The articles in the collection 250 for the 250th: The American Revolution in Monmouth County represent the most complete history of this topic ever assembled. < 250 Home < Previous pg. Next > The Difficult Service of Forman's Flying Camp by Michael Adelberg British soldiers rowed ashore, assembled, and attacked the ill-prepared Continental Army in present-day Brooklyn. David Forman’s regiment saw limited action during the battle. - June 1776 - In June 1776, with momentum building for a declaration of independence and a massive British Army on its way, the Thirteen Colonies renewed their efforts to raise men for the Continental Army. Among other measures, on June 3, the New Jersey Provincial Congress passed an act to raise up to 3,300 “Flying Camp” to join the Continental Army. Flying Camp were like other Continental soldiers but, importantly, their enlistments would run for only five months—the expected length of time of the 1776 military campaign season. Raising Forman’s Regiment One Flying Camp regiment would be raised from Middlesex and Monmouth Counties--Nathaniel Heard of Woodbridge and David Forman of Freehold were charged with raising four companies each from their home counties. Recruiting began in May, prior to the passage of the act, and the regiment reached critical mass by mid-June. Thomas Henderson (a major in the newly-raised regiment) recalled that the first part of the Flying Camp left for “Long Island and joined General Washington's army” on June 14. (Brooklyn and Queens were discussed as part of Long Island in the 1700s.) A month later on July 15, as additional Monmouth County company raised from Upper Freehold left for New York. Forman’s recruits left Monmouth County at an inopportune time. As they left, a Loyalist insurrection bubbled up in Upper Freehold township. The departure of 200 supporters of the Revolution left the Monmouth militia weakened at its first moment of crisis. Noting the militia’s weakness, the New Jersey Provincial Congress resolved on July 2 that no additional Monmouth County militia would leave the county beyond Forman’s men: Resolved, That, in the opinion of this Congress, the Militia of Monmouth County ought, for the present, to remain in their own County, excepting such part thereof as by the late Ordinance of this Congress were required to form their proportion of the New-Jersey Brigade of three thousand three hundred men. Surviving documents do not reveal exactly when the full Middlesex-Monmouth regiment, now commanded by David Forman, its colonel, reached Long Island. However, one of the men, Isaac Vredenburgh, recalled their line of march and initial responsibilities upon reaching Brooklyn: His company was attached to the Regiment commanded by Col David Forman. A few days after the company marched to Elizabeth Town and from thence by Bergen Point & Staten Island, to Long Island [Brooklyn], and that they labored there and were engaged in constructing redoubts, and breastworks. Forman’s Regiment in the New York Campaign Forman’s regiment was assigned to a brigade commanded by General Nathanael Greene of Rhode Island. Greene’s first order mentioning Forman’s regiment concerned gathering "slaw bunks [sick beds] from the different regiments” for Forman. Greene’s order continued “two companies that have been with Col. Forman's Regiment are exceedingly sick, great numbers taken down every day." Indeed, sickness would prove far more dangerous to Forman’s Flying Camp than British soldiers. Periodic muster rolls from Forman’s regiment show the impact of sickness on the regiment during its five months of service. July 1776 – 451 men (42 sick & present, 0 sick & home) September, 352 total (25 sick & present, 131 sick & home); October – 253 men (20 sick & present, 115 sick & home) By October, Forman’s regiment had lost roughly 40% of its men. While there were a few captures and deaths, sickness caused the large majority of losses. After the Continental Army’s disastrous first battle with the British in Brooklyn, the Continental Army began retreating across New York. With the Army in motion, desertions also became a problem. On September 9, Forman advertised a 40-shilling reward for the return of sixteen deserters. He re-advertised for their return in two New York newspapers again on September 28, suggesting little initial success in locating and capturing the deserters. Other men left the regiment for various reasons. Muster rolls record six men being furloughed home (presumably they would return). Forman furloughed himself in September, perhaps to search for the deserters. Other men were listed as “on command” – a catch-all term used for men on temporary assignments away from their company. Common reasons men were listed “on command” include service at a military hospital, gathering supplies for the Army, and recruiting. Combat deaths were a relatively small problem – there were only two combat deaths across the four Monmouth companies. Other documents provide glimpses into the ill-discipline of the rank and file. Orderly books from junior officers and sergeants in Forman’s regiment provide glimpses into the Army’s disorder: July 10: “The General doubts not the person that took and mutilated the statue in the Broadway last night was actuated by zeal in the public cause, yet it was so much the appearance of riot & want of order in the Army that he directs that in the future these things may be avoided by the soldiers & left to be executed by the proper authority.” July 13: [Soldiers] “instead of attending to their duty at the beating of a drum, continued along the banks of the North River, gazing at the ships”; July 17: “Complaints having been frequently made that the Sentries, especially those posted along the river, fire wantonly at boats and persons passing - officers are to be careful upon this head and acquaint Sentries that they are not to molest or upset the ferry boats”; August 3: Warning issued regarding "the foolish & wicked practice of profane cursing and swearing"; August 6: Men chastised for "bad behavior" towards locals "taking and destroying their things." The first time Forman’s regiment saw battle was at the Battle of Long Island (Brooklyn). Several of Forman’s men discussed it in their postwar veteran’s pension applications (written in the 1820s). Some anecdotes about the Battle of Long Island are offered below: David Baird recalled that he “marched to Flatbush where a battle was fought -- that he was not in the main battle, but was engaged in a skirmish with the British during the day, and made a narrow escape with his life, being shot at by a Hessian of whom some of his men killed afterwards, the bullet passing his temple but doing no serious harm." John Bruce recalled that he “was employed in making entrenchments and fortifications in Brooklyn, at which place they continued until a few days after the battle of Flatbush... Saw the engagement but was not in the battle." Isaac Childs recalled that he "was in the battle of Long Island when the British took it, and saved myself from being prisoner by swimming to the Yellow Mill." James Craig recalled that “when the British Army attacked the Americans at Long Island… were placed in a piece of woods that skirted the roads which the British Army had to come.” His friend, Jacob Pettenger, recalled that Craig “induced a fleeing soldier” to return and stay in formation. Samuel Mundy recalled the hurried retreat of Forman’s regiment after the battle: He recalled the regiment fleeing suddenly at 11 pm "leaving their tents standing.” After the Battle of Long Island, Washington’s Army, with Forman’s regiment in it, spent the fall retreating across New York and into New Jersey. Isaac Vrendenburgh recalled the regiment’s line of march: Remained in the New York a very short time when the whole army move towards Harlem, and from thence marched to Fort Washington and while there had several recontres with the enemy – Shortly after marched up to the White Plains, where the American forces were collected, and where he remained until the battle at that place occurred, in which he was engaged. After this affair, marched some distance further north and crossed the Hudson, and then marched down southerly through Haverstraw to Fort Lee, and from thence through Bergen County to Newark and Elizabethtown in Essex. With only a week remaining in their enlistment, on November 24, Forman was permitted to pull his regiment away from the Army and return to Monmouth County. This was done in order to suppress a burgeoning Loyalist insurrection. Samuel Mundy recalled: The Colonel of the regiment received orders to take his regiment to Perth Amboy & cross over into Monmouth County to disarm certain disaffected persons in that county - immediately after this service he was discharged with the rest by the Colonel, their term of service expired. Forman’s campaign against the Monmouth insurrectionaries is discussed in another article. Related Historic Site : Brooklyn Battlefield (Battle of Long Island, Brooklyn, NY) Sources : Anderson, John R. "Militia Law in Revolutionary New Jersey." Proceedings of the New Jersey historical Society, vols. LXXVI and LXXVII (July 1956 and January 1959), pp. 291, 293-4; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, Thomas Henderson of New Jersey, www.fold3.com/image/#23877525 ; Minutes of the Provincial Congress and the Council of Safety of the State of New Jersey 1775-1776 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2009) pp. 550-1; Charles H. Lesser, The Sinews of Independence: Monthly Strength Reports of the Continental Army (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1976), pp. 26-34; New York Historical Society, Orderly Books Collection, Captain Henry Weatherhill, reel 3, #32 and American Book #32; Library of Congress, William Walton, Orderly Book; Nathanael Greene, The Papers of General Nathanael Greene (Chapel Hill: U of North Carolina Press, 1976) vol. 1, pp. 270-1; Peter Kinnan, Orderly Book Kept by Peter Kinnan, pp. X, 19-56; New York Gazette & Weekly Mercury, September 9, 1776; David Forman returns, National Archives, Collection 881, R 640; New Jersey Provincial Congress, July 2, 17776, in Peter Force, American Archives: Documents of the American Revolution, 1774-6 (digitized: http://dig.lib.niu.edu/amarch/find.doc.html), v6: p 1632, 1635; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, Samuel Mundy of NJ, www.fold3.com/image/#25890437 ; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 1, p 197; David Forman returns, National Archives, Revolutionary War Rolls, Coll. 69, p2, 5, 7, 11; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - David Baird; Franklin Ellis, The History of Monmouth County (R.T. Peck: Philadelphia, 1885), p228; John Rees, Eyewitness to Battle: The Pension Depositions of Frederick Van Lew and Isaac Childs, Brigade Dispatch, vol 29, n 3, 1999, p 18-21; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, John Bruce of New York, www.fold3.com/image/#11713958 ; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, Jacob Pettinerger of NJ, www.fold3.com/image/# 25952031. Previous Next

The articles in the collection 250 for the 250th: The American Revolution in Monmouth County represent the most complete history of this topic ever assembled. < 250 Home < Previous pg. Next > Colonel George Taylor Turns Loyalist by Michael Adelberg Loyalists were recruited into British service with handbills like this one used in Philadelphia in 1777. George Taylor circulated similar handbills when recruiting in Monmouth County. - November 1776 - George Taylor was Monmouth County’s senior militia officer, the first-appointed militia colonel and leader of the county’s largest regiment (his regiment had ten companies, the other two regiments had eight companies). But Taylor’s family leaned Loyalist. His cousin, William Taylor, led a movement to oppose the Declaration of Independence. William and his uncle, John Taylor, would lead a Loyalist insurrection in December. George’s father, Edward Taylor, was a leading Committeeman in 1775 who would become publicly disaffected by 1777. By November 1776, George Taylor’s frustrations mounted. The county militia was wracked with dysfunction —several companies simply would not turn out. From his base on the Navesink Highlands, Taylor daily observed small vessels illegally trading with the British on Sandy Hook and Staten Island without the naval assets to intervene. He also daily observed a powerful British military with the ability to easily invade thinly-protected Monmouth County. The Continental Army was routed in New York and retreating across New Jersey. Governor William Livingston snubbed Taylor by denying him custody of a vessel that he captured from a British prize crew. Taylor began hedging his bets; he became a “friend ” to a budding Loyalist association. Taylor was charged with rotating militia companies to stand guard opposite the bustling British naval base at Sandy Hook. Mid-month, he ordered out a new militia company but knew it was insufficient to withstand a British attack. On November 19, Taylor wrote John Covenhoven, a delegate to the New Jersey Assembly, about the weak defenses and a new loyalty oath requirement: I have taken this method to inform you and the rest of the House that Col. [Daniel] Hendrickson's month ends next Thursday, and the men will be very anxious to return home. I am at a loss how to act in this case, as the General's are out [retreating across New Jersey] and no orders can be given... I have ordered a company down to Sandy Hook; the post, I think, lies the most exposed. Taylor also offered to resign from the militia in preference to signing a loyalty oath: I have been informed that an act of your House makes void all commissions when the bearer does not qualify [sign of loyalty oath], and if officers have no other principles to bind them but oaths, I should be very doubtful whether any extraordinary matter might be expected of them. This subject I shall drop, and request information whether you choose my resignation or I must act as usual. This, Gentlemen, is on your breasts. Taylor concluded the letter ominously: “I shall now remain inactive until I hear from you." News of Taylor’s quasi-resignation spread quickly. Colonel Samuel Forman, commanding the militia regiment from Upper Freehold, Dover and Staff townships, wrote Assemblyman Joseph Holmes about Taylor in November 21: There is a task laid before me that I don't like. Col. Taylor refuses taking the oath required: in consequence thereof, the officers refuse acting under him. They request me to take command the next month, which begins tomorrow. Tis quite likely that Col Taylor has orders from the General, and also money to supply the regiment with provisions. Before I can go [and take command], I must have orders and money to supply a Commissary. You see the immediate necessity of orders being sent, or our guards on shore may be suffering for provisions, and in the greatest confusion. On November 24, Colonel David Forman’s Flying Camp returned to Monmouth County to break up a budding Loyalist insurrection—one that George Taylor likely knew about because it was led by his cousin, William. As Forman started arresting Loyalists, George Taylor likely feared that his cordial relations with insurrectionists would be uncovered. On November 28, George Taylor "deserted to the enemy"—probably joining the British on Sandy Hook or Staten Island. Taylor apparently met with Courtland Skinner, General of the Loyalist New Jersey Volunteers , and offered himself up as a senior officer. Since the field officer ranks of the New Jersey Volunteers were filled (with Monmouth Countians Elisha Lawrence and John Morris already leading the 1st and 2nd Battalions), Skinner devised a novel role for him. On December 18, Taylor was commissioned the Colonel of Monmouth County’s [Loyalist] Militia: You are therefore to take said militia into your charge and care as Colonel thereof, and duly exercise both officers and soldiers of the same in arms; and as they are hereby commanded to obey you, as their Colonel, so are you likewise to observe and follow such orders and directions from time to time as you shall receive from your Captain General. Taylor’s ill-fated Loyalist militia and brief period as a Loyalist partisan are discussed in another article, but, regardless of title, George Taylor’s commission evolved into a recruiter role over the course of the war. In April 1779, Taylor paid 3-guinea bounties at Sandy Hook to seventeen Loyalists who he recruited from Monmouth County to join the New Jersey Volunteers. Six months later, deliberately vague orders were sent to Captain Swinney of the HMS Europe at Sandy Hook to assist Taylor. Taylor would "go ashore at Sandy Hook Bay as may suit his purpose, which are according to the Commander in Chief's directions." Related Historic Sites : Marlpit Hall Sources : Selections from the Correspondence of the Executive of New Jersey, From 1776 to 1786 (Newark, NJ: Newark Daily Advertiser, 1848) pp. 18-20; William S. Stryker, Official Register of the Officers and Men of New Jersey in the Revolutionary War (Trenton: Naar, Day & Naar, 1872); Courtland Skinner to George Taylor, Great Britain, Public Record Office, Treasury, Class 1, vol 634, folio 186; Thomas Crowell, letter, Library of Congress, MMC - Courtland Skinner, box 10; John Andre to Captain Swinney, Great Britain Public Record Office, Treasury, Class 1, Volume 634, folio 187; Michael Adelberg, “’I am as Innocent as an Unborn Child’: The Disaffection of Edward and George Taylor,” New Jersey History , Spring 2005, v 123, pp 1-25. Previous Next

The articles in the collection 250 for the 250th: The American Revolution in Monmouth County represent the most complete history of this topic ever assembled. < 250 Home < Previous pg. Next > Refugee Women Listed in Monmouth County Militia Returns by Michael Adelberg Women picked up the pieces after raids laid waste to villages and farms. Sometimes they packed up their families and fled, as when 19 Tinton Falls women became refugees at Colts Neck. - June 1779 - Following April and June raids, the village of Tinton Falls was abandoned. All of its militia leaders were captured or killed, the public and military stores were taken, the buildings were looted or destroyed, and most or all of the livestock from the farms around the village were taken. Robert Morris, the Chief Justice of New Jersey, worried that people were becoming refugees in the inland countryside. He wrote: “Some are quitting their habitations, and others declare they are willing to do so, observing that if they must go on by starving, they had rather do it in the country than in the Provost Jail." Evidence that this did, in fact, happen is in a militia return compiled by Captain James Green. Green captained the Colts Neck militia, six miles west of Tinton Falls. His June 1780 militia return lists his 95 men and nineteen women—eleven of whom clearly were not from Colts Neck in boldface. (The others probably were not from Colts Neck either, but evidence is lacking.) See table 9 The women were not part of Green’s militia company. His decision to include them on his militia return is likely because they (and their families) were living as refugees at Colts Neck; Green was providing rations for them. Each township had Overseers of the Poor, but the Shrewsbury Township Overseers of the Poor in 1778 (1779 township records have not survived) were Joseph Parker, Joseph Throckmorton, and Thomas White—each of whom was either disaffected or residing near the shore. In either event, these men—who likely were neutrals or disaffected—were not politically aligned with families made refugee by Loyalist raiders. Green’s June 1780 return was compiled a year after the June 10, 1779, Tinton Falls raid, providing evidence that refugees were at Colts Neck for at least a year. It is important to note that none of these women were prosperous at war’s end, and at least three ended the war with less wealth than they had before the Tinton Falls raid (noted with an asterisk). Other Women in Militia Returns Seven women are listed in Upper Freehold militia returns from 1778-1780. They are Mary Perrine, Elizabeth Mooney, Elizabeth Rue, Martilla Clayton, Eleanor Reynolds, Elizabeth Mount, and Rebecca Mount. Of the seven, only one—Rue—is likely a refugee. She was from Freehold Township and her husband, Matthias Rue, was killed at the Battle of Navesink in 1777. Two of the women—Mary Perrine and Rebecca Mount were wives of Upper Freehold Loyalists who owned 225 and 200 acre farms with 12 and 11 head of livestock respectively. At war’s end, they were moderately prosperous yeoman farmers. The reason that Colonel Samuel Forman and Captain John Covenhoven (not the legislator of the same name) felt the need to list these women on militia returns is unknown. But the most likely reason is that these women (even the prosperous ones) and their families were displaced for a period of time and in need of support. Perhaps their estates were damaged when the British Army came through Upper Freehold in June 1778. There might be another case of a woman being included on a militia return. A genealogist, Marjy Wienkop, noted that the Stafford Township militia company of Captain Reuben Randolph lists Jeany Sutton as serving with him for 35 days at Perth Amboy. While "Jeany" is a female name, it can be wondered if this is a nickname of the French "Jean"—and potentially a male name (although Sutton is not a French name). Assuming that Jeany Sutton was a woman, the reason that Randolph felt a need to include her on his militia return is unknown. Women often went with military companies as “camp followers” but they were not paid for doing so beyond pay earned performing jobs for the soldiers. While the decimation of Tinton Falls may have forced dozens of people to become refugees, the Battle of Navesink was the event that produced the most deaths and captures of Monmouth Countians. Intermittently throughout the war, Monmouth Countians petitioned the state legislature for assistance for the suffering families of militiamen. On June 5, 1781, the New Jersey Assembly voted to grant half-pay military pensions to the wives of five Monmouth militiamen who died at Battle of Navesink or endured long term imprisonment after the battle. The women were: Isabella Hibbetts [widow of James], Mary Stillwell [widow of Obadiah], Elizabeth Cole [widow of William], Mary Winter [widow of James], and Penelope Davis [widow of Joseph]. The pensions were of a modest monthly amount of £2 S5. It is unknown why these five women were granted pensions while the wives of most of the militiamen killed or captured at the battle went unmentioned. While the state took like action to support a few women and families rocked by the local war in Monmouth County, militia officers provided support for many other impoverished, vulnerable women. If all of Monmouth County’s Revolutionary War militia returns had survived to this day, it is probable that more women would have been listed on a scattering of additional returns. Militia officers had no authority to provide rations or pay to these women. But under dire circumstances, these officers did what they thought was necessary. There is no reason to think they were punished for exceeding their authority. Sources : Morris, Robert, “Letters of Chief Justice Morris, 1777–1779,” Proceedings of the New Jersey Historical Society, vol. 38 (1920), pp. 175-6; Upper Freehold Militia Muster Rolls, National Archives, Revolutionary War Rolls, Coll. 70, p2, 4, 9; Muster rolls posted at the Continental Line, http://www.continentalline.org/articles/article.php?date=0002&article=000202 ; National Archives, Continental Army Records, Samuel Forman's Militia Regiment; Militia Return, June 1780, Captain James Green, Stryker-Rodda, Harriet, “Militia Women of 1780, Monmouth County, New Jersey,” N.S.D.A.R. Magazine, vol. 113, n. 4, April 1979, pp. 308-12; Harriet Stryker-Rodda, “Militia Women of 1780,” Daughters of the American Revolution Magazine, vol. 113 (1979) p 310; The Library Company, New Jersey Votes of the Assembly, June 5, 1781, p 34; Michael Adelberg, Biographical File (on file at the Monmouth County Historical Association Library). Previous Next

The articles in the collection 250 for the 250th: The American Revolution in Monmouth County represent the most complete history of this topic ever assembled. < 250 Home < Previous pg. Next > Admiralty Courts Held at Barton's Tavern in Allentown by Michael Adelberg In April 1776, the Continental Congress authorized privateers to capture British ships. The legality of 58 ship captures were judged at Admiralty Courts held at Gilbert Barton’s tavern in Allentown. - July 1778 - With the entry of France into the war, the British navy re-assigned ships away from the Atlantic Seaboard to protect other parts of its sprawling empire. The British now had less ability to protect ships coming in and out of New York. Privateering, by which American ship captains captured British and Loyalist ships with the blessing of the Continental and state governments, officially started in April 1776, when the Continental Congress sent states “blank commissions for private ships of war… for making capture of British vessels and cargoes.” But privateering along the New Jersey shore did not blossom until spring 1778, when the British naval presence weakened and bold Whigs (supporters of the Revolution) such as William Marriner—demonstrated that British defenses in Brooklyn were permeable. The capture of a ship was often a simpler matter than determining who had rights to the captured vessel and its cargo. Cases like that of the Betsy , captured after beaching on the Monmouth shore in November 1776, illustrate the months of dysfunction that could follow the capture of a ship. The state of New Jersey established an Admiralty Court address this problem. Admiralty courts heard competing claims on captured vessels, declared a rightful owner, ordered sales, and collected fees for the state. Historian Donald Shomette dates the establishment of the New Jersey Admiralty Court to an October 1776 law that empowered the Governor to call an admiralty court. It appears that the first adjudicated prize vessel was in early 1777. Richard Somers, commanding the militia at Great Egg Harbor, took the brigantine Defiance. The state lacked an admiralty court but passed an act to establish one on February 28. The court would determine the right owner of the captured vessel and appoint a marshal to oversee the sale of the condemned vessel. The marshal would: It shall and may be lawful for the Marshal of the Court of Admiralty to take into his Care and Custody the said Vessel and Cargo, and, after giving due and publick Notice of the Time and Place of Sale, to sell and dispose of the same to the best Advantage, and to collect and receive the Monies thence arising, in the same Manner that he might or could do if the said Vessel and Cargo had been legally condemned in the said Court, and a Sale had been awarded by the Judge thereof. The act establishing New Jersey’s Admiralty Court is in Appendix 1 of this article. The new court condemned the prize vessel, Defiance , to Somers. The vessel was sold on the Tuckahoe River near Great Egg Harbor on March 12. Regular admiralty courts did not convene until summer 1778. Starting in 1778, and continuing into 1783, the State of New Jersey convened dozens of admiralty courts. While most prize vessels taken by privateers were brought into port at Little Egg Harbor or Toms River , the state chose to hold its admiralty courts well inland—perhaps because holding courts on the shore might prompt a British/Loyalist attack or spark riots from locals with a vested interest in the court’s decision. Allentown as Top Site for Admiralty Courts The majority New Jersey admiralty courts met at the tavern of Gilbert Barton in Allentown. The selection of Allentown as the host site for the majority courts was not accidental. Allentown was thirty miles inland and was connected to Egg Harbor and Toms River via roads. It was also close to Burlington, Princeton, and Trenton, seats of the New Jersey government. After June 26, 1778, when the British Army left Allentown on its march across New Jersey (leading to the Battle of Monmouth two days later), Allentown was safe from British/Loyalist attacks. Barton owned the village’s leading tavern. His loyalty to the Revolution was well-understood; he testified against Loyalist insurrectionaries before the New Jersey Council of Safety in 1777 and was the father of a Continental Army captain, William Barton. His tavern hosted Upper Freehold Township’s annual town meeting. Barton sold and leased livestock to the Continental Army even when it probably was not to his economic advantage. He was also a brother-in-law of Charles Petit of Egg Harbor, the shore’s most influential political leader and a man heavily invested in the flourishing privateer industry at Little Egg Harbor and the village of Chestnut Neck, just upriver from the harbor. The first New Jersey Admiralty Court in 1778 was advertised in the New Jersey Gazette on June 6, 1778, but was not held until July 13. The long lag probably is attributable to the march of the British Army across New Jersey in late June. When it did convene, the court adjudicated: the captured sloop, Duck , claimed by Joseph Wade; the sloop, Hazard , claimed by Peter Anderson; the sloop, Sally , claimed by the "Abraham Boys"; the sloop, Dispatch , and the brigantine, Industry , claimed by Timothy Shaler; the sloop, Palm , the brigantine, Speedwell , the brigantine, Carolina Packet , and the brigantine, Prince Frederick , all claimed by John Brooks; and an unnamed schooner claimed by John Potts (of Monmouth County). It is noteworthy that the majority of the claimants were Pennsylvanians or New Englanders—a trend that would continue at future admiralty courts. In total, 60 trials adjudicating 58 prize vessels (two re-trials) were held at Barton’s tavern—far more than any other New Jersey Admiralty Court host site. (See Appendix 2 for a list of these vessels.) 43 of these cases were held at Barton’s tavern in 1778 and 1779, after which other sites were used mor43 of these cases were held at Barton’s tavern in 1778 and 1779, after which other sites were used more frequently. (See table 7 for the list of vessels tried at Barton’s tavern.) The other sites to host multiple admiralty courts were: The Burlington County Courthouse, Rensselaer Williams’ House at Trenton, and Isaac Wood’s House at Mount Holly. In Upper Freehold Township, admiralty courts later in the war were listed as being hosted at the house of Benjamin Lawrence and “Randle’s Tavern.” Gilbert Barton died in 1782 (his will was dated February 21). Lawrence was his son-in-law and likely moved into Barton’s tavern, even if only temporarily. There is a good chance that Barton’s tavern and Lawrence’s house were the same place. Local historian John Fabiano notes that Barton’s tavern became Randle’s tavern when the Barton family sold it to the Randolph family (Randle was a nickname for Randolph). Adonijah Francis, the owner of Allentown’s other tavern, also hosted one admiralty court. James Green of Colts Neck became an innkeeper at Freehold later in the war and hosted an admiralty court; no other Monmouth County site hosted a court outside of Allentown. New Jersey Admiralty Court records no longer exist, but the admiralty court announcements printed in the New Jersey Gazette provide important information on what transpired in these courts. Through these announcements, we know the men who claimed the prize vessel, the men who were alleged to have lost or forfeited the vessel, and the type of vessel. John Burrowes, Jr., of Middletown Point, who served as captain in the Continental Army into 1779 (starting in David Forman’s Additional Regiment and later serving in the New Jersey Line ), became the Admiralty Court’s Marshal in 1780 and announcements carry his name after his appointment. He served as Monmouth County’s sheriff concurrently for two years. At least eleven Monmouth County militia officers took prizes during the war. All of these Monmouth County claimants, except Asher Holmes of Marlboro, lived near the shore. At least three of the captured vessels (probably more) had grounded on shore. The vessels taken by Monmouth Countians were a combination of captures at sea and vessels that grounded on the shore. Interestingly, two Monmouth County Loyalists operating ships out of Staten Island—Richard Reading and Thomas Crowell—lost vessels that were condemned at admiralty courts in Barton’s tavern. The most prolific privateer captains were from New England or Philadelphia. For example, Samuel Ingersoll of Salem, Massachusetts had four prizes condemned to him at Barton’s tavern and Yelverton Taylor of Philadelphia had three prizes condemned there. Raritan Bay’s most prolific privateer , Adam Hyler of New Brunswick, also had three prizes condemned to him at Barton’s tavern. These men were heroes in their day and a prize being condemned to a privateer was a cause for celebration. It is easy to imagine significant bar tabs being run up at Barton’s tavern on the nights when prizes were condemned. Hosting admiralty courts was, no doubt, good for business. Shortcomings of the Admiralty Courts Admiralty Courts did not end all controversies about claims on captured vessels. A 1780 Dover and Stafford townships petition to the New Jersey Assembly complained: A number of vessels have lately been stationed along the shores… and that there is no law of this State, as they allege, clearing ascertaining what proportions of said vessels or cargoes shall belong to captors of preservers, which has given occasion to many suits. Some prizes were indeed the subject of litigation and counterclaims long after the New Jersey admiralty courts finished their work. This was commonly because the provenance of the vessel was not known when the New Jersey admiralty court awarded the prize to the claimant. American vessels taken by British ships and then retaken by American privateers could bog down in long litigation. At least three of the vessels tried at Barton’s tavern were known to be American vessels taken by the British and then retaken by American claimants. For example, a January 2, 1782, admiralty court announcement noted that William Treen and Joseph Edwards ("of the whaleboat Unity ") claimed the sloop Betsy (not the same vessel discussed above) formerly captained by Joseph Burden. The Betsy was originally a New Jersey vessel taken by the British off the Delaware Bay before it was retaken on the New Jersey coast by Treen and Edwards. One particularly complicated case brought before the Admiralty Court in 1783 involved Colonel David Forman’s seizure of two vessels, Diamond and Dolphin , at Little Egg Harbor. They were owned by the New England privateer Nathan Jackson. Forman had evidence that Jackson was secretly playing both sides, operating as a Yankee privateer when convenient and trading with Loyalists in New York when his cargo could fetch a better prize there. The Admiralty Court awarded the vessels to Forman despite Jackson contesting the claim. The court’s decision was upheld by the New Jersey Supreme Court when Jackson sought redress there. Jackson then sought redress in the Continental Congress’s court to hear interstate disputes, apparently without success. This is the subject of another article. Curiously, it appears that many vessels taken as prizes on the New Jersey shore were never brought to the Admiralty Court. William Marriner, for example, captured a number of enemy vessels between 1778 and 1780. In May 1780, the Pennsylvania Gazette , advertised the sale of two prizes taken by Marriner near Sandy Hook, Black Snake and Rattle Snake , along with a pilot boat. These were apparently American privateers captured by the British navy, and then re-taken by Marriner. It does not appear that these prizes were adjudicated in admiralty court (based on court announcements) even though Marriner carried a Letter of Marque (privateer license) from the state. (Note: The Black Snake was purchased by Joseph Randolph of Toms River and re-commissioned as a privateer captained by Joshua Huddy.) The New Jersey Court of Admiralty passed out of existence when the war ended. The courts certainly did not solve all of the problems associated with assigning a captured ship to a new owner, but it improved upon the vacuum that preceded it. Better documentation would shed greater light on whether most of the court’s proceedings were straightforward assignments of a ship to a single claimant, or contested affairs between individuals with conflicting claims. Whatever its shortcomings, the New Jersey Admiralty Court was a good example of the fledgling government quickly devising \a new institution to meet a need. Related Historic Site : The Old Mill Appendix: "An Act to Empower the Marshal of the Court of Admiralty to Secure and Sell the Prize Vessel or Brigantine Defiance Lately Taken by the Militia of this State," February 28, 1777 Whereas Colonel Richard Somers, by his Petition hath set forth, That he the said Richard Somers, with a Detachment of the Militia of this State, was stationed at Great-Egg-Harbour as a Guard to the Sea-Coast, and to protect the Inhabitants thereof against the Depredations of the Enemy; and that during his Continuance in that Station, he, with the said Detachment, and sundry others of the Inhabitants, did man and arm certain Boats, and therewith took a certain Brigantine or Vessel called the Defiance, supposed to belong to the King of Great Britain, or some of the Subjects of the said King; and that as a Court cannot conveniently be held at this Time wherein to proceed against the said Vessel and her Cargo, no Trial or Condemnation thereof can be speedily had, by Reason whereof the same are suffering, and likely to be greatly wasted; Sect. 1. Be it therefore Enacted by the Council and General Assembly of this State, and it is hereby Enacted by the Authority of the same, That it shall and may be lawful for the Marshal of the Court of Admiralty to take into his Care and Custody the said Vessel and Cargo, and, after giving due and publick Notice of the Time and Place of Sale, to sell and dispose of the same to the best Advantage, and to collect and receive the Monies thence arising, in the same Manner that he might or could do if the said Vessel and Cargo had been legally condemned in the said Court, and a Sale had been awarded by the Judge thereof; 2. And it is further Enacted, That the said Monies arising from the Sale of the said Vessel and Cargo shall be liable to the like Decree, Distribution and Order of the Court of Admiralty, when the same shall be fully established, as if the Sale hereby ordered and directly had not been made. Appendix 2: Prize Vessels Adjudicated at Barton’s Tavern See Table 7 Sources : Continental Congress authorizes Letters of Marque, Journal of the American Revolution , https://allthingsliberty.com/2019/09/massachusetts-privateers-during-the-siege-of-boston/letter-of-marque/ ; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 2, pp. 251-2, 258-9, 272; Library of Congress, Early American Newspaper, New Jersey Gazette, reel 1930; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 2, pp. 469-70; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 3, pp. 54, 60; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 3, p 330; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 3, pp. 385, 420; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 3, pp. 481, 486-7; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 3, pp. 513, 524; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 2, pp. 251-2, 258-9, 272; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 2, pp. 469-70; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 4, p 147; William Horner, This Old Monmouth of Ours (Freehold: Moreau Brothers, 1932) p 75; Donald Shomette, Privateers of the Revolution: War on the New Jersey Coast (Shiffer: Atglen, PA, 2015); William Nelson, Austin Scott, et al., ed., New Jersey Archives (1901-1917, Newark, Somerville, and Trenton, NJ: 1901-1917) vol. 5, pp. 139-140; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 5, p 170; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 4, p 358-9; Charles Hutchinson, Allentown, N.J. its Rise and Progress (Part 15), Allentown Historical Society; Petition summarized in: The Library Company, New Jersey Votes of the Assembly, March 13, 1780, p 157; Correspondence from John Fabiano; Huddy’s privateer commission is in Catalog of the Exhibition: Joshua Huddy and the American Revolution, Monmouth County Library Headquarters, October 2004; Acts of the General Assembly of the State of New-Jersey, at a Session begun at Princeton on the 27th Day of August 1776, and by Adjournment. To which is prefixed, the Constitution of the State (Burlington, 1777). Accessed via https://navydocs.org/. Previous Next

The articles in the collection 250 for the 250th: The American Revolution in Monmouth County represent the most complete history of this topic ever assembled. < 250 Home < Previous pg. Next > County Commissioners Inventory Loyalist Estates by Michael Adelberg Many Loyalist women stayed behind when their husbands went off to the British and some had property “applied to public use.” This sketch depicts a Loyalist woman having property taken. - August 1776 - By early August 1776, at least 150 Monmouth Countians had become active Loyalists by leaving their homes to join the British Army; hundreds more were engaging in activities that bordered on active Loyalism such as illegally trading with the British and refusing to participate in the militia. Monmouth County’s Whigs (supporters of the Revolution) sought a countermeasure that would punish their active enemies and deter potential enemies from going down the same path. Confiscating the estates of Loyalists was that measure. On August 7, Monmouth County became the first New Jersey county to begin the process for confiscating Loyalist estates (under the legal argument that an individual “forfeited” his property by joining with the enemy and fighting against his country). The first step toward confiscation was inventorying the estates of suspected traitors. After that, inquisitions would be held to determine that the Loyalist in question was in fact a traitor deserving of estate confiscation. The final step would be selling the estate at public auction. Three commissioners were appointed oversee this high-stakes process—Samuel Forman (Colonel of the Upper Freehold militia), Kenneth Hankinson (a captain in the Freehold militia and future Chairman of the vigilante group called the Retaliators ), and Jacob Wikoff of Freehold (who would become the county tax collector and paymaster for Monmouth County’s State Troops). The first estates were inventoried on August 7. They belonged to two Freehold Loyalists, Thomas Leonard (now a major in the New Jersey Volunteers) and John Longstreet (now a captain in the New Jersey Volunteers). The primary inventoried assets are listed below: Thomas Leonard – total value of inventoried assets £1909 3 slaves (named one named male slave, Paris, valued at £50), 300 acre farm (L800), 10 acre property near Court House (£500), 30 acre lot (£100), Other movable property. John Longstreet Jr – total value of inventoried assets £2887 4 slaves (including one named male slave, Prince, 2 women, 1 child), 1 servant, 2.5 acre lot in town "where William Taylor, Esq., lives" (£500), 2nd "town lot, where Israel Britton lives" (£200), 5 acre lot "house & lot where Adam Shaw lives" (£700), additional town lot "where John Combs lives" (£50), 8 acre lot (L50), farm "wherein Mr. Longstreet lived" (£1000), Other movable property. Inventorying estates did not displace the families of Loyalists who remained at home. In fact, the inventory of Thomas Leonard’s estate included a note from his wife, Mary Leonard: "I, the subscriber, take charge of the estate of my husband and oblige myself to be accountable to sd Commissioners." In a male-dominated era, the rights of wives who stayed on the family estate of a Loyalist husband was an open question. The status and welfare of the Loyalist families that remained at home would greatly complicate the confiscation of those estates. Other estates were inventoried shortly after. On August 10, the New Jersey Convention requested "inventories of the Estates of Anthony Woodward and William Guisebertson [William Giberson], of Monmouth County, persons who have absconded from their homes, and joined the enemy." The Estate Forfeiture Commissioners continued their work through August. On August 12, they inventoried the estates of a handful of Upper Freehold Loyalists (including Woodward and Giberson): James Grover - 250 acre farm (£1000), slave boy, 30 hogs, horses & cattle and other items -- total value £1281; William Giberson - 40 acre farm w/ corn £351 and 2 slaves: male Ike (£60), girl Rachel (£35); James Nealon - 1 gristmill, 1 sawmill, 11 acres (£600), bills and bonds (£600), 2 "little Negro girls" (£50), other items – total value £1321; and Anthony Woodward - 150 acre farm (£800), 250 acre farm (£1500), 250 acre farm (£500), salt meadow (£35), 60 hogs (£48), 30 sheep (£15), other items – total value £3317. For Grover, it was noted that he shared his estate with three of brothers, none of whom had left for the British Army. Therefore, the commissioners noted that they could only confiscate one fourth of the estate. Finally, on August 14, the Commissioners inventoried the estates of two Shrewsbury Loyalists: Robert Morris - 50 acres, sawmill £120), £73 in other items; Jeremiah North - no land, items worth £19 s11. Parallel to this process, other Loyalists had parts of the estates “applied to public use” – meaning that the new government commandeered their property and provided compensation. Brothers John Taylor and Morford Taylor of Shrewsbury, for example, had their estates "applied to public use" in 1777. For this, they were compensated with $373 of nearly worthless Continental money. John Morris, who had become a Colonel of New Jersey Volunteers, also had his property “applied to public use.” Dozens of smaller property confiscations and livestock impressments occurred without being documented. These first actions of the Forfeiture Commissioners were only an opening salvo – ultimately, more than 100 Monmouth County Loyalists had their estates confiscated and sold at public auction. However, this did not occur until 1779, when it occurred in a scandal-riddled process that generated New Jersey Legislature investigations and several lawsuits. Related Historic Site : National Guard Museum of New Jersey Sources : Francis Bazley Lee, New Jersey as a Colony and as a State (New York: The Publishing Society of New Jersey, 1902), vol 2, pp. 93-4; New Jersey State Archives, Dept. of Defense, Revolutionary War, Numbered Manuscripts, #10122; Peter Force, American Archives: Consisting of a Collection of Authentick Records, State Papers, Debates, and Letters and Other Notices of Publick Affairs (Washington, DC: U.S. Congress Clerk's Office, 1853), 5th Series, vol. 6, p 1661; Peter Force, American Archives: Documents of the American Revolution, 1774-6 (digitized: http://dig.lib.niu.edu/amarch/find.doc.html), v6: p 1661; New Jersey State Archives, Dept. of Defense, Revolutionary War, Numbered Manuscripts, #10122; Gregory Palmer, Biographical Sketches of Loyalists of the American Revolution (Westport, Conn. and London, 1984) p 847. Previous Next

The articles in the collection 250 for the 250th: The American Revolution in Monmouth County represent the most complete history of this topic ever assembled. < 250 Home < Previous pg. Next > The Privateering of Captain Yelverton Taylor on the Jersey Shore by Michael Adelberg In small, fast ships like the Mars, Yelverton Taylor emerged as the most successful privateer captain to operate along the Monmouth shore during the Revolutionary War. - September 1778 - While the capture of the Venus in August 1778 by privateers David Stevens and Micajah Smith was the first capture of a great British ship along the Jersey shore, Philadelphia’s Yelverton Taylor was the first great privateer captain of the Jersey shore. Taylor operated out of Little Egg Harbor, at the junction of Gloucester, Burlington and Monmouth counties. Historian Donald Shomette described Little Egg Harbor and its inland village of Chestnut Neck at the start of the Revolution. The harbor was shallow, unmarked, and “perforated” with sand bars. The Mullica River which connected the harbor with the village, was thirty feet deep in stretches but twisted by sharp meanders and shifting shoals. Only local pilots could bring a ship upriver without it grounding. Chestnut Neck "could not be a considered a town," consisting of only a dozen dwellings and a tavern. Philadelphia ships used Little Egg Harbor in the winter when the Delaware River froze, and ships began using the port year-round when the British blockaded Delaware Bay and patrolled the Jersey Shore in spring 1776. The increased ship traffic provoked a British attack in June 1777 when a three-ship flotilla entered the Mullica River and took two vessels, and then took three more while departing. This attack led to the construction of a fort at the Fox Burrows of the Mullica River, but the cannon were never put into the fort. They were likely used by a privateer. By summer 1778, Little Egg Harbor was a booming port town. By summer 1778, Little Egg Harbor was the epicenter of Jersey Shore privateering. On July 6, British Admiral James Gambier wrote about these privateers. He called for more “20-gun ships coppered, sloops, cutters, and small vessels” but worried that even with more ships “the rebels can now muster threescore sail from their different ports.” He further worried “we have such a range of coast and… numberless difficulties” protecting British supply lines. In July 1778, with a powerful French fleet forcing the British into a defensive posture, privateering on the Jersey Shore truly blossomed. This is evidenced by establishment of regular admiralty courts to adjudicate the prizes. From Philadelphia, Henry Laurens, President of the Continental Congress, observed the rise of privateering at Little Egg Harbor. He wrote on July 22: “I am told no less than 12 Prizes lately taken are advertised for sale on Tuesday next at Egg Harbour.” It was from this boomtown that Yelverton Taylor emerged. His success is demonstrated by the upward progression of ships that he captained out of Little Egg Harbor. With his successes, he gained prize money necessary to put to sea in ever larger ships. By 1779, he was attacking vessels that he would have evaded in his first vessel. First Known Date / Taylor’s Vessel / Number of Guns / Crew Size June 27, 1778 Comet # of guns: 4 Crew: 25 September 30, 1778 Mars # of guns: 8 Crew : 35 July 29, 1779 Mars # of guns: 14 Crew: 60 Note: Taylor captained two different vessels named Mars . It is likely that Taylor first put to sea as a privateer captain on June 27, 1778, just days after British naval vessels completed their evacuation of Philadelphia. He would have waited for the British fleet to clear the Delaware Bay (June 30) and sail for Sandy Hook before putting himself into the sea lane along the Monmouth shore in search of smaller and unescorted vessels bound for New York. Early Captures On July 27, the New Jersey Gazette reported Taylor’s first captures, each of which was deposited at Little Egg Harbor (called Egg Harbor at the time). His first two prizes were the schooner Carolina Packet (under Capt. Walter Belts) with cargo of 16,000 bushels of salt and the sloop Lucy (Capt. Thomas Grandle) with cargo of rice and indigo. While these were small ships, they were fully loaded with goods in great demand. The vessels were sold at auction at Egg Harbor on September 11. Taylor’s next two documented prizes are recorded in the Maryland Journal , on September 8: "The privateer sloop Comet , Capt. Taylor of Egg Harbour, has brought into a safe port, a brig from Jamaica bound for New York, laden with rum, sugar, coffee and molasses--also a schooner from France, retaken with dry goods." The interest of a Baltimore newspaper in Taylor’s prizes is revealed by a Pennsylvania Evening Post report on September 19 about Taylor’s next prize. The Philadelphia newspaper reported that Taylor had arrived in the city with "the schooner, Smallwood , belonging to Maryland, taken on her passage to Curacao by a British tender, and retaken by Captain Taylor of Egg Harbor." A few days later, the New Jersey Gazette advertised an admiralty court to be held in Allentown on October 10 to hear Taylor’s claims on 1.) the schooner Fame against former Captain Francis Coffin, 2.) the schooner Good Intent against the former Captain Robsy, and 3.) the schooner Caroline [captain unknown].” The Smallwood , brought into Philadelphia, was outside the jurisdiction of New Jersey’s admiralty court. The Fame was not condemned to Taylor by the New Jersey admiralty court. An October 20 note in the papers of the Continental Congress infers that an out-of-state counter-claimant emerged. A second note about Fame from February 26, 1779, suggests that the rightful owner of Fame was still being determined six months after Taylor took it. A decision on a second vessel was also held up. In 1780, the New Jersey admiralty court retried another one of Taylor’s early captures. The delays in gaining access to his prizes may have prompted Taylor to bring other prizes into less regulated ports than Egg Harbor and Philadelphia (where port marshals impounded the vessel until a court condemned the prize to the capturing captain). There is no record of Taylor bringing another prize into either port for the next nine months. Later Captures Legal frustrations aside, Taylor remained active. By summer 1779, he was sailing in a larger ship and set his sights on bigger prizes. Joseph Reed of Philadelphia wrote of one such prize on August 18: Capt. Taylor in a privateer from this port on Thursday last took the Falmouth Packet bound to New York & was fortunate to secure the mail, not being able to bring in the vessel as the wind was contrary & he was chased by a frigate, he abandoned the prize, bringing off the mail & all the prisoners, which was landed at Egg Harbor. The New Jersey Gazette , reported that Taylor, in the schooner Mars , was "off Sandy Hook, fell in with a snow mounting 14 carriage guns, which he boarded and took.” The report continued: She proved to be a packet from Falmouth for New York. Captain Taylor took the mail and the prisoners, 45 in number, and stood for Egg Harbor; but on Saturday morning last, he fell in with a fleet of 23 sail, under convoy of a frigate, when the frigate gave chase & re-took her. Additional details were reported in the Morristown-based New Jersey Journal . The snow was the British vessel, Dashound , carrying the mail from New York to London. Nearing capture, the crew threw the mail into the sea, but it was recovered by Taylor’s men. A later article on the incident published in the Loyalist New York Gazette claimed the mail was "irrefutably sunk." This report is likely incorrect. Antiquarian sources complete the narrative. The Mars and Dashound fought a brutal hour-long battle (45 minutes in original accounts). The Dashound lost the battle when it grounded off the Monmouth shore during the fight. Once grounded, oar-powered gunboats from Toms River joined the fight. The Dashound surrendered when its masts were shot down. The gunboats ferried prisoners to Toms River and the Mars started towing the Dashound for Egg Harbor. However, Taylor had to cut the prize loose when the British frigate, Perseus , came after him. Taylor brought the British mail into Egg Harbor—a giant intelligence win for the Continental cause. Perseus towed the beaten Dashound back to Sandy Hook. A week later, Taylor was again at sea. He took a sloop named Active on September 1, but there is no record of this vessel being condemned in admiralty court so he likely did not bring it into Egg Harbor. He probably brought it to Philadelphia. At month’s end, Taylor was cruising along the Monmouth shore when he came upon his most spectacular opportunity. On September 14, the transport vessel, Triton , filled with troops, left Sandy Hook for the Carolinas as part of a convoy. Triton then separated from the convoy during a storm. The wounded vessel moved slowly off the Monmouth shore. The next day, according to a German Officer on board, “the wind was good, we therefore made our course northeast to get clear of the land and, if possible, out of the sight of the privateers cruising around there.” However, the transport was unable to get into deep water quickly. The officer recorded what happened at dawn on September 26 they spotted two privateers. It was a “sad and unhappy day.” The transport surrendered without a fight because “we were in such miserable condition that we could not escape nor make evasive procedures away from another ship. The wounded transport was larger than the two privateers, but had to surrender without a fight. Predictably, towing the bigger vessel was difficult; one of the privateers (Taylor in the Mars ) grounded and overset in the surf outside Egg Harbor. After a few days at the mouth of the harbor, the prisoners were rowed upriver to the privateer village of Chestnut Neck. They then walked under guard to Philadelphia, where they arrived ten days later. Another article discusses the capture of the Triton in greater detail. There is no record of Taylor remaining an active privateer after the capture of the Triton , though the Mars remained an active vessel under a Captain Geddes. Taylor likely had the wealth to retire. Having captured a British military mail packet and hundreds of soldiers, he knew he would be killed if ever taken by the British. Privateering was risky and he was now notorious. Before the war, Taylor worked as a pilot guiding ships between Cape May and Philadelphia—perhaps he retired to one of these places. Other privateer captains, mostly New Englanders , filled the void left by his retirement. Related Historic Site : New Jersey Maritime Museum Sources : Charles H. Lincoln, Naval Records of the American Revolution, 1775–1788 (Washington, D.C., 1906), pp. 254, 386; Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Hessian, Waldeck and British Prisoner Records, 1776-9, "List of Marine Department Prisoners: Officers Taken" and "Captures Made by Pennsylvania State Navy", coll. 875; Donald Shomette, Privateers of the Revolution: War on the New Jersey Coast (Shiffer: Atglen, PA, 2015); James Gambier to Earl of Sandwich, Sandwich Papers, 2: 295–301. Accessed via https://navydocs.org/ ; Henry Laurens, President of the Continental Congress, to Governor Richard Caswell of North Carolina, July 22, 1778, ScHi, Henry Laurens Letter Book. Accessed via https://navydocs.org/ ; Paul Burgess, A Colonial Scrapbook; the Southern New Jersey Coast, 1675-1783 (New York, Carlton Press, 1971) pp 126-7; J.A. McManemin, Captains of Privateers. (Spring Lake, N.J. : Ho-Ho-Kus Pub. Co., 1994), pp. 341-4; Maryland Journal, September 8, 1778; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 2, p 3395-6; The Library Company, Pennsylvania Evening Post; Library of Congress, Early American Newspaper, New Jersey Gazette, reel 1930; Library of Congress, Journals of the Continental Congress, vol. 12, p 1024 and vol. 13, p 188; Valentine C. Hubbs, Hessian Journals: Unpublished Documents of the American Revolution (London: Camden House, 1980) pp. 81-3; National Archives, Papers of the Continental Congress, M247, I69, State Papers - PA, v 2, p 137; J.A. McManemin, Captains of Privateers. (Spring Lake, N.J. : Ho-Ho-Kus Pub. Co., 1994), pp. 341-4; Library of Congress, Rivington's New York Gazette, reel 2906; Committee of Appeals Decision, Paul Smith, et al, Letters of Delegates to Congress, 1774–1789 (Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress, 1970) vol. 14, p 377-8; Information on Taylor’s work as a pilot is in: “Revolutionary War Delaware River and Bay Pilots” (https://continentalnavy.com/archives/2018/revolutionary-war-delaware-river-and-bay-pilots/). Previous Next

The articles in the collection 250 for the 250th: The American Revolution in Monmouth County represent the most complete history of this topic ever assembled. < 250 Home < Previous pg. Next > David Forman's Campaign Against William Taylor's Loyalists by Michael Adelberg David Forman’s house in present-day Manalapan survived into the 2000s. His campaign against William Taylor’s Loyalist association occurred in the immediate vicinity of his home. - November 1776 - As discussed in a prior article, Colonel David Forman raised four companies of so-called Flying Camp (short term enlistees assigned to the Continental Army) in the spring of 1776. He then commanded a regiment of men from Monmouth and Middlesex Counties for five months' service during the disastrous New York campaign. With enlistments expiring on December 1 and the Continental Army retreating across New Jersey into Pennsylvania, Forman was permitted on November 24 to take his regiment home to Monmouth County to crush a growing Loyalist insurrection. Forman’s orders from George Washington were broad but explicit: You are hereby ordered to march, with your regiment under your command, into said County of Monmouth, and on your arrival there, you are authorized to apprehend such persons as appear to be concerned in any plot or design against the liberty or safety of the United States, and you are further authorized, immediately to attack any body of men whom you may find actually assembled or in the arms of purposes aforesaid; and if you should find their numbers superior to your force, you have full authority to call in and take command of such a number of New Jersey militia as you may judge sufficient. I would recommend for you to be cautious in proceeding against any but such as you have the fullest grounds of suspicion, and not give the least molestation to the property of any during your march. In order to curb illegal trade between Monmouth County and the British, Forman was also encouraged to move "[live]stock and cattle or provisions... in danger of falling into the hands of the enemy" away from the coast and issue certificates to the owners for “reclamation.” David Forman’s Campaign There is no detailed account of Forman’s weeklong campaign against Monmouth County’s Loyalists, but they pursued their charge vigorously against the Loyalist association of William Taylor of Freehold. Taylor had previously rallied Loyalist-leaning neighbors against the Declaration of Independence and he was now the leader of a simmering Loyalist insurrection. After the war, he described Forman’s campaign and his narrow escape: In November 1776, Mr. Washington detached a regiment from his army, under command of Col David Forman, to take up and secure your memorialist and other friends of Government in Monmouth County, they actually took near 100 of your memorialist's friends and relations, and removed them 200 miles to Fredericktown in Maryland, and there closely confined them in gaol. Your memorialist, getting every intimation of their intentions, was obliged to leave his home and property... after laying concealed for a few days, joined that part of the Royal Army under Lord Cornwallis, on the banks of the Raritan. Taylor attempted to return to Monmouth County in February 1777. He was caught and detained by the Continental Army. But George Washington ordered his release because of confusion over a passport granted him from British authorities under which he traveled. After his detention and release, Taylor settled in as an attorney in the government-in-exile of New Jersey Royal Governor William Franklin. Another Loyalist, John Taylor of Shrewsbury [not the John Taylor of Middletown who was William Taylor’s father] was less fortunate than William Taylor: In November 1776, he was made a prisoner by the Americans, a regt. [under Col David Forman] being detached from Washington's Army to take up the friends of his Majesty's Government in that party of the country, carried to Philadelphia & there confined in close gaol. Similarly, John Wardell of Shrewsbury (a judge of the county court at Freehold and one of the county’s leading citizens) was also arrested by Forman. He was jailed in Philadelphia where he was subjected to, according to his account, “the foulest cruelties.” A few of Forman’s men wrote of the campaign in their postwar pension applications. Samuel Mundy of Middlesex County recalled: The Colonel of the regiment received orders to take his regiment to Perth Amboy & cross over into Monmouth County to disarm certain disaffected persons in that county - immediately after this service he was discharged with the rest by the Colonel, their term of service expired. Isaac Vrendenburgh, also from Middlesex County, corroborated Mundy’s account, “by request of our Colonel crossed over at Amboy and proceeded to Monmouth County where we apprehended a large body of Tories and Refugees, and were then discharged." Two Monmouth County members of Forman’s regiments, David Baird and James Johnson, also recalled the campaign. Baird recalled returning home where his company "made many prisoners of the Tories and sent them to Philadelphia." Johnson recalled that the regiment "took something like 100 Tories… and sent them to Lancaster.” The prisoners sent to Lancaster continued to Frederick, Maryland. Forman only sent a short report on the campaign to George Washington. In it, he noted breaking up a Loyalist ring led by William Taylor. He reported that "[We] took nearly 100 of his friends and relatives, who were removed 300 miles to Fredericktown, Maryland, and there confined to jail. Taylor himself, however, had previously escaped." It is unclear why some of the Loyalist prisoners were sent all the way to Frederick while others remained in Philadelphia. Charles Read’s Campaign Concurrent with Forman’s campaign, the New Jersey Government ordered four militia companies into Monmouth County under Colonel Charles Read of Burlington County (two of the four companies were from Burlington). They were to arrest Loyalist insurrectionaries. Read had led a similar campaign against Upper Freehold Loyalists in July. While Forman seems to have focused on Loyalists in Freehold and Middletown townships, Read made 70 arrests in Shrewsbury Township. A Loyalist newspaper, New York Gazette & Weekly Mercury , reported on Read’s campaign: About 70 men were taken up in Shrewsbury in New Jersey by the rebels and sent as prisoners to the Burlington goal, where they suffer in a very cruel manner; they were paraded through the country, pinioned with ropes around their necks, and often tied to fences like horses, when their leader chose to make a halt. It is possible that Read’s captures were the rank and file of Samuel Wright’s Loyalist Association since two of Wright’s men were captured and named names immediately prior to Read’s arrival. As for Read, the arrest of the Shrewsbury Loyalists was his last act in the service of the Continental cause. An antiquarian source claims that Read and Forman had a tense meeting during which Forman demanded that Read sign a loyalty oath to the New Jersey and Continental governments. Read refused and joined the British shortly after that. Forman’s regiment dissolved on December 1. The regiment would not be available to check the next wave of Loyalist insurrections that would soon flame up in Upper Freehold, Freehold and Middletown , and along the shore . These would be far more formidable than the localized associations toppled by Forman and Read. Related Historic Sites : Fort Frederick (Maryland) Sources : Rutgers University, Special Collections, Loyalist Compensation Applications, Coll. D96, PRO AO 13/109, reel 8 and D96, PRO AO 13/112, reel 10; Jones, E. Alfred. The Loyalists of New Jersey, (Newark, N. J. Historical Society, 1927) p 241. Gregory Palmer, Biographical Sketches of Loyalists of the American Revolution (Westport, Conn. and London, 1984), p 906. Rutgers University Special Collections, Great Britain Public Record Office, Loyalist Compensation Claims, D96, AO 13/112, reel 12; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, Samuel Mundy of NJ, www.fold3.com/image/#25890437 ; William Horner, This Old Monmouth of Ours (Freehold: Moreau Brothers, 1932) p 213; John Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1932) vol. 6, p 307; The Papers of George Washington, Revolutionary War Series, vol. 8, 6 January 1777 – 27 March 1777, ed. Frank E. Grizzard, Jr. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1998, p. 467; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - David Baird; Library of Congress, NY Gaz & Weekly Mercury, reel 2904; Carl Prince, Papers of William Livingston (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987) vol. 1, p 193; National Archives, Revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - James Johnson; Franklin Ellis, The History of Monmouth County (R.T. Peck: Philadelphia, 1885), p228; William Dwyer, The Day is ours! - November 1776 January 1777: An Inside View of The Battles of Trenton and Princeton (New York: Viking Press, 1983) p 38. Previous Next

The articles in the collection 250 for the 250th: The American Revolution in Monmouth County represent the most complete history of this topic ever assembled. < 250 Home < Previous pg. Next > The Confusing Case of Captain Benjamin Weatherby by Michael Adelberg General John Sullivan consulted David Forman and then cleared the name of Captain Benjamin Weatherby after he was wrongly accused of recruiting Loyalist soldiers in Shrewsbury in 1776. - June 1777 - In order to understand the Revolutionary War and government during this period, it is necessary to remember that norms were lacking and communications were terrible. Lacking the ability to quickly corroborate information, leaders frequently acted based on a single piece of evidence—and the evidence that drove actions was often wrong. Leaders did the best they could under trying circumstances, and, in so doing, often contradicted each other. On June 18, 1777, Governor William Livingston informed George Washington that one of his captains, Benjamin Weatherby, was in detention. Pending further investigation, Livingston had determined Weatherby was a Loyalist, or at least a former Loyalist: I take the Liberty to enclose you a discharge from Capt. Wetherby to one Sharp, a soldier in the service of the United States; and Sharp’s affidavit of his having paid the Capt. 100 Dollars to obtain it. I cannot learn with any certainty to whose battalion Wetherby belongs, but am told that he belongs to Collo. [David] Forman’s. If he was an officer in one of the regiments raised by this State, I should be agreeable to a resolution of Congress of the 14 of April last, have spared your Excellency the trouble of ordering an inquiry in the matter. Livingston leveled the allegation based on a May 23 affidavit from Henry Sharp, sworn before Justice John Sparks of Gloucester County. Sharp swore that Weatherby had enlisted him into the Continental Army and, after Sharp thought better of it, insisted on a bribe to let him out of the enlistment. In Sharp’s own words: “He was inlisted [sic] by Capn Benjamin Watherby [sic] and that he give to said captain [Weatherby] for his discharge the sume [sic] of one hundered [sic] Dowllers [sic].” Livingston had also remembered that in October 1776, Weatherby had participated in raising a company of men from the Monmouth shore for the Loyalist New Jersey Volunteers. Were it not for a party of Virginia Continentals (under General Adam Stephen) intercepting Weatherby’s boat on its way to Staten Island, Weatherby would have returned with a British transport and carried the men away. Based on this, Livingston informed Washington that he was detaining Weatherby under guard. Washington promptly forwarded the note to General John Sullivan, Forman’s superior officer in the Continental chain of command. By a lucky coincidence, Forman had just arrived at Sullivan’s camp when Washington’s note arrived. Forman had mustered the Monmouth County militia as part of a 2,000-man detachment that Sullivan would use to harass the British Army as it quit New Jersey. Sullivan discussed Weatherby with Forman and was likely surprised by what Forman told him. The next day, Sullivan politely informed Washington: I have enquired of General Forman. He knows of no Captain Weatherby. There is a person of that name [Henry Weatherby] at Shrewsbury who had orders to enlist the King's troops for the British service -- he enlisted some & was detected & was put in irons by General Stephen last summer, where he remained until about six weeks hence, when the General Assembly of this State released him -- Perhaps, he may since have taken the business your Excellency mentions? Washington did not debunk Livingston’s allegation about Weatherby right away. Although there is no documentation to prove it, it is likely Washington asked a staff officer to make further inquiries about Weatherby. Two things are clear from surviving documents—Captain Benjamin Weatherby’s name does not appear in the muster rolls or other documents of Forman’s Additional Regiment . And his name does appear in the rolls of Oliver Spencer’s regiment—another recently-commissioned New Jersey Continental Army regiment that competed for recruits with Forman. On July 12, Washington informed Livingston: I duly received your favor of the 18th Ult. respecting a Mr. Weatherby, and upon enquiry find, that he has been this long time dismissed from our Service for bad behavior. Colo Forman says he is of opinion that any Men he may have enlisted since, were for the Enemy, as he has been in Irons on that Account. But Washington was only partially correct. While he let the Governor know that Benjamin Weatherby was not a captain under Forman, he did not find out about Weatherby’s service and good standing under Spencer. According to the Society of the Cincinnati, Benjamin Weatherby of Billingsport, New Jersey served under Spencer from February 1777 through January 1781. No bad conduct by Weatherby is noted in his service record. It is unknown how long Benjamin Weatherby was detained, but his good name was eventually restored. His imprisonment seems to be a simple case of mistaken identity. In another remarkable coincidence, Captain Weatherby served under Sullivan and Spencer in a campaign against the Iroquois in summer-fall 1779. In so doing, he likely commanded the remnants of Forman’s Additional Regiment, which had been transferred under Spencer in 1778. As for Sharp and his curious allegation, his motivations are unclear. Perhaps Sharp was settling a score; perhaps he (and Livingston) honestly confused Benjamin Weatherby with Henry Weatherby—the Loyalist recruiter from the Monmouth shore. Either way, an innocent man actively serving his country was detained for weeks because of a single allegation that could have been quickly debunked. Related Historic Site : Morristown National Historical Park Sources : William Livingston to George Washington, in Carl Prince, Papers of William Livingston (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987) vol. 1, p 357; John Sullivan to George Washington, Sullivan, John, Letters and Papers of Major John Sullivan, Otis G. Hammond, ed. , 2 vols. (Concord, NH: 1930-31) vol. 2, p 394; Library of Congress, George Washington Papers, http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/mgw:@field(DOCID+@lit(gw080334)) ; George Washington to William Livingston, The Papers of George Washington, Revolutionary War Series, vol. 10, 11 June 1777 – 18 August 1777, ed. Frank E. Grizzard, Jr. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 2000, pp. 66–67; Various genealogical resources on Captain Benjamin Weatherby of Billingsport, New Jersey. Previous Next

The articles in the collection 250 for the 250th: The American Revolution in Monmouth County represent the most complete history of this topic ever assembled. < 250 Home < Previous pg. Next > The Hanging of Stephen Edwards by Michael Adelberg This sketch shows the hanging of British officer, John Andre, in New York in 1780. Stephen Edwards, the first Loyalist executed in Monmouth County, was hanged from a similar gallows in 1777. - September 1777 - By September 1777, Monmouth County’s Revolutionaries and Loyalists had been in conflict for more than a year. The civility of the early months—in which there were arrests and property confiscations, but no violence—gave way to individualized acts of intimidation and violence at the end of 1776. Armed clashes began in 1777, resulting in combat deaths , long term imprisonments in horrible jails, and scattered acts of gratuitous violence, looting, and arson. But entering September, Monmouth County’s local war had not climaxed to the ultimate act of government-endorsed violence—no Monmouth Countian had been executed. That would change with the capture of Stephen Edwards. The Capture of Stephen Edwards Stephen Edwards was from a middling family that lived near Eatontown in Shrewsbury Township. There is no documentary evidence about his early life and Loyalism. However, by 1777, he was likely part of George Taylor’s Loyalist militia . He was living behind British lines and likely remained in contact with disaffected Monmouth Countians. He returned to Monmouth County during some of Taylor’s incursions . According to a number of local and antiquarian accounts, in September, Taylor sent Edwards into Monmouth County to distribute British recruiting materials. Edwards was staying at his parents’ house when Captain Jonathan Forman arrived with an armed party. Edwards dressed in a nightgown and feigned being an infirmed woman. Forman searched the house and found a soldier’s boots containing an order signed by Taylor—ending the ruse. Jonathan Forman brought Edwards to Freehold where David Forman (a colonel in the Continental Army and general of the New Jersey militia) was raising men to march to Pennsylvania to support the Continental Army in the defense of Philadelphia. The Hanging of Stephen Edwards Using authority allegedly granted to him by George Washington, Forman convened some kind of impromptu tribunal that he chaired. Stephen Edwards was determined to be an enemy spy. It was well known that spies such as Nathan Hale of Connecticut had been hanged by the British. Edwards was sentenced to death and promptly hanged, presumably on October 15. Forman justified the hanging in a letter to Washington that same day: One of my scouts fell in with & took a Tory refugee who had declared his attachment to the Crown early on in our dispute - on search the Gentleman, we found in his pocket a direction to make himself acquainted with the situation of our Army - I immediately ordered a court to call for his tryal [sic] - the fellow confessed to sd paper, and [said] that it was given him by Col. Taylor, the court sentenced him to be hung, which was executed today. Forman’s authority to convene such a tribunal and impose a death sentence is doubtful, but he often exceeded his authority. If Edwards was acting under the orders of a British-commissioned officer, he should have been recognized as a prisoner of war and been imprisoned rather than hanged. Starting in 1778, Governor William Livingston would pardon about half of the men given death sentences in the Monmouth County courts. Forman’s quick hanging of Edwards denied the Governor of this opportunity. Further, Forman reportedly refused to allow Edwards a last visit with his parents who had traveled to Freehold. At the time of the tribunal, Forman was in the process of raising men for dangerous duty with the Continental Army and a crowd was gathering in Freehold for the county’s annual election. Given these exceptional circumstances, it is probable that the Edwards hanging had a performative element to it. Public hangings of notorious Pine Robbers drew celebratory crowds to Freehold later in the war. While many of the details of the Edwards capture and hanging offered above are from antiquarian sources, they are consistent with facts offered in original sources, including Forman’s own letter excerpted above. Another source is the testimony of William Corlies, a Shrewsbury Loyalist, who spoke about Edwards in 1782. He said: Edwards was taken out of his bed at his own house and carried to Freehold; the following day he was brought to some kind of trial, and the day following executed. The offense alleged against him was said to be his having some papers [from George Taylor] found in his pocket. Robert Lawrence, a squire whose daughter, Mary Leonard, ran afoul for Forman further corroborated Forman’s use of extra-legal tribunals: "David Forman do himself a court martial… without following the rules of either martial or common law." Two Loyalist newspapers reported on the hanging of Edwards. The more accurate of the accounts was printed in the New York Gazette : Stephen Edwards, an inhabitant of Shrewsbury… was in consequence of some form of private information, surprised and apprehended by a party of rebel light horse at Shrewsbury a few hours after he landed, going to visit his wife and children. He was with great exultation and triumph hurried up to the rebel headquarters at Freehold, where David Forman, by a kind of court martial, had him tried, condemned and executed in two days. The report concluded: "It will shock the reader" that Edwards was “denied a final visit with his grief stricken family,” but he "behaved to the last moment with a coolness and a steadiness most heroic." The New York Gazette & Weekly Mercury published a less accurate report of the hanging of Edwards: We hear from Shrewsbury that a very young man, very inoffensive in his behavior except in being a friend to the Government, was last week hung up at his father's door, without ceremony, by one Forman, who calls himself of Major, for no other crime than attempting to bring off to this place a few cheeses to this town, where he had been forced to take up his abode; after he had hung for several hours, it was with the utmost difficulty that the relentless murderer could be prevailed upon to indulge his father to permit him to bury his body. In November, the New York Gazette , reported on Forman’s removal as a general in the New Jersey militia and, incorrectly, suggested that the hanging of Stephen Edwards was at cause: We are informed that General David Forman has been removed of his command as a General in the Rebel Army, in consequence, it is said, of a memorial preferred against him by the inhabitants of Monmouth County, New Jersey, which expressed their abhorrence for the monstrous and deliberate murder of Stephen Edwards of Shrewsbury. The wife of Mr. Forman has ever since the above atrocious act been in a state of distraction. Stories about the hanging of Stephen Edwards, no doubt, reverberated within the Loyalist refugee community. The Edwards hanging was discussed several times in April 1782 during the court martial of Richard Lippincott (Monmouth Loyalist) for having hanged Captain Joshua Huddy (Monmouth Revolutionary). It was one of a dozen “Acts of Cruelty and Barbarity ” enumerated by Loyalists to demonstrate the villainy of Monmouth’s Revolutionaries. Further, Loyalists claimed that Captain Huddy played a direct role in killing Edwards. Josiah Parker, for example, testified "that in the year 1780, he took Joshua Huddy prisoner… Huddy did then confess that he had been concerned in hanging Stephen Edwards… he had fixed the rope around Edwards's neck." As much as any other early-war incident, the hanging of Stephen Edwards set the precedent for the kidnappings and murders that characterized the later-war in Monmouth County. Related Historic Site : Nathan Hale Homestead (Coventry, CT) Sources : Franklin Ellis, The History of Monmouth County (R.T. Peck: Philadelphia, 1885), p205; Edwin Salter, History of Monmouth and Ocean Counties (Bayonne, NJ: E. Gardner and Sons, 1890) p 182-3; Edwin Salter, Old Times in Old Monmouth (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1970) p 6; United Empire Loyalist Association, Loyalist Trails 2017-11, March 12th, 2017 ( https://uelac.ca/loyalist-trails/loyalist-trails-2017-11/#StephenEdwards ); David Forman to George Washington, Library of Congress, George Washington Papers, Series 4, reel 44, October 10 - 16, 1777; Robert Lawrence, Memorial, New Jersey State Archives, Bureau of Archives and History, Manuscript Coll., State Library Manuscript Coll., #129; Library of Congress, Rivington's New York Gazette, reel 2906; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 1, p 479; Library of Congress, Rivington's New York Gazette, reel 2906; Deposition, Josiah Parker, Great Britain, Public Record Office, Colonial Office, CO 5, v105, reel 8, #709. Previous Next

The articles in the collection 250 for the 250th: The American Revolution in Monmouth County represent the most complete history of this topic ever assembled. < 250 Home < Previous pg. Next > Loyalists Seek to Defend Waters Off Sandy Hook by Michael Adelberg Isaac Lowe, Chairing the New York City Chamber of Commerce, sought a vessel to protect the waters outside of Sandy Hook in spring 1781. Neither he, nor the British, found a vessel to do this job. - May 1781 - Early in the Revolutionary War, the British military easily turned aside any threats to their base and ships at Sandy Hook (which they captured in April 1776 ). Troops at the lighthouse, backed by a guardship(s) anchored nearby, easily dispersed land-based attacks in June 1776 and March 1777 . Fortifications constructed and troops deployed in July 1778 made Sandy Hook impervious to a landing by the marines in Admiral Charles Henri D’Estaing’s large French fleet . However, by 1779 the British presence at Sandy Hook was dramatically weaker. Early in the war, the guardship was never less than a frigate and was frequently more than one ship. In 1779, with the British navy now fighting a global war that sapped its strength in New York, the guardship was often a sloop of war (less than half the guns of a frigate). Cannon were taken from Sandy Hook’s shore battery, and troop size dwindled down to a single under-strength company of New Jersey Volunteers . Loyalist irregular raiding parties camped at Sandy Hook intermittently, but did not greatly increase the peninsula’s security. A collection of rebels successfully attacked Sandy Hook—including Captain John Burrowes of Middletown Point and Captain John Rudolph of Henry Lee’s Continental Army dragoons . A company of Loyalists was captured by a privateer on its way to Sandy Hook. On the ocean side of Sandy Hook, New England privateers took dozens of vessels coming in and out of New York. On the Raritan Bay side, local privateers such as William Marriner launched at least a dozen successful attacks against Loyalist vessels “London Trading ” between New Jersey and New York. The large merchant ship, Britannia , and sloop of war, Alert , were taken in separate incidents. Better Protecting Ships Near Sandy Hook Loyalists were exasperated. In March 1781, the Board of Associated Loyalists , a British-tolerated paramilitary group, sought an armed boat to protect the waters around Sandy Hook without success on March 13 and March 20. Details on their attempts to gain a vessel are not revealed. The Associated Loyalists would continue trying to purchase vessels for the next six months before finally succeeding in doing so in September. Isaac Lowe, chairing the New York City Chamber of Commerce, also believed an armed boat was needed to better protect London trading vessels coming into Sandy Hook and fishing vessels off Shrewsbury Inlet (at present-day Sea Bright). On May 1, the Chamber wrote Marriott Arbuthnot, the admiral commanding the British navy in New York: The best cruising ground for the enemy, perhaps in the whole world, is within sight of Sandy Hook… many stout privateers are fitting out in different rebel ports, and that unless effectual measures may be taken to defeat and blast their designs, very few vessels, except of great force, will get safe in or out of this port. The Chamber called for: A couple of last-failing frigates constantly to cruise between Delaware and Block island, and making the lighthouse at Sandy Hook once or twice a week, as the winds might permit, would effectually protect the trade at this port from all invaders. Arbuthnot responded two days later: I have just received the letter you have honored me with, pointing out the necessity of frigates being constantly employed in cruising off Sandy Hook, for the protection of the trade bound to this place, as well as for protecting the fishery upon the banks of Shrewsbury, and to prevent the rebel privateers from making such near approaches to this port as they have lately done, to which they are reported to have met with too much success. The admiral further wrote that British "frigates have not only been cruising almost constantly off the bar, but between Montauk point and the Delaware ...I have detached cruisers off this part of the coast.” Arbuthnot then discussed a prior offer to protect the Shrewsbury fishing banks: With respect to the protection of the fishermen employed on the banks of Shrewsbury, for supplying your market, I cannot help mentioning to you, that early after I took the command on this station, I purchased a vessel, mounting 12 carriage-guns; she was fitted out at a considerable expense; I requested that the city would man her, that I would pay the men, and that her services should never be diverted to any other purpose than giving such protection. My offer was received with a strong degree of coolness. Lowe did not reply for nearly a month. When he did, on May 28, he expressed ignorance regarding Arbuthnot’s prior offer of a boat to protect the fishing banks off Shrewsbury: With regard to your Excellency's request to the city, to man a vessel for the protection of the fishery on the banks of Shrewsbury, the Chamber of Commerce beg to assure your Excellency, that no application was ever made to this corporation upon that subject; or, in all probability, they had taken it up with the same zeal which they doubt not your Excellency will admit they manifested to procure volunteers for manning his Majesty's ships under your command. Lowe promised to man the gunboat if Arbuthnot would again make it available: If your Excellency will be so good as to furnish-a proper vessel, with provisions and ammunition, to protect the fishermen on the banks of Shrewsbury, for the benefit of this market, the Chamber of Commerce will cheerfully exert their endeavors and they doubt not they will be able, in a short time, not only to procure as many men as your Excellency may think sufficient for that purpose, but also raise funds for paying them provided that they shall be discharged as soon as the fishing season is over. It is unknown if Arbuthnot and Lowe ever put the discussed vessel to sea to protect the Shrewsbury shore. The Associated Loyalists nearly did so. On May 21, Daniel Coxe of the Associated Loyalists wrote: You will please to inform the Board that there is now fitting out at this place three large whaleboats in order to protect the trade to you by cruising along the Jersey Shores from Cape May to the Hook, they are now ready to go down. However, as noted above, it appears that these boats never put to sea (or may have put to sea and suffered quick capture rebel privateers). The Associated Loyalists, on July 20, had to again request a vessel from the British navy "to annoy the sea coast southward of Sandy Hook, and check the trade of the Delaware." Meanwhile, the most successful Loyalist whaleboat, the vessel Trimmer , neared the end of its career. According to newspaper accounts in the Loyalist New York Gazette and the New Jersey Gazette , the Trimmer captured a New Jersey galley, Bulldog , and two small sloops on April 21, which it brought into Sandy Hook. This added to its impressive list of captures: "these three makes nine prizes brought into here by the Trimmer in the last month, besides the number destroyed." However, the Trimmer soon met with disaster. On June 13, the New York Gazette , reported that the Trimmer , while returning back to New York, "was overset by means of a sudden gust of wind within sight of the Light House, by which melancholy incident 35 people drowned, the remainder of the crew taken up by some vessels near at hand." The newspaper further reported that “among the saved was Capt. Phillips, the vessel's master.” It appears that Phillips did not return to the dangerous work of privateering. Efforts to Better Protect Sandy Hook Fizzle For all of the letter-writing in spring 1781, there is no evidence that the British navy, the New York Chamber of Commerce, or the Associated Loyalists put a vessel to sea to protect the London Traders or fishermen of the Shrewsbury banks in spring 1781. Lowe again sought British protection for the Shrewsbury Banks fishermen in July 1782, writing the British Admiral: The trade and fishery [off Sandy Hook?] are unprotected, and requesting that some means be pursued to encourage the fishermen to take fish and supply this garrison, and that its commerce may not be annoyed by the privateers and whale-boats that infest even the Narrows. New England privateers continued to prowl the approaches to Sandy Hook and small New Jersey privateers, including the bold Adam Hyler, continued to pluck small vessels off Sandy Hook. The Associated Loyalist vessels (the sloops Colonel Martin and Association , and the brig Sir Henry Clinton ) that finally put to sea in September 1781 had undistinguished tenures. Newspapers do not attribute any captures to them. When the British finally sought to check Hyler and the Raritan Bay privateers in June 1782, their efforts were lampooned rather than feared. The Pennsylvania Freeman's Journal reported on June 19: The enemy have a stout galley stationed near the mouth of the Raritan, and gun boat or two cruizing about the bay, who appear to do little more else then firing now and then upon such rebel oystermen and fishermen as venture too near them. That same month, Congress approved a plan to provide wood and supplies to American prisoners held in New York to build a fishing boat if the British would permit the prisoners to fish the Shrewsbury Banks alongside Loyalist fisherman. It is unknown if his plan was ever fully-executed. For short periods of time, such as May 1780 , British fleets docked at New York and put ships on patrol on the Jersey shore. They took some prizes, and forced rebel privateers to back off. But, for long stretches in between, rebel vessels operated with impunity. The illegal trade between the Monmouth shore and New York was too profitable to be ended by the capture of some Loyalist vessels. London Traders knew the risks they were taking and enjoyed cooperation from locals along long stretches of the largely disaffected New Jersey shoreline. The capture of Loyalist fishermen engaged in peaceful activity, was that much more heart-wrenching for Loyalists. This is the subject of another article. Related Historic Site : New York City Chamber of Commerce (Manhattan, New York) Sources : New York Chamber of Commerce of Marriott Arbuthnot, John Stevens, Colonial Records of the Chamber of Commerce of New York, 1768-1784 (New York: John F. Trow, 1867) pp. 255-81; S.W. to Daniel Coxe, John Austin Stevens, Magazine of American History, 1884, vol 11, p161; Library of Congress, Early American Newspaper, New Jersey Gazette, reel 1930; The Scots Magazine, v43, p 373-5; Library of Congress, Rivington's New York Gazette, reel 2906; Clements Library, Proceedings of the Board of Directors of the Associated Loyalists, March 1781 p. 8-13, August, p. 5, July p. 11, and September 1781, p. 5. Previous Next

The articles in the collection 250 for the 250th: The American Revolution in Monmouth County represent the most complete history of this topic ever assembled. < 250 Home < Previous pg. Next > The Capture of William Marriner by Michael Adelberg William Marriner led two boats with 28 New Jersians to the Brooklyn shore to pick-off vessels trading with New York. Bad weather forced Marriner’s party to land; they were taken by local militia. - August 1780 - In early June 1778, two whaleboats left Middletown Point (present-day Matawan). They rowed through the night, and landed in Brooklyn. The small party, led by William Marriner (along with Captain John Scheck of Middletown) captured two prominent Loyalists and returned with them without any losses. It was one of the more remarkable raids of the war. Operating out of Middletown Point, Amboy, and New Brunswick, Marriner raided Brooklyn again and intermittently attacked and took larger vessels over the next two years. But his string of successes ended in August 1780. On August 3, Marriner headed toward Brooklyn again with a small party (28 men) in two whaleboats. In bad weather, one the boats overturned and the party had to go ashore at Hog Island (near present-day Breezy Point). The Loyalist New York Gazette reported the results: Captain Hicks, of the militia of that place, mustered his company and with a few volunteers in two boats went in quest of them, but the stormy weather prevented their attacking them this evening. About four o'clock the next morning, a smart action ensued, and the whole party of Rebels were taken prisoner. The report claimed that Marriner had been cruising the Brooklyn-Queens shore for fourteen days and “had met with no success." That seems unlikely as Marriner’s party would not have carried enough provisions to be at sea for that long. The report also stated that "there were none killed or wounded on either side; several grape shot went through Captain Hick's jacket." Finally, the report discussed the captured rebels: One of them [boats] was commanded by William Marriner, formerly of this city, but of late a great rebel partisan, prisoners amount to twenty-eight, among them a rebel commissary named Mr. [Alexander] Dickey, who ever had proven a violent persecutor of Royal officers and Loyalists who had fallen in his power. Two men in Marriner’s party discussed their capture in their postwar pension applications. Joseph Vanderveer of Middletown recorded: He volunteered with about twenty other persons on board a boat under Captain Marriner and another boat under Dickey, upon an expedition where they proceeded as far as Rockaway Bay; our boats, together with a sloop we had captured, ran aground, while lying in this situation we were taken prisoner by a part of the British Army and marched across Long Island to a place called White Stone, where we then put on board boats, taken to New York, and imprisoned in the North Church & kept there in close confinement until the latter part of December in the year 1780, when he was again exchanged. Josiah Woodruff of Essex County was also in Marriner’s party. He later recalled that "in the year 1780, I volunteered with said William Clark [also from Essex County] in a company under the command of Captain Marriner who, as we understood, had a commission for cruising as a privateer on the water against the common enemy." The party left Amboy on August 3 "on board two boats" with 10 oars each and 28 men "well armed with muskets and other weapons." They rowed past Sandy Hook to the southern shore of Long Island where, at Hog Island, they captured a small sloop “loaded with pork and sugar.” Woodruff described the mission going bad. The boats were unable to row back to New Jersey "due to boisterous winds." One of the boats overturned and the men had to swim to shore. Then, "very early in the morning, the British collected in a large boat, well armed, and we were all made prisoners." Marriner’s men were jailed five months before they were exchanged. Woodruff noted that the mission was to "intercept London Traders " and that the men “had perfect confidence in his [Marriner’s] skill & his patriotism as a Whig engaged in annoying the London Trader & carrying on unlawful traffic with the enemy." This was Marriner’s last privateer action. While the men in Marriner’s party were exchanged in December 1780, Marriner was not released until October 1781. Upon release, Marriner returned to a hero’s welcome in New Brunswick. But he quickly faded from public view. Marriner was likely an alias, and he may have reverted to his original name. An antiquarian source claims Marriner managed a tavern at New Brunswick after his release. Alexander Dickey, the co-leader of Marriner’s party, would remain an active whaleboat privateer through the end of the war. And New Brunswick became the primary port for the Raritan Bay privateers . If Marriner was managing a tavern it is easy to imagine him advising would-be privateers over strong drinks. New Brunswick’s most famous privateer captain, Adam Hyler, would soon emerge. Related Historic Site : The Wyckoff House Museum (Brooklyn, New York) Sources : National Archives, Revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - Tunis Vanderveer; J.A. McManemin, Captains of Privateers. (Spring Lake, N.J.: Ho-Ho-Kus Pub. Co., 1994), pp. 341-4; Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application of William Clark of NJ, National Archives, p26; Library of Congress, Rivington's New York Gazette, August 1780, reel 2906. Previous Next

The articles in the collection 250 for the 250th: The American Revolution in Monmouth County represent the most complete history of this topic ever assembled. < 250 Home < Previous pg. Next > The Establishment of the Association for Retaliation by Michael Adelberg Conrad Alexandre Gerard, the French diplomat, wrote with concern about rising vigilantism in Monmouth County in 1779; he could not stop formation of the Retaliators, a vigilante society, in 1780. - July 1780 - In spring 1780, Loyalist raiding parties ungoverned by military officers emerged as a dangerous, new enemy for Monmouth Countians. They kidnapped a dozen militia officers and several other Monmouth leaders. Inside Monmouth County, rage and desperation reached a new level; meanwhile, the expected return of the French fleet put county leaders in motion—traveling from Freehold to shore to create stores of provisions. This enabled Freehold Township leaders, particularly a clique of Machiavellian leaders who attended the Tennent Church together, to promote a bold idea—establishing a vigilante society to inflict eye-for-an-eye retaliation whenever a member of the society was attacked. Continental Leaders Worry about Vigilantism Throughout the war, Continental leaders worried about Whigs (supporters of the Revolution) engaging in lawless violence. Dr. Benjamin Rush, serving in the Continental Congress, for example, discussed "furious Whigs" who “injure the cause of liberty… by their violence." George Washington worried about New Jersey militia officers from “the lowest class of people… leading men into every kind of mischief; one species of which is plundering the inhabitants under pretense of being Tories." Worries about local leaders behaving lawlessly pushed Governor William Livingston to issue a proclamation on February 5, 1777. He scolded local officials who have “forcibly carried away and seized the goods of their fellow inhabitants on pretense that the owners thereof were inimical to the Liberties of America." Livingston warned that retribution would "inflame the minds of the sufferers... and abolish all discipline." Livingston ordered militia officers and other civil officials to "desist for the future from all depredations and violence" without legal due process. Monmouth Countians Petition for Tougher Laws Against Enemies In Monmouth County, scars from the Loyalist insurrections and the disastrous Battle of the Navesink trumped the Governor’s warning. Over the next three years, they repeatedly petitioned the Legislature for stronger laws to punish Loyalists and their kin at home. The petitions are summarized below: In March 1777, petitioners argued against leniency for disloyal citizens who “have nothing to fear from violation of the laws of this state.” They called for stricter laws to punish the at-home disaffected. In June 1777, petitioners (in two petitions) plundered of property during the Loyalist insurrections sought a law that would compensate them from the estates of Loyalists. When the Legislature did not act, Nathaniel Scudder, the County’s leading political figure, wrote Governor Livingston in April 1778: The Tory race, who have increased under our nurture, that is to say our lenient measures, are now much more dangerous than the British troops. Alas, my dear sir, instead of rearing our heads as heretofore like the stout oak, we flag like the parcel of bull rushes. Other petitions called for the State to prevent Loyalists from returning home, and re-punishing Loyalists formerly jailed but now “suffered to go at large." At least three more petitions went forward in 1779 calling for more vigorous actions against the at-home disaffected. In May and September 1779, petitioners (in three petitions) argued that county residents were “deprived of their property by some of the fugitives that have joined the enemy from this county.” They wanted victims “compensated by [the estates of] such fugitives as have left their estates." Extra-Legal Acts Against Loyalists in Monmouth County Even while Monmouth Countians were seeking stronger laws against Loyalists and at-home disaffected, some were taking matters into their own hands. Perhaps most notably, in October 1777, David Forman, a Colonel in the Continental Army (who would soon have his troops taken away from him) hanged the Loyalist Stephen Edwards without a civil trial. Other events would follow. In January 1778, the New Jersey Supreme Court heard a trespass case against William Wikoff. The state charged Wikoff “with diverse other persons, with force and arms… unlawfully did assemble and close the stable of a certain Denice Holmes.” There, he “unlawfully did break and enter, and a horse belonging to Daniel Van Mater, did maliciously and unlawfully take from said stable to the evil example of all others." Van Mater was a Loyalist whose horse was apparently being boarded by Holmes. Wikoff had served as a captain under David Forman and his family had opposed the Loyalist insurrections. In 1782, the Supreme Court heard a case in which the State charged three leading Monmouth Whigs--John Burrowes, David Forman and Elisha Walton—with illegally detaining a Loyalist. Prosecutors charged that on April 1, 1778, "James O'Hara had then and there committed a felony & was flying from justice and was on his way to New York.” O’Hara was taken by the men who “falsely and unlawfully did conceal and keep secret the wicked intentions of the said James O'Hara... whereby O'Hara was not then & there brought to justice." O’Hara was detained without arrest; he re-emerged as a Pine Robber in 1781. After the destructive raid against Middletown Point in May 1778, a Monmouth County Whig published a threat to retaliate against civilians in Brooklyn in the New Jersey Gazette on June 6: O, ye butchering British monster! We are not obliged to delay retaliating any longer! - Therefore, as you value the safety of your friends on the Island, do not send another example as that of Middletown [Point], for the consequence may prove fatal to the Tories on the Island. Concurrently, William Marriner and John Schenck launched their surprise counter-raid against Brooklyn, and the Monmouth County Court of Oyer and Terminer issued a dozen capital convictions—more than any county court would issue during the war. Later that year, the captured Loyalist, James Pew, was murdered in the Monmouth County jail by the prison guard, James Tilley. Word of vigilante activity in Monmouth County reached Philadelphia. Conrad Alexandre Gerard, the French diplomat at Philadelphia, wrote with concern on February 10, 1779: The impunity with which the Tories who lived in New Jersey have exercised all kinds of exhortation in the proximity of the English [has] embitters the Whigs, who have themselves re-assembled throughout all parts of the County of Monmouth, which is very fertile in Tories. They [Tories] infest the roads with robbery, the Whigs give their hunt; they seize property all over where they find [Tories]; they kill in great numbers [and] they accuse throughout. They [Whigs] drag them [Tories] before the juries of their choice and assume the right of the [entire] body of people; they pronounce the guilty and enforce their sentences immediately without due processes, and confiscate their goods. People hope this rage will calm down through public vengeance and the particular exercises of the Whigs. If such exercises are the good fruits of Democratic Liberty, this is a good fruit people cannot wish on their enemies. Extra-legal retaliation also had its moments in the Continental Congress; a few times, it threatened eye-for-an-eye retaliation. For example, on May 24, 1779, Congress stated that the British ”have perpetrated the most unnecessary, wanton and outrageous barbarities… deliberately putting many to death in cool blood after they had surrendered, abusing women and desolating the country." So, Congress resolved: “Congress will retaliate for cruelties and violations of the laws of nations committed in these states against the subjects of His Most Christian Majesty, in like manner and measure.” Establishing the Association for Retaliation A year later, in June 1780, the New Jersey Legislature’s Upper House, the Legislative Council, recorded receiving a petition from Monmouth County praying "that retaliation may be made on the disaffected to induce the enemy to treat our citizens more humanely." The Council minutes do not record a response to the petition, but the petition was sent to the Assembly (the Lower House). The Assembly’s minutes record receiving two petitions from Monmouth County about retaliation. The first one: "praying that a law may be enacted to enable them to retaliate upon the disaffected in the said County, under proper regulations and restrictions" was referred to the Committee. The second one prayed for a law that would allow petitioners “to apprehend a number of the most notoriously disaffected who are related to the most considerable among the Refugees, and to keep them in close custody until the loyal subjects of the State, in the hands of the refugees are liberated.” The petitioners well knew that many families split apart during the war. Punishing the kin of a Loyalist based on the (alleged) sins of that Loyalist is impossible to ethically defend. If the kin of the Loyalist was “notoriously disaffected,” those individuals could stand trial for their own actions. One of these petitions has survived. The petitioners complained of: The enemy amongst us, who not only conceal the plunderers, but we believe, give information as to most of our movements, and are so crafty that we are not able to bring lawful accusations against them, although there is great reason to think they are active aforesaid, by which means they take off any persons they please, plunder our houses, take our property. The petitioners worried about the militia and state troops “not being up to the task.” They then requested: As no means appears to us to be so effective as that of retaliation, we therefore earnestly pray that your honourable body will form such a law as may enable us to make such retaliation, as person for person and property for property, under such restrictions & regulations as to your honours will seem most adequate to the suppression of aforesaid. Importantly, the petitioners requested a law to enable “person for person and property for property” retaliation—a tacit acknowledgement that such actions were not legal under existing law. On June 23, David Forman (who was assisting the Continental Army with preparations for the arrival of the French fleet) wrote George Washington regarding a raid against Middletown that took ten captives (seven were liberated). Forman interrogated a Loyalist captured during the raid: On his examination, he confesses he is not a soldier - neither was he to receive any pay - that their sole business was to take a number of inhabitants from their houses and to plunder, & that the plunder was to be divided amongst them. The fact is they were probably a marauding gang. Forman called on Washington to clarify that he could execute such a man for “marauding”—a power granted to British officers. Forman referred to a standing British order: Declaring that all persons not uniformed & acting without a commissioned officer, if taken, should be hanged immediately as marauders - some such example, I am sure, is necessary in this part of the country to deter that class of people; we can no longer be secure at night. My next dispatch shall cover, for your Excellency's opinion and if agreeable to the rules of war, that prisoners taken in that way may be executed. At this same time, articles that would establish the Association for Retaliation were being drafted. Forman and others were traveling between Freehold and the shore, making it easier to promote the Association for Retaliation’s first meeting—to be held at Freehold on July 1. The articles were circulated; signatures were collected. On July 1, the Association for Retaliation held its first public meeting at the county courthouse to elect a nine-man Board of Directors. According to antiquarian sources, Retaliators were sworn to secrecy under threat of the "direst penalty." 436 Monmouth Countians signed the articles—more signatures than any Monmouth County document from the Revolutionary Era. A number of David Forman’s political rivals —including Colonel Asher Holmes—chose to sign, though they probably regretted doing so later on. The articles of the Association for Retaliation stated the worldview of the Retaliators: Whereas from the frequent incursions and depredations of the enemy (and more particularly of the refugees) in this county, whereby not only the lives but the liberty and property of every determined Whig are endangered, they, upon every such incursion, either burning or destroying houses, making prisoners of, and most inhumanly treating aged and peaceable inhabitants, and plundering them of all portable property, it has become essentially necessary to take some different and more effectual measures to check said practices. They further complained about local disaffected who “in general have been suffered to reside unmolested among us, numbers of which, we have full reason to believe, are aiding and accessory to those detestable practices.” The Retaliators, therefore, “actuated solely by the principles of self-preservation… solemnly associate for the purpose of retaliation” and “obligate ourselves” to: Warrant and defend such persons as may be appointed for the purpose of making restitution to such friends to their country as may hereafter have their houses burned or broke to pieces, their property wantonly destroyed or plundered, their persons made prisoners. The eye-for-an-eye credo of the Retaliators was then laid out in three provisions: First, for every good subject of this state residing within the county that shall become an associator, that shall be taken… on the errand of plundering and man-stealing, there shall be taken an equal number of the most disaffected and influential residing and having property within the county, and them confine within the Provost jail and treat them with British rigor, until the good subjects of this state taken as aforesaid shall be fully liberated. Second, for every house that shall be burned or destroyed, the property of a good subject that enters with this association, there shall be made full retaliation upon or out of the property of the disaffected as aforesaid. Third, for every article of property taken as aforesaid from any of the associators, being good subjects, the value thereof shall be replaced out of the property of the disaffected as aforesaid. Finally, the Retaliators pledged to support the militia (“We will turn out at all times when the country is invaded, and at other times do our proportionate part towards the defence thereof.”) and advertise themselves in the New Jersey Gazette . These provisions may have been included to assuage fears that the Retaliators would work in opposition to Whig institutions such as the militia. (The full Articles for Retaliation are in Appendix 1 of this article.) The Retaliators knew that their existence was controversial; Nathaniel Scudder, a member of the Retaliator Board, wrote letters on July 12 and 17 to Philadelphia seeking to legitimize the group in the nation’s capital (see Appendix 2). In one of his letters, Scudder was too frank, writing (and underlining): “We are well aware of the objections this distressing mode is liable to cause, as being not agreeable to law, liable to abuse and likely sometimes to injure the innocent - but alas my dear friend, necessity has no law.” With this statement, Scudder crystalized the problem posed by the Retaliators—they judged themselves so righteously aggrieved that they could commit unlawful and brutal acts , including against people whose only “crime” was having Loyalist kin. The Loyalist New York Gazette also printed the Articles for Retaliation. The writer noted that two members of the Retaliator Board had been prisoners in New York “whereupon, instead of the pains of imprisonment, were through the grace & benignity of Government, they were genteelly lodged and protected from every kind of insult.” While Loyalists, “merely for conscientious adherence to principle” are “condemned at mock tribunals, tortured and ignominiously put to death." The writer concluded that the Retaliators should be "most exemplarily and emphatically retaliated upon." Indeed, the vigilante Associated Loyalists in New York would emphatically retaliate upon the Retaliators, and they would retaliate in kind. As this author has previously written, retaliation propelled the local war Monmouth County for the next two years toward climactic retaliation in April 1782. Related Historic Site : Old Tennent Church Appendix 1: Articles of Association for Retaliation Whereas from the frequent incursions and depredations of the enemy (and more particularly of the refugees) in this county, whereby not only the lives but the liberty and property of every determined Whig are endangered, they, upon every such incursion, either burning or destroying houses, making prisoners of, and most inhumanly treating aged and peaceable inhabitants, and plundering them of all portable property, it has become essentially necessary to take some different and more effectual measures to check said practices, than have ever yet been taken; and as it is a fact, notorious to every one, that these depredations have always been committed by the refugees (either black or white) that have left this country, or by their influence or procurement, many of whom have near relations and friends, that in general have been suffered to reside unmolested among us, numbers of which, we have full reason to believe, are aiding and accessory to those detestable practices. We, the subscribers, inhabitants of the county of Monmouth, actuated solely by the principles of self-preservation, being of opinion that the measure will be strictly justifiable on the common principles of war, and being encouraged thereto by an unanimous resolve of the honorable the congress, passed the 30th of Oct., 1778, wherein they in the most solemn manner declare that through every possible change of fortune they will retaliate, do hereby solemnly associate for the purpose of retaliation, and do obligate ourselves, our heirs, executors and administrators, and every of them jointly and severally, to all and every of the subscribers and their heirs, to warrant and defend such persons as may be appointed to assist this association in the execution thereof; and that we will abide by and adhere to such rules and regulations for the purpose of making restitution to such friends to their country as may hereafter have their houses burned or broke to pieces, their property wantonly destroyed or plundered, their persons made prisoners of whilst peaceably at their own habitations about their lawful business not under arms, as shall hereafter be determined on by a committee of nine men duly elected by the associates at large out of their number; which rules and regulations shall be founded on the following principles, FIRST - For every good subject of this state residing within the county, that shall become an associator, and shall be taken or admitted to parole by any party or parties of refugees as aforesaid, that shall come on the errand of plundering and man-stealing, the good subject not actually under or taken in arms, there shall be taken an equal number of the most disaffected and influential residing and having property within the county, and them confine within the Provost jail and treat them with British rigor, until the good subjects of this state taken as aforesaid shall be fully liberated. SECOND - For every house that shall be burned or destroyed, the property of a good subject that enters with this association, there shall be made full retaliation upon or out of the property of the disaffected as aforesaid. THIRD - That for every article of property taken as aforesaid from any of the associators, being good subjects, the value thereof shall be replaced out of the property of the disaffected as aforesaid. We do also further associate for the purpose of defending the frontiers of this county, and engage each man for himself that is a subject of the militia that we will turn out at all times when the county is invaded, and at other times do our proportionate part towards the defence thereof. We the associators do hereby direct that a copy of this association be, as soon as the signing is completed, transmitted to the printer of the New Jersey Gazette, for publication, and that the original be lodged in the clerk's office. Also we do request, that the associators will meet at the courthouse on Saturday, the 1st of July, at 1 o'clock in the afternoon for the purpose of electing a committee of nine men, as before mentioned, to carry the said association into effect. Appendix 2: Nathaniel Scudder’s July 1780 Letters on Retaliation Nathaniel Scudder letters to Philadelphia on July 12 and July 17. Excerpts on Retaliation: July 12 : “After petitioning the Legislature without success for a law of retaliation or other remedy for depredations of the Refugees, and now despairing any other effectual mode of redress, the inhabitants of the County have entered into a solemn association (near 500 have signed it) to retaliate in kind upon the disaffected among us for all the damages, burnings, kidnappings, etc., done or perpetrated by the Refugees - and the Association has chosen a committee to execute the general purposes of the said association & General Forman is our chairman & that the association have jointly pledged themselves and their fortunes to support & defend us, you will not doubt that the execution will be rigidly punctual & delivered.” July 17 : “We suffer greatly in this part of the country from the murder, depredation, and kidnappings of the refugees and disaffected... we have from the necessity of the case on the sole ground of self-preservation been compelled to enter into a general association for the purpose of retaliation on the persons and property of the notoriously disaffected yet residing amongst us, for all damages depredations, burnings, kidnappings & c. done or committed by any of the refugees on the associators in this neighborhood; [we] amount to near or quite 500, & the number is daily increasing - they have chosen a committee of execution and have solemnly pledged themselves to defend them in the prosecution of the business - an eye for an eye & a tooth for a tooth [underlined], we are well aware of the objections this distressing mode is liable to, as being not agreeable to law, liable to abuse and likely sometimes to injure the innocent - but alas my dear friend, necessity has no law [underlined], we could no longer consent to be murdered and plundered by rule while from the laxness and timidity & indecision of our own magistrates the law was rather a screen for the Tories, while they [laws] afforded but little security to the well-affected citizens." Sources : Washington’s quote is in Ruth M. Keesey, "New Jersey Legislation Concerning Loyalists," Proceedings of the New Jersey Historical Society, vol. 79 (1961), p 81; Governor Livingston's Proclamation, American Revolution Digital Learning Project, www.amrevonline.org ; Petition contained in: National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, James Wall of NJ, www.fold3.com/image/# 20366031; The Library Company, New Jersey Votes of the Assembly, February 18-19, 1778, p 55, 58; The Library Company, New Jersey Votes of the Assembly, May 29, 1778, p 123 and June 3, 1778, p 129; Minutes of the Provincial Congress and the Council of Safety of the State of New Jersey 1775-1776 (Ithaca: Cornell University Library, 2009) p 245; The Library Company, New Jersey Votes of the Assembly, September 28, 1779, p 178-180; New Jersey State Archives, Supreme Court Records, #39523; Nathaniel Scudder to William Livingston, Massachusetts Historical Society, William Livingston Papers; New Jersey State Archives, Supreme Court Records, #34123; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 2, pp. 246-7; Conrad Alexandre Gerard, Despatches and Instructions of Conrad Alexandre Gerard, 1778-1780, (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1939) pp. 510-1; Journals of the Continental Congress, (Philadelphia: David Claypool, 1782) vol. 5, p220; the articles establishing the Association of Retaliation are printed in Franklin Ellis, The History of Monmouth County (R.T. Peck: Philadelphia, 1885), p206; Journals of the Legislative Council of New Jersey (Isaac Collins: State of New Jersey, 1780) p95-6; The Library Company, New Jersey Votes of the Assembly, June 9, 1780, p 229; David Forman to George Washington, Library of Congress, George Washington Papers, series 4, reel 67, June 23, 1780; New Jersey Historical Society, MG-14 (Ely Collection), Petition, Monmouth County; William Horner, This Old Monmouth of Ours (Freehold: Moreau Brothers, 1932) p 219-20; Nathaniel Scudder to John Scudder, New Jersey Historical Society, Letters: Nathaniel Scudder; Nathaniel Scudder to Henry Laurens, Pennsylvania History Society, Dreer Collection, Nathaniel Scudder, August 17, 1780; Library of Congress, Rivington's New York Gazette, reel 2906; Tilton, LeRoy W. "New Jersey Petition of 1780, Concerning Retaliation," National Genealogical Society Quarterly, vol. 34, Spring 1946, pp. 75-76; “’A Combination to Trample All Law Underfoot’”: The Association for Retaliation and the American Revolution in Monmouth County, New Jersey,” New Jersey History , 1997; Michael Adelberg, Biographical File, unpublished compendium at the Monmouth Historical Association. Previous Next