the American West, 1765–1776 (New York: W.W. Norton, 2018), and T. H. Breen, The Will of the People:

228 • Notes to Page 189

The Revolutionary Birth of America (Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2019). Breen estimates that “at least 450” new men served on early New Jersey committees, 48. 15 Hopkinson quoted in Ruth Bogin, Abraham Clark and the Quest for Equality in the Revolutionary Era, 1774–1794 (Rutherford, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1982), 45; Maxine N. Lurie, “Envisioning a Republic: The New Jersey Constitution and Oath of 1776,” New Jersey History (Winter 2001): 3–21; Maxine N. Lurie, “New Jersey: Radical or Conservative in the Crisis Summer of 1776?” in New Jersey in the American Revolution, ed. Barbara Mitnick (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2005), 31–43.

Index Page numbers in italics indicate illustrative materials. abolitionism, 7–8, 127–128, 188 Act for Free and General Pardon, NJ, 67 Adams, John, 22, 93, 112–113 Adams, John Quincy, 179–180 Adams, Samuel, 11 administration, British: Loyalists’ disappointment with, 171–172, 179; in the path to the Revolutionary War, 8 Administration of Justice Act, 12, 189–190 affirmations of loyalty/allegiance, 65, 110–111, 118–119, 121. See also oaths of loyalty/allegiance agriculture, 7, 18 Alexander, William, Lord Stirling, 17 allegiance: affirmations of, 65, 110–111, 118–119, 121; independent, of women, 178; reasons for, 17–23; situational, 84, 85–86; for straddlers, trimmers, and opportunists, 108. See also loyalty; oaths of loyalty/allegiance Allen, Ethan, A Narrative of Colonel Ethan Allen’s Captivity, 73–74 Allen, William, 173–174 Allison, Samuel, 118 American Commissioner for Prisoners, 82–83 Anderson, Ephraim, 50 Anglican ministers, 20, 21–22, 139–142, 143, 158–162, 164, 165–171, 180 Anglicans: conflicted loyalties of, 87–88; as irreconcilable Loyalists, 133, 139–142, 143, 144, 147, 149–150, 157; as Loyalists who

remained, 158–162, 164, 180; as Loyalists who returned, 165–171; as Patriots, 58, 140; postwar importance of, 188–189; side-taking by, 19–20, 21–22 Arnett, Hannah White, 31–32 Arnett, Isaac, 31 Asgill, Charles, 26 assembly of New Jersey Colony, 6–7, 10–11 Associated Loyalists, 26, 27, 133, 138 Ayres, William, 21–22 Bainbridge, Absalom, 172 Bainbridge House, 172 Baptists, 19–20, 53, 58 Barber, Francis, 49–50 Barker, James, 140 Barton, Joseph, 17 battles. See name of battle Baylor Massacre, 27–28 Beach, Abraham, 14–15, 21–22, 140, 158–162, 180 Beach, Antje/Anne (born Van Wickle), 158–162 Beatty, Charles Clinton, 82 Beatty, John, 82 Bell, Andrew, 162–164 Bergen County, 19–20, 22–23, 25, 27–28, 132–133, 134, 155, 174–175 bishop, American-Anglican, 21–22, 33, 143, 161–162, 165–167, 168, 180, 189–190 229

230 • Index

Black Brigade, 154–155 black market. See “London Trade” Black New Jerseyans: Loyalists, 28, 132, 134–135, 154–157, 158; population, 7–8; voting rights of, 16. See also slaves/slavery Black Patriots, 52–55 Black Pioneers, 154–155 Blackwell, Robert, 140 Bloomfield, Joseph, and family (Moses and Samuel), 8, 18, 70–71, 84 Bonnel, David Sr., 56 Book of Negroes, 155 Borden family (Elizabeth, Joseph II, Joseph III), 37 Borick, Carl P., Relieve Us of This Burden, 76–77 Boston Port Act, 12 Boudinot, Elias, 82–83, 118–119, 181 Boudinot, Susan, 11–12 Bound Brook, Battle of, 102–103 Brackenridge, Hugh Henry, “The Rising Glory of America,” 20–21 Brannon, Rebecca, From Revolution to Reunion, 131–132 Bray, John, 86, 87, 108 British army: Quakers’ service in, 128–129; sexual violence by, 28–29; in violent massacres, 27–28; in the war in New Jersey, 24–26 British Claims Commission, 185 British constitution, violations of: and Loyalist returns, 170–172; in the path to war, 9–10, 17, 18; in Quaker participation in the war, 124–125 British laws: Loyalist objections to, 147; in the path to war, 9–13; Quaker objections to, 111–112 Brotherton Reservation, 8 Browne, Isaac, 142, 170 Burgoyne, John, 24, 41–43 Burlington, New Jersey, 89–90 Burlington Monthly Meeting, 123 Burr, Aaron, 100 Burr, Esther (born Edwards), 83 Burrows, Edwin G., Forgotten Patriots, 75, 76, 82–83, 184 Bustill, Cyrus, 53 Cadwalader, John, 125–126 Cadwalader, Lambert, 68–69, 125–126

Caesar, slave of the Drake family, 52, 59 Caldwell, Hannah Odgen, 45–46 Caldwell, James, 45–46 Calloway, Colin G., The American Revolution in Indian Country, 3 Cape May County, 7, 15, 18, 22–23, 132–133 Cato, slave, 53 “Ceasariansis” (Richard Stockton attr.), 63 Chandler, Jane (born Elliott), 165, 167, 169 Chandler, Thomas Bradbury, 21–22, 165–170, 180; An Appeal to the Public in Behalf of the Church of England in America, 165–167; Friendly Address for All Reasonable Americans on the Subject of Our Political Confusion, 167; What Think Ye of the Congress Now?, 167 Charleston, SC, 65–67, 71–72 Chew, Benjamin, 162–163 churches: damage and destruction of, 32, 140, 152–153, 170, 173, 183–184; as smallpox hospitals, 50–51. See also name of church citizenship, 65, 88, 89, 151 civilians, 50–51, 71–72, 88 Clamstown, New Jersey, 106 Clark, Abraham, 33–35, 64, 67 class, socioeconomic: in historiography on causes of the Revolutionary War, 2–3; in side-taking, 17–18 Coercive/Intolerable Acts, 9, 11, 12, 33, 136, 138 Cogil, Joseph, 17 College of New Jersey: in educating Patriots and American politicians, 37–39; founding of, 19, 20–21; Livingston as trustee of, 41; ratio of Patriots to Loyalists in, 33; and the Stockton family, 61–62, 80, 82, 205–206n3; tea party protest, 11–12; wartime damage to, 39, 81–82, 184, 210n60. See also Nassau Hall colleges, colonial, 19. See also name of college Collin, Nickolas, 2, 87–88, 91–92 Collins, Isaac, 41–42, 120, 121, 123–124 Colonel Tye/Titus, 155 Committees of Safety, 65, 69–70 compensation: for Loyalists, 135–136, 149–150, 153, 154, 170–171, 172, 176–177; for straddlers’ loss of property, 92–97. See also pensions Congress Hall, Provost jail, 78 Connecticut Farms, 25–26

Index • 231

Connecticut Farms, Battle of, 45–46 conservatism: of Loyalists, 133, 142–143, 165–167, 179–180; of New Jersey, in the path to war, 9–13; of Quakers, 112, 129–130; religious, in allegiance, 19–20 Constitution of 1787, 44–45, 185–186 Continental army: free and enslaved Blacks in, 52, 53–55; Quakers’ service in, 124–127; in violent massacres, 27–28; in the war in New Jersey, 4–5, 24–26 Continental Congresses: adamant Patriots in, 46; Coercive Acts in first meeting of, 12; in creation of new state governments, 13; in Jonathan Odell’s poetry, 141–142; members of, as British targets, 34; members of, as prisoners of war, 78; rape investigated by, 28; in the war of oaths, 65 “Convention Army,” 72, 76–77 “Convivial Hall,” 102, 103 Cooke, Samuel, 164 Cooper, David, A Serious Address to the Rulers of America, on . . . Slavery, 128 Cooper, John, 127–128, 188 Corlis, John, 155 Cornwallis, Lord Charles, 4–5, 23–24, 102–103 costs: and conflicted loyalties, 95; economic, 185; in facing the postwar period, 183–186; forage wars in, 27; historiography on, 3–4; to Loyalists, 58–59, 158; for Patriots, 33–34, 35–36, 37, 40, 44–45, 58–59; to Richard Stockton, 78–79. See also damage and destruction Council of Safety, 43–44, 67–68, 72, 79, 89 Covenhoven, John, 60–61, 105 Coxe Family (Daniel, V; John Redman; Sarah Redman; William), 148–152, 178–179 Coxe v. Gullick, 151 Crane, William, 52 criminals: captured Patriots as, 71; prisoners of war as, 77; as survivors, 106–107 Croes, John, 180 Cromwell, Oliver, 53 Cudjo, Jack, 53 Cunningham, William, 76, 78 Currency Act of 1964, 9, 18 damage and destruction: to churches, 140, 170, 173, 183–184; to the College of New

Jersey, 39, 81–82, 184, 210n60; of the First Presbyterian Church in Elizabethtown, 32, 152–153; of New Jersey towns, 183–185; psychological, 183–184; to Queen’s College, 184; reports of, 185. See also costs; property death toll, 27–28, 34, 75, 184 Declaration of Independence: captured signers of, and the oath of allegiance to the monarch, 60–63, 67–68, 69–70; in Patriot/Loyalist division, 17; in the revolution in New Jersey, 1–2; signers of, as British targets, 33–34, 69 Declaratory Act of 1766, 10, 39 DeLancey, Oliver, 17 Delaware, Christian, 28 Delaware Indians, 107–108 Delaware River Battle of the Kegs, 36–37 Demarest, David G., 101 Demarest, Gilliam, 101 Demarest, Jane (born Zabriskie), 101 Dickinson, John, Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania, 124–125 Dickinson, Philemon, 124–125 disease, 34, 40, 50–52, 184 diversity, socio ethnic and racial, 7–8, 58 divisions: East/West in New Jersey, 5–6; in historiography, 2–3; postwar reconciliation of, 186 Dongan, Edward Vaughan, 144–145 Donop, Carl Emil, 104–105 Dougan, Henry, 144–145 dower rights, 96, 149, 178–179 Drake, Ephraim, 68 DuBois, Louis, 47 DuBois, Peter, 138 Dutch Reform Church: Coetus faction, 7–8, 19–20, 21, 33–34, 47–49, 58, 161; Conferentie faction, 142, 144, 161, 164 East Jersey Board of Proprietors, 6–7, 17–18, 87–88, 89, 137–138, 170–171 economics/economy: in conflicted loyalties, 87–88; in historiography on causes of the Revolutionary War, 2–3; inflation, 27, 34; in interpretations of the Revolutionary War, 4; in pre-War New Jersey, 6–7; in side-taking, 17–18; wartime costs to, 184–185 Edeson/Edison family, 175 Edison, Thomas, 175

232 • Index

elections, 16, 188–190 Elizabethtown, NJ, 6, 12, 14–15, 31–33, 167–170 Elm Farm, 159–160, 193n2 emancipation of slaves, 53–55, 71, 110, 154–155, 158 enlightenment, rural, 51–52 enslaved persons. See slaves/slavery Episcopal Church of the United States, 161–162, 169–170, 180 evangelicalism/evangelicals, 19–21, 22, 33, 39 exchanges of prisoners, 68–69, 71–72, 77, 82–83, 88 executions, 26, 65–67, 119, 138 exile/exiles: common attributes of, 157; compensation for, 135–136; of Dutch Ministers, 142–145; Loyalist, in historiography, 131–132, 133, 135; of Patriot prisoners of war, 71–72; of Quakers, 111, 112–114, 128; in the war of oaths, 65, 68. See also Loyalists; refugees factionalism: in pre-War politics, 6–7; religious, 19–20, 142–143 family: children of Patriot leaders, as British targets, 34; and conflicted loyalties, 85, 86–88, 90, 101, 108; of Loyalists who remained or returned, 163–164, 172, 173; in Patriots’ determination, 32–33; postwar forgiveness in, 186; in protection of property, 177–178; in side-taking, 18–19 Fell, John, 33–34, 40–41, 71–72 Ferguson, Henry Hugh, 100–101 Ferguson, Patrick, 28 Fergusson, Elizabeth (born Graeme), 100–101 Field, Mary Peale/Peel, 104–105, 108 First Presbyterian Church, Elizabethtown, 31–33, 152–153 First Presbyterian Church, Tennant, 20 Fischer, David Hackett: Paul Revere’s Ride, 90; Washington’s Crossing, 2–3, 76 Fitch, John, 56 Fithian, Philip Vickers, 51–52 forage wars, 25, 27–28, 129, 179 Ford, Gabriel H., 151 Ford, Jacob, Jr., 52 forgiveness, as wartime legacy, 186 Forman, David (“Black David”), 49, 59 Fort Lee, Battle of, 23

Fort Mercer, 116 Fort Pitt Treaty, 108 Fort Ticonderoga, 64 Fowler, David J., 106–107 Franklin, Benjamin, 19, 58, 136, 138, 186 Franklin, Elizabeth (born Downes), 138 Franklin, William: arrest of, 13, 15; on the Currency Act, 9; and the Greenwich tea party, 11–12; as Loyalist, 19, 133, 135–136, 138–139; violation of parole by, 69 Frazer, Gregg L., God against the Revolution, 3–4, 131–132 Frazer, William, 140 free Blacks, 53, 59 French and Indian War, 8–9 Freneau, Philip Morin: “American Liberty,” 74; The British Prison Ship, 74–75; “The Rising Glory of America,” 20–21 Gage, Margaret (Kemble), 90–91 Gage, Thomas, 90–91 geography and the war in New Jersey, 4–5 Georgia, 65–67 Gerlach, Larry R., Prologue to Independence, 2–3 governors: in the Constitution of 1776, 16–17; Patriot, local selection of, 220n21; postwar election of, 188–189; royal, as Loyalists, 132, 136, 138, 220n21 Great Awakening, 19–20, 161 Green, Jacob, 12–13, 22, 50–51; Fast Day Sermon, 188; Observations on the Reconciliation of Great Britain and the Colonies, 12–13, 186 Greene, Nathaniel, 124 Greenwich, “tea party,” 11–12 Hackensack valley, 47–49, 56, 133, 186 Haddonfield Friends Meeting, 118–119 Hancock, John, 78 Hancock, William, 113, 129 Hancock House Massacre, 27–28, 129 Hand, Elijah, 129 hangings in effigy, 10, 13–15 harbors: in the British invasion, 13, 46; deaths on prison ships in, 34, 73–75, 184; in the Revolutionary War in New Jersey, 4–5, 13, 26, 27–28, 29 Hardenberg, Jacob Rutsen, 21, 99 Hart, John (“Honest John”), 33–34, 35–36

Index • 233

Hartshorne Family, 97 Hatton, John, 15 Heyward, Thomas Jr., 68, 69 Hinchman, John, 171 Hoock, Holger, Scars of Independence: America’s Violent Birth, 2, 3 Hope Farm house, 98–99 Hopkinson, Francis, 33–34, 36–37, 79–80; “The Battle of the Kegs,” 36–37; “The Birds, the Beast, and the Bat,” 101–102 Horse America, The, 189 Horton, Jonathan, 51 Howard, William, 19 Howe, Richard, 31–32, 65–67 Howe, William, 24, 31–32, 65–67 Howell, Richard, 11–12 Huddy, Joshua, 26, 138, 155 Hunt, Abraham, 105–106 Hunterdon County, 28–29, 134 ideology, 2–3, 18 imprisonment: of loyalists, 154, 173; in oath taking, 60–61, 65–67, 68; of Patriots, 34, 35, 52; of Quakers, 111, 117, 119; of Richard Stockton, 60–61, 69–70, 71–73, 77–78; of straddlers, 93, 95. See also prisoners of war Indians, 3, 8, 28, 41–43, 107–108, 132, 188 Ingersoll, Thomas N., The Loyalist Problem in Revolutionary New England, 131–132 Intolerable/Coercive Acts. See Coercive/ Intolerable Acts Jasanoff, Maya, Liberty’s Exiles, 131–132, 165 Jersey (prison ship), 35, 75 Jockey Hollow, 25 Johnes, Timothy, 51 Johnson, James, 12 Johnson, Uzal, 172–173 Jones, T. Cole, Captives of Liberty, 76–77 Jones, Thomas, History of New York during the Revolutionary War, 44 Jouet, Cavalier, 134 Kammen, Michael, 68, 69 Kearny, Michael, 175 Kemble Family (Peter, Richard, Samuel, Stephen, William), 86–87, 90–91, 179 Kempe, Grace (born Coxe), 148–149, 150 Kempe, John Tabor, 150

Kempe’s Lessee v. Kennedy et al., 150 kidnapping, 27, 72, 138, 154 Killbuck, John and Thomas, 107 King, Boston and family, 156–157; Memoirs, 156–157 King’s Mountain, Battle of and massacre at, 28 Kinsey, James, 117–118 Kirby, William, 185 Kitchel, Anna, 65–67 Kuyper, Hendrick, 52 Kuypers, Elias and Warmoldus, 164 LaGrange, Bernardus/Barnardus, and family, 14–15, 131, 144–145, 146, 146 Laurence/Lawrence, John, and family, 173 Laurens, Henry, 71–72 Lee, Charles, 23 legacies of the Revolution, 186, 189–190 Leiby, Adrian, 2–3 Lenape/Delaware people, 8, 107–108 Leutze, Emanuel Gottlieb, Washington Crossing the Delaware, 5 Leydecker, Gerhardus/Garret, 142, 144 Lincoln, Benjamin, 102–103 Lindsey, William R., “Treatment of American Prisoners of War during the Revolution,” 76 Lippincott, Richard, 26 Litchfield jail, 138 Little Egg Harbor, 26, 27–28, 29 Livingston, Brockholst, 44 Livingston, John Lawrence, 44 Livingston, Susan, 42 Livingston, Susannah (born French), 41 Livingston, William, as adamant Patriot, 41–45; and Loyalists, 142, 154, 161, 167, 169, 179–180; postwar concerns of, 183, 185–186; and the Quakers, 111, 118; satirical poetry by, 41–43; on straddlers refusal to take the oath, 88 Lockwood, Matthew, To Begin the World Over Again, 3 “London Trade,” 27, 106 Long Island, Battle of, 72 Loring, Joshua, 73–74, 76 Lott, Abraham, Jr., 93 Lowe/Low family (Cornelius; Isaac; Isaac, Jr; Nicholas), 92–97 Lowndes, Rawlins, 69

234 • Index

Loyalists: as “aliens,” 178–179; Anglican ministers as, 20, 21–22, 139–142, 143, 158–162, 164, 165–171, 180; Black, 28, 132, 134–135, 154–157, 158; Colt’s Neck raid by, 46–47; common characteristics of, 19–22, 133, 157, 179; compensation for, 135–136, 149–150, 153, 154, 170–171, 172, 176–177; costs to, 58–59, 158; criticism of Livingston by, 44; Dutch Reform Ministers as, 142, 144–145, 161, 164; factors in side taken by, 17–18, 19–22; as Federalists, 179–180; William Franklin, 19, 133, 135–136, 138–139; in historiography, 131–135; in interpretations of the Revolutionary War, 3–4; New Jersey population of, 179; Quakers as, 110, 112–113, 128–129; remained, 158–164, 218n5; repeal of laws against, 186; return of, 89–90, 148, 151–152, 165–178; sincerity of oath-taking by, 68. See also name of Loyalist loyalty: affirmations of, 65, 110–111, 118–119, 121; conflicted, 85, 86–101, 108, 114–116. See also allegiance Lundin, Leonard, Cockpit of the American Revolution, 2–3 MacWhorter, Alexander, 28, 45 marriage, in loyalty and side-taking, 18–19, 100–101 Marshall, John, 150 Mary Silliman’s War, 72 Massachusetts, 10–11, 12 massacres, 27–28, 113, 129 Mawhood, Charles, 129 Maxwell, William, 169 McIllvaine v. Coxe’s Lessee, 151 Metzger, Charles H., Prisoners in the American Revolution, 76 Middlebrook, NJ, 25–26 Middlekauf, Robert, The Glorious Cause, 183–184 Middlesex County, 55, 133–134 Middleton, Arthur, 68 military service: by Black Loyalists, 155–157; exemptions from, 123–124; of Loyalists, 132–133, 134–135; by Quakers, 111, 124–129; service provision as alternative to, 111; substitutions for, 29, 53–55, 111 Militia Act of 1777, New Jersey, 52 militias, local, 4–5, 16–17, 23–25

ministers: Anglican, 20, 21–22, 139–142, 143, 158–162, 164, 165–171, 180; Presbyterian, 33–34, 45–46, 51–52, 184. See also Witherspoon, John monarchists, 85–86, 157, 173–174, 179. See also Loyalists Monmouth, Battle of, 20, 24–25, 125 Monmouth County, 22–23, 27–28, 132–133, 134, 155 Monmouth County Retaliators, 27, 49 Moody, James, 133, 153–154; Narrative of His Exertions and Sufferings in the Cause of the Government, 154 Moore, Joseph, 117 Moore, Samuel, 128 Morgan, George, 107–108 Morris, Margaret (born Hill), 113–124 Morristown, NJ, 50–51, 52, 183–184 Mott, John, 127 Mulford, David, 50 Murray, Joseph, 50 mutiny, 126 Mutiny/Quartering Acts, 9 Nassau Hall, Princeton, 1–2, 26, 39, 80, 82, 184. See also College of New Jersey National Gazette, 75–76 navies in the war, 29, 113–114 neo-Whig history, 2–3 neutrality, 8, 19–20, 88, 91–92, 107, 111, 113–119. See also straddlers Newark, NJ, 28–29, 186–187 New Brunswick, NJ, 13–14 Newgate prison, Connecticut, 137 New Jersey Constitution of 1776, 13, 15–17, 65, 110–111, 188, 189–190 New Jersey Gazette, 41–42, 121, 123–124 New Jersey Privy Council, 79–80 New Jersey Volunteers (“Skinner’s Greens”), 147–148 New York Harbor, 13, 29, 34, 46, 73, 75, 184 North Act of 1777, 71 oaths of loyalty/allegiance: affirmations of allegiance, 65, 110–111, 118–119, 121; and confiscation of Loyalist property, 133–134; conflicted loyalties in taking of, 88, 89–90, 91, 100–101; to the monarch, 21–22, 23, 60–61, 62, 64–70, 95, 105, 207n21; Oath of Abjuration and

Index • 235

Allegiance, 67–68, 80, 81, 210n54; oath of neutrality, 91; and pardons, 23, 65–66, 67, 79, 133–134; Quaker refusal of, 110–111, 117–118, 124; required by the New Jersey Council of Safety, 79, 80; timing and place in taking of, 84; war of, 64–71 Odell, Jonathan, 114, 140–142, 143, 168; American Times, 141–142; Word of Congress, 141 Ogden, David, and family, 170–171 Ogden, Robert, 10 Ogden, Urzal, 21–22, 170 Old Tappan massacre, 27–28 opportunists, 85, 102–107, 108. See also straddlers; trimmers pacifism/nonpacifism, 20, 109, 110, 111–112, 113–124 Paine, Thomas: Common Sense, 12–13; The Crisis Papers, 23 Parker, James, 17, 86–88, 108, 164 Parkinson, Robert G., The Common Cause: Creating Race and Nation in the American Revolution, 2 Parliament, 9–13, 18, 71, 77. See also taxation without representation parole, 60–61, 68–69 Paterson, Cornelia (born Bell), 162–164 Paterson, William, 40, 65–67, 163–164; The Dominion of Providence over the Passions of Men, 22 path to war: conservatism in, 9–13; mob action and radicalism in, 13–17; taking sides in, 17–23 Patriots: adamant, 34–50; Anglicans as, 58, 140; Black, 52–55; conservative, 179–180; costs for, 33–34, 35–36, 37, 40, 44–45, 58–59; damage and loss of property of, 34, 35–36, 37, 47–48, 52, 55–58; disease as factor for, 34, 40, 50–52, 184; factors in side taken by, 17–18; in interpretations of the Revolutionary War, 3–4; prisoners of war, 71–78, 82–84, 184; Quakers as, 119–124; refusal of protection papers by, 31–32; religious affiliation in side-taking of, 19–22, 32–33, 37–39, 58; tested loyalty of, 84; in the war of oaths, 64–71. See also r name of Patriot Paulus Hook garrison massacre, 28 Pearson, Isaac, 107 Penn, John, 162–163

pensions: British for Loyalists, 139, 143–144, 145, 150, 154, 171, 172; military for Black Patriot soldiers, 53–55. See also compensation Philadelphia, PA, 65–67 Philadelphia Meeting for Suffrage, “The Antient Testimony and Principles of the People Call’d Quakers,” 112 Philadelphia Quaker Meeting, 111–113, 120–121 physicians, 133, 140, 144–145, 172–173 Plain Dealer (Bridgeton), 85 ports, free, 89–90 post-war future, 183–186 Potts, Stacy, 123–124 Presbyterians: as adamant Patriots, 37–39, 58; and the College of New Jersey, 19; ministers, 33–34, 45–46, 51–52, 184 (see also Witherspoon, John); as Patriots, 19–20; postwar importance of, 188–189 press, freedom of, 123 Prevost, Theodosia Bartow (later Burr), 86–87, 99–101, 213n22 Prevost brothers (Augustine Jacques, Jacques/James), 99 Prime, Benjamin, 46–47 Prince (former slave and Loyalist), 156 Princeton, Battle of, 1–2, 69–70, 184 Princeton, NJ, 26, 78–79, 183–184. See also College of New Jersey prisoners of war, 60–61, 68–69, 70–78, 82–84, 88–89, 172–173, 184 prison ships, 34, 73–75, 76, 184 privateers, 29 property: claims for damage and loss of, 92–97, 116, 138, 139, 145–148, 149–151, 153, 158; confiscation of, 65, 101, 119, 133–134, 146, 147, 149; in the Constitution of 1776, 15–16; enslaved persons as, 53; in interpretations of the Revolutionary War, 4; and laws on treason, 133–134; Loyalist, damage and loss of, 138, 139, 143–144, 145–148, 149–151, 153, 158, 170–171, 179; Patriot, damage and loss of, 34, 35–36, 37, 39, 43–44, 47–48, 52, 55–58, 70, 183–184; Quaker, claimed by “Free” Quakers, 120–121; Quaker, damage and loss of, 116–117; regained, 151–152, 175–178; Stockton’s loss of, 78–79; in straddling, trimming, and opportunism, 85, 92–97, 100–101, 102–103, 108; women’s dower rights to, 96, 149, 178–179

236 • Index

Provincial Congresses, 12, 13, 16–17 Provost jail, New York city, 40–41, 78 Putnam, Israel, 111 “Quaker Blues,” 124 Quakers: as adamant Patriots, 58; in colonial New Jersey, 7–8; conflicted loyalties of, 86–87, 97; and the Constitution of 1776, 16–17; “disowning” of, 110, 113, 119–121, 123, 124, 127–129, 171; distrust and suspicions regarding, 110, 112–114; Free Quakers, 20, 119–124, 129–130; in interpretations of the Revolutionary War, 4; as Loyalists, 110, 112–113, 128–129; and loyalty oaths, 64–65; military service by, 124–129; noncombatants, 113–124; pacifism in doctrine of, 109, 110, 111–112; Patriot and nonpacifist, 119–124; political influence of, 109–110, 130, 188–189; population of, 109–110, 130; in relief efforts, 118–119; side-taking by, 19–20, 113–124; and slavery, 4, 127–128, 155 Quartering Act, 9, 12 Quebec Act, 12 Queen’s College, 19–20, 21, 184 Queens Rangers, 129 Quinton’s Bridge, 27–28, 129 race, 3, 7–8 racism, 108, 155–156 radicalism, 13–17, 63–64 Raritan Landing, Piscataway, 86, 92–93 Raritan valley, 19–20, 161, 183 recognition of the United States, 71–72, 77, 111–112 reenslavement of Black Loyalists, 156–157, 158 refugees: irreconcilable Loyalists as, 133; Patriot, 34, 48, 50, 58; “Refugee Town,” Sandy Hook, 106–107; as returnees, 173–175; wartime, 29–30, 184, 185, 190. See also exile/exiles; Loyalists regime change, 15, 188 religion, 7, 16, 19–22, 32–33, 97, 110–111, 179, 189–190. See also name of religious group representation in Parliament, 9–11, 12, 18, 63, 124–125 retaliation, 3–4, 27, 28, 37, 49, 179 Retaliation, Association for, 97, 133 Return of Tories, Association to Oppose the, 134

return/returnees, Loyalist, 89–90, 132, 148, 151–152, 165–178 Riedesel, Friederike Charlotte Luise, 103–104 Rivington, James, 13–14 Robinson, Beverly, Jr. and family, 165 Robinson, Lady Catherine Skinner, 147–148 Romeyn, Theodore (“Dirck”), 47–49, 56 Ross, Betsy (Elizabeth), 120–121 Royal Loyalist Claims Commission, 92–94, 95, 135–136, 145, 147–148, 171 Rush, Benjamin, 61–63, 67, 78–79, 82, 84 Rutherford family (Walter, John, and James Parker), 17, 87–90 Rutledge, Edward, 68 sanitation, 50–52 Saratoga, Battle of, 72, 103–104 Scudder, Nathaniel, 46–47 Sergeant, John Dickinson, 17, 33–34, 39–40 settlement of New Jersey, 5–6 sexual violence/rape, 28–29 Shaughnessy, Andrew Jackson, The Men Who Lost America, 3 Shreve family (Henry, Israel, John), 126–127, 129 side-changers, 102, 108, 148–149, 152, 172–173 Sierra Leone, 155–157 signers of the Declaration of Independence, 33–34, 36–39, 60–63, 67–68, 69–70. See also name of signer; Stockton, Richard; Witherspoon, John Simsbury-mines, 137 Sinnickson, Sarah (born Hancock), 129 Skinner, Cortlandt, and family (Catherine, John, Stephen, William), 17, 43–44, 145, 147–148, 175 Slaughter, Thomas, Independence: The Tangled Roots of the American Revolution, 2 “slavery” in the Constitution of 1776, 16–17 slaves/slavery: in colonial New Jersey, 7–8; in the Continental Army, 52, 53–55; deaths of, in British military service, 134–135; emancipation of, 53–55, 71, 110, 154–155, 158; in historiography, 3, 4; in Loyalist claims for compensation, 135–136; as Loyalists, 134–135, 154–157, 158; post-Revolution, 188 smallpox, 50–51

Index • 237

Smith, William, Jr., 68 Smith, William Peartree, 181–182, 185–186 Smyth, Frederick, 171–172 Society of Friends. See Quakers Sons of Liberty, 10, 167–168 Spero, Patrick, The American Revolution Reborn, 3 spies/spying, 112–113, 136, 138, 152–153, 154 Stamp Act of 1765, 1–2, 9–10, 63, 136, 138, 167 starvation, 50, 73–74, 77 Stiles, Ezra, 169–170 Stives, William, 53 St. John’s Anglican church, Elizabethtown, 32–33, 140 Stockton, Annis (born Boudinot), 61, 83–84 Stockton, Richard and family: in activism on behalf of prisoners of war, 72–73, 82–84; background of, 61–64; British loyalty oath taken by and recanted, 60–61, 67–70, 207n21; as British target, 33–34; and the College of New Jersey, 80, 82; oath of Abjuration and Allegiance taken by, 80, 81, 210n54; post-parole life of, 78–81; as prisoner of war, 60–61, 69–70, 71–73, 77–78 straddlers, 85, 86–101, 107–108, 123–124, 151–152, 186. See also neutrality; opportunists; trimmers substitutions for military service, 29, 53–55, 111 Sugar House prison, 35, 82–83, 101 Sullivan, John, 28, 112–113 Supreme Court, U.S., 149, 150–151 Supreme Court of New Jersey, 80 survival/survivors: in changing allegiance, 85–86; failed, 107–108; flexible, 101–107; for prisoners of war, 60–61; and the war of oaths, 69 Sutphen/Sutphin, Samuel, 53–55 tarring and feathering, 14–15 taxation without representation, 9–11, 12, 18, 63, 124–125 Taylor, Alan, 132, 173–174; American Revolutions: A Continental History, 1750–1804, 2 Tea Act, 9, 11–12 “Ten Crucial Days,” 24–25 Tennent family (John and William, Jr.), 20 Toms River, British raids on, 29

Townshend Acts of 1767, 9, 10–11, 124–125 treason, 71, 77, 92, 93, 105–106, 119, 133–134 Trenton, Battle of, 5, 24, 69–70, 72, 113–114, 125 Trenton, NJ, 6, 51, 56–58, 121, 123–124 trial by jury, 16, 189–190 trimmers, 85, 101–102. See also opportunists; straddlers Trinity Church, Newark, 170 Tucker, Samuel, 105 van Beuren/Buren, James, 173 van Buskirk, Abraham and Jacob, 152–153 van Buskirk, Johannes/John, 105–106 van Dike, John and Rebecca, 175, 177–178 van Horne, Philip, 102–104 van Nostrandt, Samuel, 156 van Schaack, Peter, 165 vengeance, 26, 72–73, 77, 133. See also retaliation violence: by the Associated Loyalists, 27, 133; in historiography on the Revolutionary War, 3–4; irreconcilable Loyalists in, 133, 152–153; level of, 27–29; massacres, 27–28, 113, 129; Quaker objections to, 111–112; against Quakers at Hancock House, 129; retaliation in, 27, 28, 49; in strength of anti-Loyalist sentiment, 134 von Wreden, Carl August, 104–105 voting rights, 15–16, 65, 97, 188 Vought family (Christoffel and John), 173–174 Vought House, Clinton, New Jersey, 173–174 Wadman, Arthur, 144–145 Wallace, Gertrude (born Lowe), 95–96 Wallace, John, 97–99 Wallace, Sarah (born Lowe), 92–93, 95, 96, 151, 164 Wallace brothers (Alexander, Hugh), 95–97 Walton, George, 68 Washington, George: on Black men as soldiers, 52; in inoculation of Patriots against smallpox, 50–51; and Israel Shreve, 126–127; and James Moody, 154; and the Joshua Huddy affair, 26; on prisoner of war exchanges, 72; treatment of Stockton by, 79–80; in the war in New Jersey, 23–24; in the war of oaths, 67, 69–70

238 • Index

Washington Crossing the Delaware (Leutze), 5 waterways, 4–5 Wayne, Anthony, 90, 91–92 wealth, in side-taking, 17 Weaver, George and Frederick, 174–175 Western Delaware Indians, 107–108 West Jersey Council of Proprietors, 6–7, 89 West New Jersey Quaker colony, 109–110 “Whig” philosophy, 18 Whitall, Ann Cooper, 113, 116–117 Whitall, Benjamin, 127 Whitall, Job, 116–117 White, Anthony, 162 White Eyes, George Morgan and Koquethagachton, 107–108 White Hill, Burlington, 104–105 Williams, Joseph, 128–129 Williams, Peter, 53 Witherspoon, John: as an adamant Patriot, 33–34, 37–39, 38; as early advocate of independence, 12–13; in investigation of

the treatment of prisoners, 78; and Richard Stockton, 61–62; in Jonathan Odell’s poetry, 141–142; postwar concerns of, 183, 185–186; on Richard Stockton’s loyalty oath, 67; side-taking by, 20–21, 22 women: conflicted loyalties of, 99–101; and “couverture,” 19; as determined patriots, 31–32; dower rights of, 96, 149, 178–179; as flexible survivors, 104–105; Loyalist, challenges for, 178; and loyalty oaths, 64–67; in the massacre at Mohawk Valley, 28; propertied, as voters in the Constitution of 1776, 16 Woodward family, 128–129 Yard, Benjamin, 56–58 Yorktown, Battle of, 26, 72, 76 Zabriskie family, 175 Zuckerman, Michael, The American Revolution Reborn, 3

About the Author HISTORIAN MA XINE N. LURIE is professor emerita at Seton Hall University. An early

American historian, with an interest in both the seventeenth and the eighteenth centuries, she has concentrated on New Jersey history for more than thirty-five years. She compiled two editions of A New Jersey Anthology (1994 and 2002) and worked for years with Marc Mappen on the Encyclopedia of New Jersey (2004), then with Peter O. Wacker and Michael Siegel on Mapping New Jersey: An Evolving Landscape (2009), and with Richard Veit on both New Jersey: A History of the Garden State (2012), as well as Envisioning New Jersey: An Illustrated History of the Garden State (2016). She is also the author of scholarly articles that have appeared in a variety of journals, as well as chapters in several books. In addition, she has enjoyed teaching college students, participating in workshops for K–12 teachers, and judging History Day competitions. An interest in public history has led to participation in several organizations, including the New Jersey Studies Academic Alliance and the New Jersey Historical Commission. This book began with an interest in Richard Stockton that expanded over the years to the story of other New Jersey residents who were also caught up in the middle of a long civil war.