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 > Competition for Continental Army Recruits in Monmouth County by Michael Adelberg Broadsides like this one were posted across New Jersey. Continental Army recruits were promised a bounty, a uniform, and, sometimes, land in the West. But few recruits were raised in 1777. - May 1777 - In the spring of 1777, there was a great need to bring men into the Continental Army. The soldiers who had enlisted in 1776 had served their time and most were heading home. George Washington’s army needed to be rebuilt against the professional British Army with long term troops. The Continental Congress focused on this need and recommended to the states that future enlistments run for three years or the length of the war. It also focused on widening the pool of recruits. Below is one example of a resolution passed with the goal of enhancing Continental Army recruitment: Resolved, that it be recommended to the Legislatures of each of the United States to enact laws exempting from actual service any two of the militia who shall, within the time limited by such laws, furnish one able-bodied recruit to serve in any battalion of the Continental Army, for the term of three years or the present war - such exemption to continue during the term for which the recruit shall enlist, and every such recruit be entitled to the Continental bounty and other allowances. Congress further recommended that the states permit "the enlisting of servants and apprentices” and allow debtors to enlist. It encouraged states to raise enlistment bounties. Initial bans against African Americans joining the army were reversed. Each state was responsible for raising its own troops and New Jersey—as the “crossroads of the Revolution”—responded by increasing its recruiting bounties and creating a new Continental Army regiment to be raised under Colonel Oliver Spencer. While Spencer was based in Essex County, his recruiters ranged across northern New Jersey and into Monmouth County. Across New Jersey but particularly in Monmouth County, young men who were willing to fight had many options—the New Jersey Continental Line, Spencer’s new regiment, David Forman’s Additional Regiment —and British service in the New Jersey Volunteers. Mark Lender, the premier historian of the Continental Army, observed that after an initial surge of patriotism in 1776, recruits to the Army were generally young and poor men lured by bounties. While there is no reason to doubt Lender’s generalization, there were some exceptions. Jonathan Holmes of Allentown, for example, enlisted into the New Jersey Line at Bordentown on January 6, 1777. He wrote his father: "I have this day joined the Light Horse, for I think it don't do to lie by as an idle spectator at this critical time." David Forman Complains about Outside Recruiters The efforts of the New Jersey Government to recruit men for the state’s Continental Line adversely impacted David Forman’s efforts to recruit men for his Additional Regiment. On May 28, Forman complained to the Continental Congress: By the laws of such State Legislatures we have too much reason to fear the recruiting service as it respects a certain part of the Army of the United States will be much impeded... we are sorry to find that certain laws passed by the Legislatures of Maryland, Delaware and New Jersey, that we are by no means considered to be on equal footing with the other Regiments [i.e., State Lines], but we are laid under such restrictions as amounting in all its consequences to an entire prohibition. Forman described his men as "persons warmly attached to American Liberty, who have not entered the service from lucrative or ambitious motives." He and the officers in his regiment were frustrated by the uneven recruiting practices. He called recruiting parity: "We therefore hope your Honorable House will consider our situation and put us on a respectable footing as those of the eight Regiments, by establishing our authority to equality in the different States." His memorial was referred to Congress’s War Department and it appears no action was taken directly related to it. Forman was permitted to recruit for his regiment from the body of captured Loyalist insurrectionists jailed in Philadelphia. However, those efforts produced only a handful of recruits. Other Tensions Created by Recruiting The New Jersey Legislature continued to focus on raising men for the Continental Army. In October, it appointed two recruiters from each county to raise troops for the Continental Line. For Monmouth County, Kenneth Anderson (the County Clerk) and Gilbert Longstreet were appointed. The state continued to raise bounties throughout the war, but in Monmouth County, there were allegations of bounty theft. John M. Covenhoven (known as John M. to distinguish him from other men of the same name) recalled that he "enlisted for six months under Capt. David Gordon,” but claimed that “Gordon cheated him of his bounty." Recruiting for the Army also created tensions with Monmouth County’s large Quaker community. Jacob Hall recalled an incident in 1780 in which: This deponent was then encamped at Freehold town when Capt. William Barton brought in a number of recruits for the Army, among them was young Solomon Ivins... That old Solomon Ivins (the Quaker Preacher) came to camp on horseback in order to induce his son to leave the company, and he would procure him a substitute. Solomon Ivins defied his father: “He would not leave the Army to please the old fellow; the said Solomon Ivins was a good soldier and served until the close of the war." The Loyalist New Jersey Volunteers were also campaigning for recruits. Colonel John Morris, looking to fill his 2nd Battalion, advertised for recruits in Loyalist newspapers in March and May 1777. He offered an £5 recruitment bounty plus "each man shall be entitled to fifty acres of land in this province at the expiration of the rebellion." Via former militia colonel George Taylor, recruiting handbills for the New Jersey Volunteers were circulated throughout northern Monmouth County. Taylor recruited on his various incursions into Monmouth County in the spring of 1777. The results of all of this recruiting activity in Monmouth County were generally unimpressive. Monmouth Countians did not join the state’s Continental Line in great numbers. It appears that only one company—under Captain Jonathan Forman—was raised for the Continental Line from the county in 1777. Forman’s Additional Regiment also remained small—topping out at around 100 men. The low number of recruits reflects the underlying reality that Monmouth County—despite the tumult—was a place of considerable economic opportunity in 1777. Young men had many opportunities including producing agricultural and maritime products for eager commissaries . Monmouth Countians could also participate in new industries in need of laborers—particularly salt-making and privateering. Economic opportunities aside, many Monmouth Countians remained unconvinced that Revolution was the right path. The ranks of the Loyalist New Jersey Volunteers swelled in early 1777. Illegal trade with the British was lucrative and low-risk through most of the war. This was the underlying reason that relatively few Monmouth men served in the Continental Army. Related Historic Site : National Museum of the United States Army (Ft. Belvoir, VA) Sources : Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application of John M. Conover of Pennsylvania, National Archives, p4-7; Advertisement, New York Gazette and Weekly Mercury, March 10, 1777; New Jersey State Archives, Dept of Defense, Military Records, Revolutionary War Copies, box 27, #16; American Memory Project, http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collection/continental ; National Archives, revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - Solomon Ivins; National Archives, Papers of the Continental Congress, reel 49, item 41, vol. 3, #179-80; Library of Congress, Journals of the Continental Congress, vol. 8, p 394; Journals of the Legislative Council of New Jersey (Isaac Collins: State of New Jersey, 1777) p122-3; The Library Company, New Jersey Votes of the Assembly, October 10, 1777, p 200. 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 > Provisions Taken from Shore Residents for the Continental Army by Michael Adelberg The need to get provisions for his army and keep provisions from the British Army led George Washington to order troops to impound livestock from people living on the Monmouth shore. - December 1779 - With more than 10,000 British troops, thousands of sailors, and thousands more Loyalist refugees , the teeming population of Revolutionary War-New York City was in constant need of food. Monmouth County’s long shoreline—20 miles on the Raritan Bayshore and 50 miles of Atlantic shoreline - was also teeming with so-called “London Traders ” (Loyalist middlemen who sold goods from New Jersey to the British). Further, the livestock of Whigs (supporters of the Revolution) living near the shore was also vulnerable to capture, as when Loyalist raiders attacked Tinton Falls and took dozens of livestock in June 1779. Keeping provisions secure and away from the shore was, therefore, a continuous interest of New Jersey and Continental leaders. First Impressments The first time the New Jersey government took an interest in Monmouth County’s vulnerable livestock was July 23, 1776. Daniel Hendrickson, the Colonel of the Shrewsbury militia, came before the New Legislature to warn that "all stock on the sea coast… be in danger of falling into enemy hands." The Legislature directed Monmouth County’s Revolutionary leaders to “without delay, remove all stock on their coast which may be in danger of falling into the hands of the enemy, back into the country." William Applegate of Freehold, recalled participating in the campaign to take livestock at this time. He wrote: "Marched from Freehold to Middletown to bring off & secure the cattle & c., the British having at that time arrived in the Narrows." Farmers were given vouchers for the impounded livestock. But the vouchers were to be paid in low value New Jersey or Continental currencies. Clayton Tilton was a shore resident who had cattle taken in 1776. After this and other harassments, he turned Loyalist. Later in the war, he became a captain in the vigilante Associated Loyalists and was indicted for murder in the Monmouth County courts. In early 1777, Loyalist raiding parties from Sandy Hook began coming into Monmouth County via the Raritan Bayshore. This came to the attention of George Washington, who wrote Governor William Livingston on April 4, 1777: “I think the removal of the provisions in the County of Monmouth within reach of the Enemy (if they make descents) of so much Consequence, that I shall direct Colonel Forman [David Forman] to set about that work as soon as he collects a sufficient force to do it effectually." Forman dispatched Captain John Schenck to seize the goods of Shrewsbury Township residents. On April 15, Schenck recorded taking a variety of provisions, including guns and wagons: Deborah Wardell ("wife of Joseph Wardell absconded”) - 2 horses, wagon, 6 bushels of potato; Zilpha Corlies - 2 horses, wagon, gun; William Corlies - 2 horses, wagon, gun; Jacob Hance - horse; Benjamin Corlies - 30 bushels of corn. One of Schenck’s men, Job Throckmorton, later wrote that in May 1777 he went from "Freehold to Middletown to bring off & secure the cattle, horses & sheep to Freehold, to prevent their capture." It is probable that other impressments occurred at this time, but documentation is lacking. Washington and Livingston again considered impounding provisions along the Monmouth shore in early 1778. On January 12, Livingston wrote Washington about “great quantities of grain in the county of Monmouth in places much exposed to the Enemy.” He further wrote: The purchasing of this would be doubly advantageous, by supplying ourselves, and keeping it from the Enemy. From Shrewsbury Middletown Point & Amboy, I believe, New York receives considerable Supplies; and it is not in our power to secure by our Militia, those places from that infamous traffic. A few weeks later, Washington, from Valley Forge, wrote about the need to destroy supplies on the Jersey shore, because they were accessible to the British and not the Continental Army: "As it is impossible to secure the hay on the Jersey shore for our own use, it is certainly advisable to destroy it, that the enemy shall derive no benefit from it." It is unclear if Washington’s uncharacteristically harsh order was put into effect. In December 1778, Washington again worried that livestock on the Monmouth shore would fall into British hands. He wrote Livingston on December 7, 1778 “that the enemy shortly intend to make a forage upon the Monmouth coast.” He further wrote that this: Obliges me to desire your Excellency to give orders to the militia in that County to remove the stock near the coast, and to have particular regard for the houses of the disaffected, who always have previous notice to the designs of the enemy and lay up stores of provisions that may be at hand when they [the British] make their descent. By doing this, they screen themselves from the charge of having voluntarily contributed. Five days later, Livingston directed Colonel Asher Holmes, commanding the Middletown militia: I do hereby direct you, upon intelligence received of the enemy's approach or invasion of Monmouth, to remove to a place of safety, by such a number of militia as you may find necessary for the purpose, livestock, provisions and carriages as may be in danger of falling into the enemy's hands, on notice first given to owners & their neglecting or refusing to do the same. Unlike earlier impressments in which farmers along the shore were compensated for their losses, this time, the farmers had to pay the militia for safekeeping their livestock inland. Holmes would have his expenses paid "by the owner or owners of such livestock, provisions & carriages removed.” Henry “Light Horse Harry” Lee and Later Impressments A year later, Major Henry Lee was stationed at Freehold with his cavalry regiment. In December, Lee proposed seizing the goods of disaffected living along shore. Washington was cool to the idea. He cautioned Lee that any actions must “not be incompatible with the laws of the State" and asked Lee to familiarize himself with New Jersey law. Lee was feuding with Quartermaster agent , David Rhea, and admiralty court judge, John Imlay. Imlay asked Livingston to complain about Lee to Washington. While Washington had previously supported what Lee was proposing, he pulled Lee out of Monmouth County on January 7, 1780. Only three weeks later, Colonel Caleb North was sent into Monmouth County for the second time, with his Pennsylvania regiment , to curb the illegal trade to and from the Monmouth shore. He arrived with a letter from Washington instructing township magistrates "to furnish the quantity of provision required, provided I would assist them with a guard, where necessary.” The result was that North and the magistrates of Middletown and Shrewsbury townships: Impressed the following quantity of provision: forty seven barrels of beef and pork, fifty barrels of Tory bread which was taken aboard a brig near Middletown, the full quantity of grains, which is sent to the neighboring militia, with orders to be prepared for immediate use, and one hundred six head of good cattle (chiefly from the townships of Middletown and Shrewsbury) as being most in the power of the enemy. North further noted that the Commissary Agent for Monmouth County, John Lloyd, “being well acquainted with the stock and disposition of the people and this place” concurrently impressed provisions from shore residents and “came on to camp with the cattle, beef, pork & biscuit.” Loyalist raids in spring 1780 led to new efforts to impound provisions. On June 18, Commissary Officer Azariah Dunham wrote Washington about “several thousand bushels of Indian meal in the County of Monmouth belonging to the public in the greatest danger of spoiling.” Dunham would send David Forman to collect the provisions. Meanwhile, David Rhea employed Captain Joshua Huddy to round up provisions in Shrewsbury Township: Rhea wrote of Huddy, "he has drawn five teams from the remote parts of Shrewsbury, I expect more from that quarter tomorrow." Later that month, Livingston wrote the Continental Congress. He acknowledged a request from Congress to raise horse teams in anticipation of driving provisions to the French fleet on its arrival on the Jersey shore. Livingston noted "a resolution of both houses directs Magistrates to impress all the teams they possibly can in the counties of Hunterdon, Burlington, Monmouth, Middlesex, Somerset and Sussex." David Forman set about the difficult task of raising provisions for the fleet. He wrote on July 12: "It would give me great pleasure to give our allies assistance - [but] in the present situation of officers in the county I fear little will be in my power.” This is a reference to the many Whig leaders captured by Loyalist raiders in 1780. Forman also recalled the difficulties raising provisions for the French fleet when it anchored at Shrewsbury Inlet in July 1778 due to the disaffection of shore residents: When Count D'Estaing lay off Shrewsbury, he was exceedingly imposed on in point of price & could draw but little supply - the disaffection in Shrewsbury is since that time greatly increased... yet I am convinced that several hundred sheep and some cattle might be taken from some people who at several times withheld supplies from the American army & are strongly suspected of sending supplies to the enemy. Information like this from Forman pushed Washington to return Major Lee to Monmouth County to impound livestock. On July 24, Washington wrote Lee: “I am informed by General Forman that there is a great number of horses in Monmouth County [are] within the enemy's power, belonging to disaffected persons." He ordered Lee: To prevent the enemy from having benefit of these, you will immediately set about driving off from that part of the country, all horses fit for riding or wagon service, and deliver them to the Quartermaster General, giving certificates to the persons from whom they are taken. You will do the same with respect to cattle. Washington then wrote Forman about Lee’s orders. He asked Forman to confidentially cooperate with Lee: “He will apply to you for advice, which you can give him privately, as I imagine it will not be prudent for you to appear in this matter." The next day, July 25, Lee was at Shrewsbury. He acknowledged Washington’s order but also referred to an urgent need to go to Easton, Pennsylvania. He wrote Washington: "I shall arrange matters here & commit the execution of them to Capt. Rudolph." Forman went to Shrewsbury to assist Lee’s men. He wrote from Shrewsbury on July 27 that he was with Captain Rudolph “respecting the horned cattle and horses from the parts of Shrewsbury and Middletown.” But Forman was disappointed: Major Lee has marched all his horse previous to my getting this letter to East Town [Easton] except Capt. Rudolph's troops, about 24 in number. From a conviction that so few was entirely unequal to the task, I procured press warrants to the amount of about thirty for the militia to operate with him, and yesterday morning Capt. Rudolph, I expect, began to collect from the seaboard side of Shrewsbury. Forman noted that his goal was to impound 1,000 livestock, but he and Rudolph had taken only 160. He blamed the shortfall on Lee, who was in Easton by July 30. Lee wrote from Easton that his officers were “discontented” by the “evident neglect” of commissaries while he was in Monmouth County. He mentioned his recent service at Shrewsbury “for the purpose of impressing teams" without noting his decision to prematurely quit that mission. Forman further complained that Lee had allowed shore residents to voluntarily drive their livestock inland, rather than have it impounded: Success would not be considerable as I expected, occasioned by an order from Major Lee which has given the inhabitants the week before to drive up all their live cattle. That order will induce, I apprehend, the people to secret part of them. While the 160 head of livestock was far less than projected, it was still a large quantity. And, the French fleet never returned to Shrewsbury. The livestock were, instead, penned inland for several months and then finally marched to the Continental Army in January 1781. Two Monmouth County militiamen recalled driving the livestock all the way to Tappan, New York. Samuel Holmes wrote: He marched as far as Tappan [New York] under the command of Lieutenant Isaac Imlay of Upper Freehold, where they drove about 250 horses and cattle from Shrewsbury, John Lloyd, Esq., of Upper Freehold was their commissary on that occasion, after delivering the cattle, he served out the month at Morristown. John Clark also recalled marching all the way to Tappan, New York: "I was employed by the commissary to drive wagons, haul forage & provisions to Trenton [Tappan] from Monmouth Court House and was engaged in this service until April." Livestock impressments continued to occur at the direction of David Forman. As head of the extra-legal Retaliators , Forman impounded goods from several disaffected citizens. Then, in June 1782, Forman used his power as judge of court of common pleas to issue warrants for impounding livestock from four disaffected citizens. However, these were local events that were not endorsed by state or Continental leaders. The right of the government to impound provisions was unclear. At times, Washington and Livingston restrained officers from impressing provisions; at other times, they championed it. In either case, the confiscation of valuable property from citizens without due process was a troubling practice. The confiscation of goods from two Middletown farmers without a full jury trial led to Holmes v Walton , in which the New Jersey Supreme Court struck down a law that enabled goods to be seized without a full trial. After this decision—issued in the fall of 1780—the New Jersey and Continental governments never again attempted to impound provisions from Monmouth County’s citizens. Related Historic Site: Valley Forge National Historic Park Sources : 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 1651; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, William Applegate of NJ, www.fold3.com/image/#11273804 ; Peter W. Coldham, comp., American Loyalist Claims (Washington, D.C.: National Genealogical Society, 1980), pp. 490-1. Jones, E. Alfred. The Loyalists of New Jersey, (Newark, N. J. Historical Society, 1927) p 166; George Washington to Gov. William Livingston, Library of Congress, George Wahsington, Papters, http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/mgw:@field(DOCID+@lit(gw070361)) ; Receipts of Captain John Schenck, Beekman Papers, Rutgers University Special Collections, box 2, folder: Monmouth County Misc., 1727-1799; George Washington, Official Letters to the Honorable Congress (London: Caddel, Junior & Davies, 1795) vol 2, p61; National Archives, revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - Job Throckmorton; William Livingston to George Washington, The Papers of George Washington, Revolutionary War Series, vol. 13, 26 December 1777 – 28 February 1778, ed. Edward G. Lengel. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2003, pp. 208–209; George Washington to Nathanael Greene, The Papers of General Nathanael Greene (Chapel Hill: U of North Carolina Press, 1976) vol. 2, pp. 288, 292 note; George Washington to William Livingston, John Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1932) vol. 13, pp. 379-80. Leonard Lundin, Cockpit of the Revolution (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1950) p 408; William Livingston to George Washington, Carl Prince, Papers of William Livingston (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987) vol. 2, p 505; William Livingston to Asher Holmes, New Jersey State Archives, William Livingston Papers, reel 8, December 12, 1778; George Washington to Henry Lee, Library of Congress, George Washington Papers, Series 4, General Correspondence; Caleb North to George Washington, Library of Congress, George Washington Papers, series 4, reel 63, January 27, 1780; George Washington to Azariah Dunham, John Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1932) vol. 19, pp. 24-5; David Rhea to Moore Furman, New Jersey State Archives, Dept. of Defense, Revolutionary War, Numbered Manuscripts, #5594; William Livingston to Congress, Library of Congress, Peter Force Collection, Series 7C, box 31, folder 2, 68:305; David Forman to George Washington, Library of Congress, George Washington Papers, series 4, reel 68, July 12, 1780; Henry Lee to Governor Reed, Literary and Historical Manuscripts--Bound Oversize, Record ID:122286, Morgan Library; Nathanael Greene, The Papers of General Nathanael Greene (Chapel Hill: U of North Carolina Press, 1976) vol. 6, p 218 note; George Washington to Henry Lee, John Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1932) vol. 19, p 248. Library of Congress, George Washington Papers, series 4, reel 68, July 24, 1780; George Washington to Henry Forman, John Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1932) vol. 19, pp. 244-5; Henry Lee to Captain Rudolph, Library of Congress, George Washington Papers, Series 4, General Correspondence; David Forman to George Washington, Library of Congress, George Washington Papers, Series 4, General Correspondence; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, Thomas Henderson of of NJ, www.fold3.com/image/#23260727 ; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, John Clark of PA, www.fold3.com/image/#12752854 ; 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

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 Drift into Martial Law and Scandal by Michael Adelberg As he led the New Jersey Militia in the defense of the Delaware River, the New Jersey Assembly held hearings into David Forman’s conduct. This pushed Forman to resign as a Brigadier General in the militia. - March 1777 - In March 1777, David Forman was the colonel of an “Additional Regiment ” of the Continental Army stationed in Monmouth County and one of four Brigadier Generals of the New Jersey Militia (commanding the Monmouth County militia and the militias from Burlington and Middlesex counties). In his first military campaign as the most powerful man in Monmouth County, Forman led 250 men in a doomed attempt to dislodge the British from Sandy Hook . He narrowly averted disaster by retreating quickly off Sandy Hook before a British ship could land men behind him and trap him on the narrow peninsula. Throughout the Revolution, Forman often took actions that stretched the boundaries of the law. On February 27, 1777, he wrote Captain John Covenhoven (not the legislator of the same name): "You are hereby directed immediately to turn out all the men of your district capable of bearing arms… and march them to join me." On March 3, Forman issued a certificate to Obadiah Holmes: "Mr. Obadiah Holmes is hereby exempted from militia service, I have been satisfied and informed by his physician of his nervous system will not admit his doing camp duty." At the time, Forman was a Continental Army officer without authority to direct militia; he exceeded his authority both times. That authority would soon be granted, however. Forman’s Orders and Commissions On March 5, Forman was commissioned the Brigadier General over the Monmouth Militia. A letter from Governor William Livingston noted that Forman was given power to call out the neighboring county militias so the New Jersey Legislature would not have to give the unpopular order themselves. The governor wrote, "it was easier to invest him [Forman] with the power of calling out the militia of Monmouth, Middlesex and Burlington, without giving umbrage to some of the Colonels of those regiments." But Livingston also noted that the Burlington County militia is "exceedingly dilatory in their motions" and the Middlesex militia "will probably be of as much service at home as they can be elsewhere." After his unsuccessful attack on Sandy Hook, Forman turned his attention to improving the performance of the Monmouth militia by rooting out the county’s disaffected. Several weeks were spent preparing for a general muster of the three Monmouth militia regiments and forcing each militiaman to take a loyalty oath to the New Jersey and Continental governments on May 1. The plan was controversial and prompted a flurry of letters between leaders including George Washington and Governor Livingston. This general muster is the subject of another article. Forman was rightly concerned that disaffected residents on the shore were illegally trading with the British and that provisions formerly belonging to Loyalist refugees were vulnerable to capture by Loyalist parties. He wrote General Washington and Governor Livingston about the concern. Livingston wrote: Col. Forman further informs me that many of the people who have absconded have left behind them stocks of horses, cattle and grain, which will not only be lost to the owners, but to the public... The Colonel will take possession of such effects for public use. Livingston concurred, "I think the removal of provision in the County of Monmouth within reach of the enemy of such consequence that I shall direct Colonel Forman to set about that work." On April 21, Washington concurred and gave Forman authority to impress provisions, "I have transmitted copies of the resolve upon this subject to Genl. Putnam [Israel Putnam] and Colonel Forman (the latter of whom is in Monmouth County) with orders to execute them." Because the order no longer exists, it is impossible to know the breadth of Forman’s power to move against individual citizens without due process under New Jersey law. Forman Stretches His Authority into Civil Law Enforcement Forman, with these orders, put himself into affairs that would normally fall to civil government. He arrested and sent John Taylor to Haddonfield to appear before the New Jersey Council of Safety . Nathaniel Scudder of Freehold was on the Council and received a letter from Forman. Forman stated that Taylor confessed "that he had freely taken oaths of allegiance to the King & always should himself be bound by that oath." Taylor was not in arms or in active revolt when he was sent forward. So, it is unclear why Forman, as a military commander, was concerning himself with Taylor rather than letting the county sheriff and township magistrate consider Taylor’s past actions. Forman also took an interest in John Taylor’s brother, Edward Taylor. Edward had been a committeeman and a delegate to the New Jersey Provincial Congress. But he became disaffected after the Declaration of Independence and was the only member of the Middletown Baptist congregation to vote against excommunicating its Loyalist members (including John Taylor). Most irksome to Forman, Edward Taylor was the father of George Taylor, who led several raids into Monmouth County in June 1777 and skirmished with Forman. On July 2, Forman moved against Edward Taylor for “acting as a spy amongst us” and “giving aid to a party of Tories and British, commanded by your son.” I do therefore enjoin you for the future to confine yourself to your farm at Middletown, and do not attempt to travel the road more than crossing it to go to your land on the north side of said town... under risk of being treated as a spy. In punishing Edward Taylor, Forman was, in effect, acting as a one-man legal system based primarily on family ties. Forman also took action against the Shrewsbury merchant, Thomas Dowdeswell. According to Dowdeswell’s post-war Loyalist compensation claim, in 1777, his Loyalist views "caused me to be attacked and plundered of my goods and property on two different times, to the amount of £100 and upwards, by a company under the command of Genl. Forman in Monmouth County.” He further wrote, “I was confined in the town of Monmouth about 5 days under a guard; after which I was obliged to put myself under the protection of General Clinton at New York." Greater Controversies in Fall 1777 Forman’s drift toward his version of martial law continued as the year went on. He assigned his Continental regiment to the Union Salt Works —a large salt work on the Manasquan River in which he owned a controlling interest. And Forman reportedly used those troops as a labor force at his salt works and harvested wood from the private land of Trevor Newland, a former British Army officer living on the shore and owner of a competing salt work . This controversy is the focus of another article. Then, in September 1777, Forman captured Stephen Edwards, a Loyalist refugee taken at the house of his family. Edwards was subjected to a military tribunal that Forman convened and hanged on Forman’s order. Forman lacked authority to take this action. The New Jersey Council of Safety existed to try and punish Loyalists and Forman had sent other Loyalists to the Council. The hanging of Edwards inflamed Loyalist resentments and provoked later violent retaliatory acts. In September, Forman exiled Loyalist women from Monmouth County without apparent authority to do so (a June 1777 law empowered him to allow people to go to New York, but not force them). Robert Lawrence, an elder squire, was the father of Mary Leonard, the wife of a Loyalist officer in the New Jersey Volunteers and one of the exiles. Lawrence protested to the New Jersey legislature: “David Forman presumed to banish some women out of this State into enemy lines, whereupon I apprehended that our new & happy constitution had received a very dangerous wound.” Lawrence concluded that Forman’s behavior was like that of “some African tyrant." Forman’s moves against Mary Leonard are discussed in another article. Yet Forman also distinguished himself in driving the Monmouth County militia to the Sourland Hills and joining the Continental Army as the British Army went into motion in June 1777. And in September he raised militia and his regiment to march across New Jersey to fight with the Continental Army at the Battle of Germantown . After that, Forman went home to Freehold, raised more men, and returned on October 26th to participate in the defense of Red Bank (on the Delaware River) as the British laid siege. Forman also provided valuable, if uneven, intelligence reports on British movements through observations of British movements at Sandy Hook, interrogations of people coming into Monmouth County, and maintaining informants in New York. At this time, Forman became embroiled in a dispute with General Silas Newcomb, also a Brigadier General in the militia. Red Bank was in Newcomb’s home county of Gloucester. Both generals sent letters to Governor Livington complaining about the other. General Washington intervened in Forman’s favor, writing to Livingston “If you would only direct him [Newcomb] to obey General Forman as a senior officer, much good to the service would result from it.” Livingston then wrote Newcomb: I am extremely sorry to find that there should be any difference between you and General Forman at so critical a season... He [Forman] undoubtedly has a right to command you without any such derivate authority. You will therefore entertain no thoughts of dismissing the men you have assembled, but furnish General Forman with a return of them & resign command of them to him. Meanwhile, the New Jersey Legislature was receiving petitions from Monmouth County complaining of Forman’s conduct while home in Freehold for the annual county election on October 14. One of those petitions has survived: General Forman, assisted by Lt Col [Thomas] Henderson, harangued the people on the conduct of the late Assemblymen & candidates for the present Assembly... and threatening to cram the votes down the throat of one of the late members, then a candidate for the present one and confine him with his guards, and many other threats. Forman’s conduct at the 1777 election is the subject of another article. With the list of controversies building, the New Jersey Legislature chose to investigate Forman. Forman turned down a summons to appear before the Legislature on November 5 because “of the necessity he was under of being absent under important military command at the time the hearing was appointed.” He requested that the hearing be postponed. The Assembly decided to hold the hearing, but ruled that Forman need not attend. The next day, the Assembly re-read Lawrence's memorial. On November 9, Forman resigned his General's commission in the New Jersey militia. By doing so, Forman deprived the New Jersey Legislature of a lever to punish him because he no longer held a state office. (He retained his Colonel's commission in the Continental Army.) Governor Livingston wrote General Washington about the affair, "General Forman has, to my great concern, and contrary to my warmest solicitations, resigned his commission upon some misunderstanding with the Assembly." On November 11, the Legislature heard from several Monmouth petitioners and the county’s election judges about Forman’s conduct at the county election. Petitions were re-read. The next day the Assembly voted 13-12 to void the Monmouth election – despite all three Monmouth delegates voting against. It ordered a new election. The Loyalist New York Gazette half-correctly reported Forman’s resignation on November 23: 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 New Jersey Legislature was not done with Forman. It asked Geroge Washington to remove Forman’s Additional Regiment from his command—a move Washington reluctantly agreed to in January 1778. This is the subject of a different article. David Forman was a man of boundless energy who many times exerted himself for the Revolution and exposed himself to danger. Forman was robbed in December 1776 and was the target of a Loyalist raid in spring 1777. George Washington and William Livingston recognized his zeal and supported him. Yet, Forman wielded power recklessly—sometimes for petty revenge and sometimes to further his financial interests. The majority of Forman’s peers in Monmouth County leadership, the men who knew him best, supported moves to check his power. The actions of the Legislature in 1777 did not end Forman’s controversial public service. He would re-emerge later in the war as the head of vigilante organization and he would instigate a new set of scandals . Related Historic Site : Red Bank Battlefield Sources ; David Forman to Capt. John Covenhoven, National Archives, Misc. Numbered Records, 4020; William Horner, This Old Monmouth of Ours (Freehold: Moreau Brothers, 1932) p 213-6; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 1, p 321; George Washington to William Livingston; William Livingston to George Washington, John Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1932) vol. 7, pp. 344, 363; William Livingston to George Washington, Carl Prince, Papers of William Livingston (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987) vol. 1, p 292-3; Deposition, David Forman, New Jersey State Archives, Bureau of Archives of History, Council of Safety, box 1, document #17; Franklin Ellis, The History of Monmouth County (R.T. Peck: Philadelphia, 1885), p202-3; The Grover Taylor House , (Monmouth County Historical Association: Freehold, New Jersey) p 22-4; Thomas Dowdeswell, Rutgers University Library Special Collections, Loyalist Claims Applications, AO 13/96/235; The Library Company, New Jersey Votes of the Assembly, October 3, 1777, p 193 and November 4-12, 1777, p 5-17; Library of Congress, Rivington's New York Gazette, reel 2906; Robert Lawrence, petition, New Jersey State Archives, Bureau of Archives and History, Manuscript Coll., State Library Manuscript Coll., #129; David Forman, Certificate, March 3, 1777, Monmouth County Historical Association, Cherry Hall Papers, box 6, folder 5; George Washington to William Livingston, John Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1932) vol. 7, pp. 344, 363; George Washington to Congress, Official Letters to the Honorable Congress (London: Caddel, Junior & Davies, 1795) vol 2, p61; Robert Lawrence to New Jersey Legislature, New Jersey State Archives, Bureau of Archives and History, Manuscript Coll., State Library Manuscript Coll., #129; Petition, unsigned, Monmouth County Historical Association, Cherry Hall Papers, Photocopy; Minutes on the Monmouth Election in New Jersey Votes of the Assembly, November 4-12, 1777, The Library Company, p 5-17; George Washington to David Forman, Library of Congress, George Washington Papers, Series 4, reel 45, October 25 - 31, 1777; George Washington to William Livingston in John Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1932) vol. 9, pp. 485-6. Library of Congress, Papers of the Continental Congress, reel 168, item 152, vol. 5, p 161; William Livingston to Silas Newcomb, Carl Prince, Papers of William Livingston (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987) vol. 2, pp. 99-100; William Livingston to George Washington, Carl Prince, Papers of William Livingston (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987) vol. 2, p 108. 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 > Dysfunction in the Monmouth County Militia by Michael Adelberg New Jersey Militia reenactors demonstrate a firing drill. The early Monmouth militia included several companies that did not muster and others officered by Loyalists. - March 1776 - Across New Jersey, in the spring of 1776, white men between ages 16 and 60 divided themselves up into districts and began drilling in new militia companies that were loyal to the New Jersey Provincial and the Continental Congresses. The prior militia structure under the Royal Government ceased to operate. However, in Monmouth County, the early militia was not united in its support of the two Congresses. John Longstreet, who would become a captain in the Loyalist New Jersey Volunteers later that year, was a militia captain in Freehold. He described his militia company as a 70-man association which called itself the “Loyalists of Freehold.” Longstreet’s company probably existed parallel to other militia companies, neither aligned nor hostile. When the Declaration of Independence was signed, Longstreet’s men earned the derisive nickname “the Tory company.” Longstreet soon took his men to Sandy Hook and joined the British Army on July 15, 1776. Contemporary descriptions of “the Tory company” are supported in the post-war Loyalist compensation application of John Throckmorton, who noted that he was a Lieutenant in Longstreet’s Loyalist Company, and Longstreet was his captain. Another gradation of loyalty was evident in the Grenadier Company captained by Henry Waddle of Freehold. Waddle’s company, unlike most militia companies, was not raised from a specific neighborhood – it appears that Waddle’s men came from Freehold and Shrewsbury Townships. Waddle’s company was the first Monmouth militia company to muster and march outside of the county –marching to Perth Amboy in April 1776. Waddle was a known opponent of British policies who supported the Continental Association and Whig committees, but Independence appears to have been a breakpoint for him. On July 2, 1776, the same day that the New Jersey Provincial Congress adopted a new constitution separate from British control, Waddle resigned from the militia. He claimed that gout prevented further service. His resignation was accepted by the New Jersey Provincial Congress but Waddle was forced to appear before the New Jersey Council of Safety to declare “his peaceful intentions.” Though disaffected from the new government, Waddle never became an active Loyalist. In neighboring Upper Freehold, the militia was also troubled. In June, Colonel David Brearley (who led the township militia and would soon join the Continental Army) wrote the Provincial Congress twice about disaffection among his men. The first time, Brearley wrote "respecting certain disaffected persons in Monmouth County" and then he wrote again about "disaffected persons in his Regiment.” The Provincial Congress responded first by summoning two of the leading voices in a bloodless Loyalist insurrection , Richard Robins and Moses Ivins. They would not appear. This and other troubling events in Upper Freehold prompted the New Jersey Provincial Congress to send in militia from Burlington County and Pennsylvania to establish order. Shortly after that, on July 23, James Mount, a “field officer” in the militia had his commission “revoked” by the New Jersey Convention (the renamed Provincial Congress). While the revocation’s reason is not stated, it is probable that Mount was found to be cooperating with the township’s insurgent Loyalists. Shortly after that, Guisebert Giberson resigned his militia captain’s commission, which was accepted by the Convention on August 2. Giberson and Mount would both become active Loyalists. Outside of Freehold and Upper Freehold, there was even greater dysfunction in the Shrewsbury Township militia. Balthazar DeHart, an attorney who was in Shrewsbury in June, was deposed about disaffection in Shrewsbury in July: Saith that he was informed by Captain Jacob Dennis, a Militia officer, who had been ordered to guard Deal shore, in that Township, that he could scarce persuade a man to go there with him; and that the examinant knows that his brother, who is another Militia officer there, could by no means prevail on his men to go to defend that shore—the Whigs telling him they expected that if they went there, they would be delivered by the Tories to the enemy on their landing; and that he was informed by the said Captain Dennis, that the inhabitants along Deal shore told him they did by no means thank him for guarding them, and that they would much rather have the [British] Regulars than the Yankees there. Indeed, Colonel Samuel Breese, Dennis’s commanding officer, struggled with disaffection across the township. David Brearley reported to the Provincial Congress about Breese’s frustration: The Colonel at Shrewsbury has offered to resign, making great complaints of the backwardness, "to say no worse," as he expresses himself, of his people; "so few of whom," he tells us, "are ready to turn out (hiding themselves and deserting their homes)... We have ventured to encourage him with the expectation of their assisting him. On July 9, the New Jersey Convention (the renamed Provincial Congress) accepted Breese’s resignation: “Colonel [Samuel] Breese has resigned his commission of the Third Battalion of militia in the County of Monmouth, assigning for reason the general backwardness of the people.” Beyond Breese, two other two original militia Colonels, Joseph Salter and George Taylor showed disaffection for the Continental cause. Salter, who resigned immediately upon selection in late 1775, would support the Loyalist insurrections . For this and likely other suspect acts, he was arrested and detained in Trenton in 1777. He converted to Quakerism—perhaps out of religious conviction or perhaps to strengthen his case for avoiding militia service . In late 1776, Taylor became an active Loyalist and a great enemy to Monmouth County’s new leaders. However, there were also areas of the county where the new militia was stronger. It appears that the majority of militia companies in Freehold and Middletown townships were functioning by July. On July 6, David Brearley observed that "the Freehold and Middletown people who form the large battalion are, we believe, very hearty & willing to assist as much as possible.” That heartiness would soon be tested, as 200 of them soon would be summoned to put down a Loyalist insurrection . Related Historical Sites : Museum of the American Revolution Sources : Monmouth County Historical Association, Genealogical File, folder – Waddell; local history source reports the resignation of Capt. Henry Waddell of the militia on 7/2/76; 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 1635; Peter W. Coldham, comp., American Loyalist Claims (Washington, D.C.: National Genealogical Society, 1980), p 12 and 489. Jones, E. Alfred. The Loyalists of New Jersey, (Newark, N. J. Historical Society, 1927) p 132 and 166. Gregory Palmer, Biographical Sketches of Loyalists of the American Revolution (Westport, Conn. and London, 1984) p 501 and 863. Rutgers University Library Special Collections, Great Britain Public Record Office, Loyalist Application Claims, D96, AO 13/18, reel 6; Peter Force, American Archives: Documents of the American Revolution, 1774-6 (digitized: http://dig.lib.niu.edu/amarch/find.doc.html), v1: p 37-8; John Jordan, Colonial and Revolutionary Families of Pennsylvania: Genealogical and Personal Memoirs (New York: Lewis Publishing, 1911) v. 2, p804; Franklin Ellis, The History of Monmouth County (R.T. Peck: Philadelphia, 1885), p138-9; Minutes of the Provincial Congress and Council of Safety of New Jersey (Trenton: Naar, Day, and Naar, 1879) p 497; Troop Return, Henry Waddle, New Jersey Historical Society, collection 4, Revolutionary War Collection, item 7; Officers of 2nd Regiment of Monmouth Militia to New Jersey Provincial Congress, New Jersey Provincial Congress Coll., MG - 6, #17, #102, New Jersey Historical Society; Minutes of the Provincial Congress and the Council of Safety of the State of New Jersey 1775-1776 (Ithaca: Cornel University Press, 2009) pp. 451, 460; David Brearley’s letters are summarized in Minutes of the Provincial Congress and the Council of Safety of the State of New Jersey 1775-1776 (Ithaca: Cornel University Press, 2009) pp. 451, 460; Franklin Ellis, The History of Monmouth County (R.T. Peck: Philadelphia, 1885), p130, 136; 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, pp. 1621-5, 1630; "Peter Force, American Archives: Documents of the American Revolution, 1774-6 (digitized: http://dig.lib.niu.edu/amarch/find.doc.html), v6: p 1625; 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. 1, p 602-3.;; Franklin Ellis, The History of Monmouth County (R.T. Peck: Philadelphia, 1885), p138-9; Peter Force, American Archives, (Washington, DC: Clarke and Force, 1837) 4th series, vol. 6, pp. 1657-1658; Peter Force, American Archives: Documents of the American Revolution, 1774-6 (digitized: http://dig.lib.niu.edu/amarch/find.doc.html), v6: p 1657; Franklin Ellis, The History of Monmouth County (R.T. Peck: Philadelphia, 1885), p229-32; John E. Stillwell, Historical and Genealogical Miscellany, 5 vols. (New York, 1903), vol. 1: p 191. 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 > Reconstructing Monmouth County's Government by Michael Adelberg The Monmouth County courthouse in Freehold was the seat of county government. However, the Monmouth County government did not exist between December 1776 and March 1777. - February 1777 - As discussed in a prior article, the functions of the Monmouth County government—including law enforcement, courts, prison, county clerk, tax collection, etc.—ceased during the Loyalist insurrections of December 1776. Some of these functions, such as courts and tax collection, had not functioned effectively since the breakdown of the Royal government in early 1776. In February 1777, with the British in retreat and the Loyalist associations broken , supporters of the Revolution in Monmouth County now had the opportunity to rebuild their local government. Locating the county’s records and legal papers was a foundational challenge. Even before the Loyalist insurrections , County Clerk Kenneth Anderson was unable to gather papers from the prior County Clerk, Joseph Leonard. In November 1776, Anderson wrote that Leonard “refused to give over an order of delivery of sd records.” Five months later, on March 24, 1777, Anderson was still seeking the county’s records. On that day, he wrote Governor William Livingston: Since my return, have been with the Sheriff [Asher Holmes], constantly engaged in the militia for the defense of the county, so that I had not an opportunity to call on Mr. Leonard until a few days since. When I did, in the presence of the Sheriff, he [Leonard] informed me that the books, records & c. were removed by Lt. Col. Lawrence [Elisha Lawrence] - to what place he [Leonard] could not tell. It is unknown if the county’s legal papers were ever recovered. Lacking the resources and infrastructure to detain large numbers of people, state and Continental authorities declared a general amnesty for the disaffected. Those who would renounce their British oaths and take Continental oaths would be pardoned. Armed insurrectionists who menaced citizens were not permitted amnesty. But a policy needed to be improvised for Loyalist leaders who supported the insurrections without taking up arms. There were many such individuals in Monmouth County. Disaffected Leaders Drop Out of Local Leadership When Francis Gurney’s Pennsylvanians came through Middletown, they detained John Taylor. Taylor was the commissioner charged with administering British loyalty oaths in Middletown during the insurrection. General Israel Putnam asked George Washington if Taylor’s status as a British civil government official excluded him from the general amnesty. Washington responded on February 5: I never Intended to exclude any from the benefit of my Proclamation who were not particularly Active in persecuting, and destroying the Property of the friends to our cause. The case of Mr. Taylor & any others that are brot [sic] to you, or confin’d, must therefore depend upon this—As to the Circumstance respecting the Families of those who went over to the Enemy, previous to the Proclamation, it is not my Intention that they should be under any necessity of withdrawing themselves—provided their future good behavior warrants such Lenity towards them. Washington also advised that Loyalist leaders who wished to go behind British lines could do so as long as they left their valuables behind: “let no Property be convey’d with them.” Samuel Breese, the former Committeeman and first militia colonel for Shrewsbury Townships, posed another challenge. On February 11, he wrote Governor William Livingston: I am one among the number of conquered people in Monmouth County who have taken the benefit of Lord General Howe's proclamation and sworn allegiance, and alas, I cannot as yet get over my scruple for [taking] the oath to the States as required by General Washington, and the consequence of refusing is to me very terrible. If I may not have a dispensation, upon giving in good and sufficient security for my good behavior, then I will be obliged to ask your Excellency to favor me with a parole to remain on any farm or in the country unmolested with my family -- leading a quiet inoffensive life, which can be of no loss to the State. It appears that Breese was allowed to retire on his farm. At the same time that Taylor and Breese were negotiating their status. the New Jersey government sought to enforce that all officeholders, civil or military, take a loyalty oath. New Jersey required officeholders to take a two-part oath: 1. "I do sincerely profess and swear (or if one of the people called Quakers, affirm) that I do not hold myself bound to bear allegiance to the King of Great Britain, so help me God." 2. "I do sincerely profess or swear (or if one the people called Quakers, affirm) that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Government established in this State, under the authority of the people, so help me God." Devout Quakers would not swear allegiance, so they were permitted to “affirm” their allegiance instead. Refilling Local Government March 1777 was the first month in which some civil government functions returned to Monmouth County. Elections for county and township officers were held on March 11. The Shrewsbury Township election certificate has survived. The voters of Shrewsbury elected 21 officeholders including four men who were disaffected or of wavering loyalty (called “trimmers” because they trimmed their sails and blew with the wind). Table 1 demonstrates the mixed record of Shrewsbury’s 1777 officeholders. Over the course of the war, local elections appear to have been held regularly starting in 1777. However, disaffected individuals continued to serve in local government in Monmouth County’s three townships—Shrewsbury, Dover, and Stafford. This was a reflection of the disaffection of the voters themselves. There was also a need to ensure that Monmouth’s senior militia officers were supporters of the Revolution and in compliance with state law. On March 15 and 18, Governor Livingston exchanged letters with the New Jersey Assembly regarding irregularities among Monmouth County’s senior militia officers. The following problems were identified regarding the Monmouth County militia’s field officers: 1st Militia Battalion (Freehold and Middletown townships) "Lt Colonel Thomas Seabrook is said to have refused taking oaths to this State; if so, has forfeited his commission” “The Major, Mr [Asher] Holmes, is High Sheriff of the County, which two offices are incompatible, as no sheriff may leave his County - he ought therefore make his election” “In this battalion there is no Second Major" 2nd Militia Battalion (Upper Freehold, Dover, and Stafford townships) "Mr. Brearley [David Brearley] is Colonel of the 2nd Battalion, but is engaged in the Continental service” “The first Major is Elisha Lawrence [cousin of Elisha Lawrence, the Loyalist], who I am informed has accepted the enemy's protection, and refused taking oaths to Government” “This battalion is also without a Second Major" 3rd Militia Battalion (Shrewsbury township) "Of the Third Battalion, Daniel Hendrickson is Colonel, but is very infirm and said to be removed to Upper Freehold, while the battalion consists of the inhabitants of Shrewsbury." New militia elections were held on April 28 for captains and junior officers. These elections replaced officers who had joined the British and or refused to sign New Jersey’s loyalty oath. That same month, Asher Holmes, still in the role of sheriff, issued the first fines from the reconstituted Monmouth County government. The first general militia return was prepared on May 1. The return for the 1st Battalion has survived. It lists 484 rank and file as “fit & present”, 41 as captured by the enemy, and 126 as “absconded” (Loyalist refugees or in hiding). The controversial county-wide militia muster was a key element of David Forman’s (now a Brigadier General in the New Jersey militia) plan to expose the county’s remaining Loyalists and punish them under martial law . Both of these topics are discussed in other articles. Related Historic Site : Liberty Hall (William Livingston’s home) Sources : Kenneth Anderson to William Livingston, New Jersey State Archives, William Livingston Papers, reel 4, March 24, 1777; New Jersey Loyalty Oaths printed in Larry Gerlach, New Jersey in the American Revolution 1763-1783 A Documentary History (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975) pp. 363-4; Kenneth Anderson to New Jersey Legislature, New Jersey State Archives, Bureau of Archives and History, Manuscript Collection, Manuscripts, box 14, #27; George Washington to Israel Putnam, 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. 256; Samuel Breese to William Livingston, Massachusetts Historical Society, William Livingston Papers; Shrewsbury Township Election, Monmouth County Historical Association, Steen Collection, box 2, folder 11; The Library Company, New Jersey Votes of the Assembly, March 15, 1777, pp, 108-9; William Livingston, report, in Carl Prince ed., Papers of William Livingston (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987) vol. 1, p 280-1; Militia Elections, New Jersey State Archives, Dept. of Defense, Revolutionary War, Numbered Manuscripts, #1046-1058; Militia Return, Monmouth County Historical Association, Cherry Hall Papers, box 6, folder 7; New Jersey State Archives, Dept. of Treasury, State Auditor's Account Book, Sheriff Fines, Monmouth County, reel 181, pp. 195-203 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 > Samuel Lippincott, Man-Stealing, and Jailed Militiamen in New York by Michael Adelberg Lists like this one show that hundreds of prisoners were exchanged. But prisoner exchanges also fueled the “man stealing” of Monmouth County patriots who served as chips in later exchanges. - February 1780 - On a cold night in February 1780, Samuel Lippincott was kidnapped from his bed. He recalled: While in bed in his residence in Monmouth County, applicant’s residence was plundered by two black Refugees, who laid ready upon his house and took him out of his bed. After having tied his hands behind him, they, in the company of several Tories, conveyed him and two other prisoners to Sandy Hook, from whereabouts [on] the third day they were conveyed to New York. Lippincott was jailed three months in the notorious Sugar House prison until "that place becoming so crowded with prisoners, he was conveyed to the North Church where he remained until he was exchanged.” While there, Lippincott recalled a friend escaping from North Church "having procured a new civilian set of clothes with the connivance of two Hessian guards, passed through the board fence by which the church was surrounded, where a plank was missing, and mingled with the citizens." Lippincott was exchanged “after having been a prisoner for seven months and seven days.” The kidnapping of Lippincott represented an important pivot in the local war in Monmouth County in two ways. It is the first documented case of a party of Black Loyalists conducting a raid on their own, and it appears to be the first recorded “man-stealing” in Monmouth County. Man-stealing was the name given to small raids conducted primarily to carry off hostages. Monmouth Countians had been imprisoned in New York City jails at least since February 1777 when more than 70 Monmouth militiamen were captured by British regulars at the Battle of Navesink . At least four of the men taken that day were still imprisoned when Lippincott was taken. But Lippincott represented a new kind of Monmouth County prisoner—one taken not as a result of battle, but because Loyalists desired revenge for rebel abuses, and because new prisoners were needed for additional prisoner of war exchanges. Other Man-Stealings Captain Moses Shepherd led a militia company from Middletown Township. After the war, his widow, Rebecca Shepherd, wrote of his capture and imprisonment at about the same time as Lippincott’s capture: He was once made a prisoner taken in his own house by a party of Tories about dawn… he was taken to New York paroled as an officer on Long Island, stayed about six weeks, he, in company with Captain Thomas Chadwick took a small boat or skiff and came home, but was afterwards exchanged. William Morris testified to seeing Shepherd while he was detained in New York. “He was passing the prison in New York - Captain Moses Shepherd called to him from one of the windows. He [Morris] stayed and conversed with but was afraid to go in.” Two of Moses Shepherd’s nephews, Elisha Shepherd and Jacob Shepherd, were also captured in 1780. Elisha Shepherd recalled serving in the militia “until taken prisoner by the refugees under Col. Tye when he was taken to New York and put in the provost’s or hangman’s jail… and continued confined in said prison to the end of the war.” His brother, Jacob Shepherd, testified that “himself and his brother… were kept prisoners for about five months and he thinks they were exchanged in the month of March.” Two other militiamen, in their postwar pension applications, described being captured in small raids and taken to New York. Abraham Lane recalled that "he was taken prisoner by a company of Refugees of whom William Gillian was Captain, and was carried to the City of New York and confined in the Sugar House; from there he was removed to the North Church and detained prisoner from March to September 1781." He was paroled home and promptly re-joined the militia as a Lieutenant. Elijah Clayton recalled being taken at Colts Neck on May 14, 1781 “and confined in North Church, and from thence to the Sugar House, where he was kept prisoner until New Year's following, when he was exchanged." Thomas Clayton recalled meeting his brother, Elijah, while in jail: He did not know what had become of his brother until he was informed that he was a prisoner in the same city; that he obtained permission to go see said Elisha and asked for and received a dollar from a Black fellow in some office under the British... That the party that took him prisoner also took a horse from him, from which he never received any compensation. Of course, Monmouth militiamen continued to be taken in military encounters as well. Joseph Johnson was captured on March 16, 1780, on the Raritan Bayshore, while under serving Capt. Joseph Stillwell. Johnson "was taken prisoner... he was kept a prisoner of war in close confinement for 9 1/2 months at which time he took with small pox and very nearly died and then exchanged at Elizabethtown." He returned to militia service in July 1781. In April 1780, John Brown, recalled participating in a skirmish at Manasquan during which he "was taken prisoner by the British at Shrewsbury & carried to New York, where he remained a prisoner in close confinement for 7 months & suffered cruelly from his captors." He also returned to militia service in 1781. Prisoner Backlog in Brooklyn An important purpose of man-stealing was to gain chips to be used in subsequent prisoner exchanges. As noted in a prior article, one of the primary powers granted to the vigilante Associated Loyalists by the British was the ability to capture their own prisoners and conduct their own exchanges. Exchanges are the subject of another article , but it is important to note that the pace of exchanges was slower than captures and prisoners backlogged. From September 1780 until the end of 1782, there was a backlog of Monmouth County militia officers as prisoners. Lists of militia officers paroled to Loyalist houses in Brooklyn exist from September 1780 through war’s end. A "List of New Jersey Officers taken by British, 1776-1780," was compiled in September 1780. It lists 26 New Jersey militia officers confined in Brooklyn. Fourteen of the men were from Monmouth County. They are noted below along with information on their capture and status in September 1780. Six of these men were at home and not in service when taken, three were exchanged, and one was dead: Col. Daniel Hendrickson: taken June 11, 1779, "at his house...exchanged"; Lt. Col. John Smock: taken May 27, 1778, "at Monmouth Cty…not in service"; Lt. Col. Aucke Wikoff: taken June 11, 1779 "at his house...in Provost [jail]"; Maj. Hendrick Van Brunt: taken June 11, 1779 "at his house...in Shrewsbury"; Capt. Stephen Fleming: taken May 27, 1778 at "Monmouth Cty...exchanged"; Capt. Barnes Smock: taken February 13, 1777 "near Light House...exchanged"; Capt. Jacob Covenhoven: taken May 27, 1778 "in Monmouth Cty"; Capt. Richard McKnight: taken June 11, 1779 "in home...not in service, died 1780"; Lt. Thomas Cook: taken February 13, 1777 "near Light House"; Lt. James Whitlock: taken February 13, 1777 "near Light House"; Lt. Theophilus Little: taken May 27, 1778 "in Monmouth Cty...not in service"; Lt. [Moses] Shepherd: taken [no date] "at home in Monmouth Cty"; Lt. Thomas Little: taken June 27, 1778 "in Monmouth Cty"; Lt. Tobias Polhemus: taken February 13, 1777 "near Light House." At least two additional militia officers were captured in 1780 but are not included in this report. Captain Thomas Wainwright spent eighteen months in prison before he was exchanged. Captain Barnes Smock was captured in June 1780 and was exchanged in December. The condition of the prisoners of war in New York was a frequent concern of Continental officials. On September 9, 1780, Commandant of Prisoners, Abraham Skinner, wrote to Governor William Livingston about "the peculiar situation of prisoners of war belonging to this State." Skinner worried that the New Jersey government was not supporting its prisoners of war. Of the officers, he wrote: The officers who are prisoners on Long Island [Brooklyn] have not had the least supply or support from this office since the Spring of 1779; since which many of them have been at board on Long Island, and many of them are destitute of a single farthing, are liable to the daily insult from their landlords, who seem tired of supporting them without fee or reward, and if their exchange could be effected, they would be detained for payment of the debts. Of the enlisted men, Skinner wrote: The citizens and Privates of this State are confined in the Sugar House and churches in a wretched situation, many of them without a shirt or blanket, and no allowance except what they receive from the enemy, about 3 1/2 pounds of bread, which is issued to them by the Continental agent. Skinner wrote that the Jersey prisoners "feel mortification in seeing their fellow sufferers receive supplies from the neighboring States" while they receive nothing from New Jersey. That same month, Hendrick Van Brunt co-authored a petition to Governor William Livingston requesting provisions for prisoners. This included a request for £50 in cash for each officer on parole on Long Island to settle debts. The petitioners noted that nothing had been sent from New Jersey in more than a year, and a prior request for support had been ignored. The petition was signed by 30 New Jersey officers. Seventeen of these men were militia officers of which nine were from Monmouth County (Lt. Col. John Smock, Lt. Col. Aucke Wikoff, Van Brunt, Capt. Barnes Smock, Capt. Jacob Covenhoven, Lt. James Whitlock, Lt. Thomas Little, Lt. Tobias Polhemus, Lt. Thomas Cook). On August 5, 1782, Skinner, compiled a list of "Debts incurred by Sundry Americans Owing to their Captivity to Inhabitants on Long Island." Eleven prisoners on the list were "Jersey Militia" and six of those were Monmouth Countians: Little, McKnight (dead), Polhemus, John Smock, Van Brunt, and Whitlock. They had accumulated debts as high as £65. Skinner’s November 1782 "Schedule of Debts Accumulated by Paroled Prisoners on Long Island" listed the same six officers plus Jacob Covenhoven, Thomas Cook, Barnes Smock (re-captured), and Aucke Wikoff. Lt. Whitlock had been exchanged. The prisoners were prone to disease and privations. Some died. Mathias Mount, a prisoner who was exchanged, returned to Monmouth County and testified on April 24, 1781, about the death of Captain John Dennis while they were prisoners in New York: The deponent was a prisoner in New York in 1778, and was well acquainted with Capt. John Dennis of the 3rd Regiment of the militia of Monmouth County, and saith that John Dennis' wounds were not cured, and that the said Dennis after his death lay several days in the corner of the yard, before he was buried. The kidnapping of Samuel Lippincott presaged the appearance of Colonel Tye and the Black Brigade and the man-stealings that would punctuate the Revolutionary War in Monmouth County in 1780. Man-stealings advanced the local war in Monmouth County to a more brutal stage, leading a cycle of retribution between the vigilante Associated Loyalists and Monmouth County’s Retaliators . Sources : National Archives, revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - Samuel Lippincott; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, Moses Shepherd of NJ, www.fold3.com/image/# 16276047; -- National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, Elisha Shepherd of OH, www.fold3.com/image/# 16277477; National Archives, revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - Joseph Johnson; National Archives, revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - John Brown; List of Officers Taken, New Jersey State Archives, Dept. of Defense, Revolutionary War, Numbered Manuscripts, #3971; Franklin Ellis, The History of Monmouth County (R.T. Peck: Philadelphia, 1885), p229-32; Selections from the Correspondence of the Executive of New Jersey, From 1776 to 1786 (Newark, NJ: Newark Daily Advertiser, 1848) pp. 260-1; Edward Roser, "American Prisoners Taken at the Battle of the Navesink," Genealogical Magazine of New Jersey, vol. 45, n 2, May 1970, p57; Hendrick Van Brunt to William Livingston, Selections from the Correspondence of the Executive of New Jersey, From 1776 to 1786 (Newark, NJ: Newark Daily Advertiser, 1848) pp. 261-3; National Archives, revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - Abraham Lane; National Archives, revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - Elihu Clayton; Edwin Salter, Old Times in Old Monmouth (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1970) p 303; List of Debts of Prisoners on Long Island, National Archives, M246, RG93, reel 135, folder 4, pages 4-10; Schedule of Debts, New Jersey State Archives, Dept. of Defense, Revolutionary War, Numbered Manuscripts, #4125. 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 > Dr. John Lawrence and the Crime of Having Loyalist Kin by Michael Adelberg Dr. John Lawrence was a physician prominent Loyalists in his family. Although he was not an active Loyalist, he was forced to live out the war away from his home. - July 1776 - As discussed in a prior article, John Lawrence, Sr., was one of Monmouth County’s leading citizens before the Revolution—a lawyer, judge, surveyor, and member of New Jersey Assembly. He was supportive of the Continental Association and boycott of British goods. However, when protesting British policies shifted to declaring independence, John Sr. became an active Loyalist. In July, he led a bloodless insurrection against the new government in Upper Freehold. John Sr. was arrested for "holding treasonable intercourse with the enemy" and detained in Burlington County. On July 5, the New Jersey Convention ordered that "Mr. John Lawrence, of the County of Monmouth, not to depart the house of Mr. [Rensselaer] Williams [of Trenton]; and if Mr. Lawrence should refuse…. order him confined under such guard as the Committee may deem necessary." He would remain under house arrest for nine months. John Lawrence, Sr., had two sons. Elisha Lawrence was the Monmouth County sheriff under the Royal government. He played an active role in his father’s insurrection and led 60 Upper Freehold Loyalists to join the British Army on Sandy Hook. He would soon become Colonel of the 1st Battalion of New Jersey Volunteers, a Provincial Corps of the British Army. John Lawrence, Jr., was John’s other son, a Princeton graduate and prominent physician who owned a home at Perth Amboy but spent a great deal of time at his father’s house in Upper Freehold. There is no evidence that John Jr. (Dr. John Lawrence) was active in his father’s insurrection, but there is no evidence that he opposed it. Actions Taken Against Dr. John Lawrence On July 9, the New Jersey Convention took action against Dr. John Lawrence and seven other New Jerseyans from prominent Loyalist families. They were arrested and brought to Trenton. Lawrence and the others were ordered "not to depart the town of Trenton.” But later that day, the Convention reconsidered the status of Dr. John Lawrence. "Pursuant to order, Dr. John Lawrence, appeared before Congress and was permitted to return home on his parole, to attend this House whenever called upon." But Dr. Lawrence’s final parole agreement shows that he was not allowed to return home. Instead, he was required to go to Morristown. Perth Amboy was within sight of the British Lines and Upper Freehold was simmering with Loyalist insurrectionists. If Dr. John Lawrence wanted to actively oppose the Revolution, he could cause considerable mischief in either place. Morristown, on the other hand, was 25 miles inland from British lines and thoroughly controlled by Whigs (supporters of the Revolution). Though not as dangerous as his brother or father, New Jersey authorities were not willing to let Dr. John Lawrence live where he pleased. Dr. Lawrence’s July 13 parole oath is below: I do hereby give my parole of honor to the Provincial Congress of New Jersey that… I will return to Morristown, in Morris County, & there remain in a circle of six miles of the Court House in town, & that I will not carry on any political correspondence whatsoever on the subject of the dispute between Great Britain & the United Colonies, neither will I furnish any provisions or given any intelligence to the enemies of the Colony. In September, Continental Army defeats in New York raised expectations that the British Army would soon invade New Jersey. Amidst the resulting panic, men were punished for the crime of having Loyalist kin; Dr. Lawrence was jailed at Trenton. On September 26, Dr. Lawrence wrote a letter of protest to Governor William Livingston: After having complied with every requisition of the Congress - paying my proportions of the tax raised & signing the Association - I was exceedingly surprised to find myself made a prisoner by an order from Genl. Washington [George Washington] in consequence of which I have been carried to Trenton where the Provincial Congress was then sitting, and flatter myself that had I the opportunity: such a defense might have been made as would have discharged me entirely from my imprisonment - Taken from my business & put to very heavy expense. I therefore request that instead of continuing [within a circle of six miles of Morris[town], I may be removed to Allentown in Monmouth, under a parole similar to what I have given at this place, where my father's house will prevent any extraordinary charges occurring to me & where from its situation so remote from the British Army, I apprehend there can be no objection offered. However, Dr. Lawrence was not permitted to return to Upper Freehold. He returned to Morristown, where, while drunk, he engaged in spreading the word about the defeat of the Continental Army. On February 7, 1777, testimony was given against his conduct shortly before the British crossed into New Jersey: One Wm. Stewart [William Stewart] an assistant to these fals harted [sic] smooth tong’d fellows, went off to the Enemy, (as I am Well inform’d) I am affraid [sic] of the Conciquence [sic]. These fellows with two Tory Prisoners at McKee’s the Night after Long Island was given up was all drunk in taken of their Joy. Capt. Canedy & one Doctor Lawrence [Dr. John Lawrence] was the Prisoners—this Club of traitors has been riding all times of night just before some expedition of the Enemy, from Morristown to Prinstown [sic] or somewhere near their, where [there] was a member of the Convention, a friend of theirs. Another of them at the same time [was] going down to Newark, to their friends, their Every one of them most active in their several departments. I have many other reasons for my present opinion of these fellows, which would make them Blush to hear of. However, these fellows & their Influence is failing & will Continew [sic] to fail with all the rest of that abandoned crew of trators [sic] to their Country. Dr. John Lawrence at War’s End Despite this testimony, it appears that Dr. Lawrence was permitted to live out the war as a non-participant in New Jersey. Some sources suggest that he spent parts of the war behind British lines in New York as a non-combatant Loyalist refugee. Although surviving records are incomplete, there appears to be no further evidence of bad conduct from Dr. Lawrence or punishments from the New Jersey government. By 1783, it was clear that the British would be leaving New York. At this time, Dr. Lawrence considered his fate and whether he belonged with his brother (and three members of his extended family) behind British lines. He visited New York and may have offered himself up for a patronage position with the British government. On September 15, 1783, John Colden, a prominent New York Loyalist, wrote of Dr. Lawrence to Guy Carleton, the British commander in chief in New York and Governor of Canada: I am informed Mr. Lawrence supports a favorable character—is pushing himself forward and bids fair to rise in his profession. He has been two or three times in New York since the cessation of hostilities but I have not seen him. He will probably be a useful man to you; he designs to settle in New York. But it appears that this flirtation was temporary. Dr. Lawrence returned to Upper Freehold after the war, where he kept a low profile and lived out his life without incident. Outside of a night of loose talk while drunk, there is no evidence that he acted against the Continental cause. The support of his influential cousin, also named Elisha Lawrence, may have facilitated his peaceful reintegration. Cousin Elisha Lawrence was a Lt. Colonel in the militia and served in the upper house of the New Jersey legislature. Related Historic Site : Morristown National Historical Park Sources : Franklin Ellis, The History of Monmouth County (R.T. Peck: Philadelphia, 1885), p138 and 200-1; 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 1638-9; Minutes of the Provincial Congress and the Council of Safety of the State of New Jersey 1775-1776 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2009) pp. 497-8; John Stillwell, Historical and Genealogical Miscellany, 4 vols, Genealogical Publishing Co, 1970, v3, p411-21; John Lawrence, New Jersey State Archives, Collective Series, Revolutionary War Documents, #4; The Papers of Benjamin Franklin, vol. 22, March 23, 1775, through October 27, 1776, ed. William B. Willcox. New Haven and London:: Yale University Press, 1982, pp. 517–518; Peter Force, American Archives: Documents of the American Revolution, 1774-6 (digitized: http://dig.lib.niu.edu/amarch/find.doc.html), v6: p 1652; New Jersey State Archives, William Livingston Papers, reel 3, September 26, 1776; NJ Council of Safety, New Jersey State Archives, box 2; 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, pp. 266–267; John Stillwell, Historical and Genealogical Miscellany (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1970) v3, p417; John Colden to Guy Carleton, Alfred Jones, “Letter of David Colden, Loyalist, 1783”, American Historical Review, October 1919, vol. 25, p80-6. 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 > Lewis Bestedo Kills Loyalist and Exposes Loyalist Outlaws by Michael Adelberg Jesse Woodward led a small band of Loyalist outlaws into the woods of Upper Freehold Township in early 1777. Here, the men lived in small hunting cabins similar to this one still standing in Virginia. - April 1777 - When the Upper Freehold Loyalist insurrection and other insurrections collapsed in January 1777, the less committed insurrectionists received amnesty in exchange for taking a loyalty oath to the New Jersey government. Among the more committed insurrectionists, 200+ were captured and jailed ; at least as many others went to New York as Loyalist refugees and recruits into the Loyalist New Jersey Volunteers . And a few committed Loyalists went underground, living as outlaws in the thinly-populated cedar forests and salt marshes along the shore. The best-documented of these Loyalist outlaw bands—numbering ten or fewer—went into the woods of southern Upper Freehold township in early 1777. These men, more or less led by Jesse Woodward, lived in modest hunting cabins for several weeks until the desire for revenge lured one member of the group, Nicholas Williams, to expose them and lose his life in the process. Lewis Bestedo Kills and Captures Loyalist Outlaws A devoted Whig (supporter of the Revolution), Lewis Bestedo, was the first man known to hunt down these Loyalist outlaws. On March 20, 1777, Colonel Israel Shreve of the Continental Army recorded "Lewis Bastedo brot [sic] three deserters viz. Jacob Fagan and his brother” and “6 Tories” to the Army’s prison. A year later Fagan would re-emerge as the first of Monmouth County’s notorious Pine Robber gang leaders. This incident may have induced other Loyalists-in-hiding to go after Bestedo. According to Bestedo’s deposition before the New Jersey Council of Safety : On or about the 9th of April, as he, the deponent, was riding the public road between the dwelling house of Alexander Howard and Crosswicks, two men, namely Nicholas Williams and Thomas Fowler, who were till then concealed in the bushes, started up near the deponent, when said Williams said 'God Damn your blood, stop!' and immediately said Williams and Fowler both presented their guns at this deponent, who instantly alighted for his horse... That one or both said persons did fire directly at him, and that a ball discharged from one of the guns came so near his head that he thinks it brushed his hair. Upon which the deponent, having also a loaded gun in his hand, did immediately take aim and shot the said Nicholas Williams through the head... and then rushing toward the said Thomas Fowler, took him a prisoner, and conveyed him to Allentown, where he delivered him to Capt. [Francis] Wade. The captured Loyalist, Fowler, was also deposed by Wade a Continental Army commissary officer , at Allentown: He heard Nicholas Williams, who Lewis Bestedo shot this morning in his own defense, says that he would shoot Bestedo the first time he could do it, and as Bestedo was passing the road, going to Crosswicks from Allentown on his lawful business, sd Williams and Fowler lay in ambush along some brush on the road, & started up on sd Bestedo when sd Williams cried out to sd Bestedo 'Damn you, stop' & fired at sd Bestedo directly out of a loaded rifle, & on a missing, sd Bestedo, having a loaded musket with him on his horseback, immediately alighted & fired at sd Williams & shot him there in the head & took sd Thomas Fowler prisoner. Fowler described that outlaw bands "kept in a cabin for two months past, near to Joshua Gibbs." Fowler lived near Williams and Samuel Woodward. “Jesse Woodward also lived in the woods with them in a cabin along Crosswicks Creek.” Jesse Woodward had encouraged Fowler and Williams to stay in hiding "as the regulars would soon return, when they would be at liberty to go where they pleased & that Little Anthony Woodward promised they would be rewarded." John McGinnis was also listed as one of the outlaws, but he remained living in the community. McGinnis had warned Fowler "not to betray him.” With Fowler as an informant, Captain Wade was apparently able to capture Jesse Woodward, who he examined on April 10 at Allentown. Wade wrote of Woodward, "I find he is very backward in giving any information. You will find by his confession and Fowler's, that they differ much... it however plainly appears that there is a gang of them living in the pines and no doubt in readiness to show themselves whenever an opportunity offers.” Wade said he would write George Washington about the Loyalist outlaws in hiding. He also suggested that Bestedo should be allowed to keep the firearms of Fowler and Williams as a reward for his actions. In his statement, Jesse Woodward admitted to disarming Whigs during the Loyalist insurrection the prior December under guidance from his cousin, Anthony Woodward, who was acting under order from the British Army. He then "went from his house last December into the Pines about ten miles from his house, and living in one of the cabins for about a week at a time, and sometimes went home, and removed to a cabin on Crosswick's Creek above Waln's Mill, where he has lived about three or four weeks past.” On Fowler and Williams, “he understood from his children they were under the same circumstances that he was.” Fowler was brought before the New Jersey Council of Safety on April 11 and confessed that he, Samuel Woodward and Nicholas Williams went to Shrewsbury with plan to go off to Sandy Hook, but were turned back by a patrol. After the insurrection collapsed, Fowler went with Jesse Woodward to a cabin. Tedium in the woods may have prompted rash action. Fowler deposed that, “he has done no work for two months, but was persuaded that the regulars would make it all up to him if he lay still... was persuaded by sd Williams to go with him & assist him in taking Lewis Bestedo, whom he said he would carry to the Hook, when Bestedo returned the fire & shot Williams dead & took him prisoner." Other Loyalist Outlaws Captured With Jesse Woodward and Fowler captured and Williams dead, the Loyalist outlaws grew desperate. Thomas Woodward and Thomas Williams attempted to escape to New York. However, they were taken outside of New Brunswick on May 10 and brought before the Council of Safety on May 21: This affirmant further saith that sd Williams did then and there undertake to conduct him, this affirmant, to the city of New Brunswick & that in pursuance thereof, they, this affirmant and sd Williams, did that night set off with a design to go to the said city & traveled nightly (laying still by day) until they arrived within a few miles of sd city, where they were both apprehended and made prisoners - This affirmant further saith that being himself a stranger to the country & roads through which they passed, he trusted himself entirely to the guidance and direction of him, sd Williams, and that altho' there was no previous agreement between of reward, yet the sd Williams did immediately after their sd apprehension demand of him, the affirmant, the sum of two dollars for his services, which he paid to sd Williams. Another member of the Loyalist gang, Giles Williams, was captured on May 19. Upper Freehold’s David Brearley, a Continental Army officer, sent him to Governor William Livingston, with the note: Your Excellency will have delivered herewith a certain Giles Williams, who left this State last summer with Elisha Lawrence and others, and joined the Enemy on Staten Island; he has sometime past been lurking in the Pines with a set of villains, but was very luckily taken last night in the edge of the Pines by Lieut. Barton [Gilbert Barton] and sent to this place [Allentown]. It is interesting that Giles Williams was part of the first wave of Loyalist insurrectionaries who left Upper Freehold in July 1776 to join the New Jersey Volunteers under Lt. Colonel Elisha Lawrence. Williams apparently deserted the New Jersey Volunteers but remained a committed Loyalist. A number of Loyalists who became so-called Pine Robbers later in the war followed this same pattern. The fate of the few remaining Loyalist outlaws in the Upper Freehold group is unknown; it is possible they remained outlaws and drifted into more violent outlaw activities. By the summer of 1778, and for the rest of the war, Loyalist outlaw gangs, including the one led by Jacob Fagan, resided in the pine forests and salt marshes of coastal Monmouth County. These Pine Robbers terrorized locals and made large swaths of land largely ungovernable. Historian David Fowler (no relation to Thomas Fowler) examined the Upper Freehold Loyalist outlaws and identified them as the starting point of the Pine Robber phenomenon. While this early Loyalist outlaw group was less violent than later outlaw gangs, Fowler’s hypothesis is instructive. Related Historic Site : Nothnagle Log Cabin (early log home in New Jersey, but not representative of one-room hunting cabin) Sources : The Journal of Colonel Israel Shreve, March 20, 1777, Louisiana Technical University, Special Collections (excerpted by David J. Fowler); Deposition of Lewis Bestedo, Carl Prince, Papers of William Livingston (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987) vol. 1, pp. 306-7.New Jersey State Archives, Bureau of Archives of History, Council of Safety, Thomas Fowler; Jesse Woodward’s Statement, taken by Francis Wade, Selections from the Correspondence of the Executive of New Jersey, From 1776 to 1786 (Newark, NJ: Newark Daily Advertiser, 1848) p 51-3; Confession of Thomas Fowler, New Jersey State Archives, Bureau of Archives of History, Council of Safety, box 1, document #74; Deposition, New Jersey State Archives, Bureau of Archives of History, Council of Safety, Thomas Woodward; David Brearley to William Livingston, Selections from the Correspondence of the Executive of New Jersey, From 1776 to 1786 (Newark, NJ: Newark Daily Advertiser, 1848) pp. 60-1. 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 Demise and Sale of the Pennsylvania Salt Works at Toms River by Michael Adelberg Thomas Wharton was Pennsylvania’s Governor (called “President”) in early 1778 when the state determined the Pennsylvania Salt Works were a failure. The state sold the salt works in 1779. - November 1777 - As discussed in prior articles, because of the British blockade of American ports, there was an acute salt shortage in the fledgling United States. Salt was critical for preserving foods—without it, people would starve each winter. In 1776 and 1777, approximately twenty salt works started up along the Jersey shore. The most ambitious of these was the Pennsylvania Salt Works at Toms River, financed by the Pennsylvania government. Though started in summer 1776, the Pennsylvania salt works were still not producing salt in 1777—as other salt works were at least modestly productive. In fall 1777, the British Army defeated the Continental Army at Brandywine and Germantown , and occupied Philadelphia. The Continental Congress fled west to York, Pennsylvania and Washington’s army hunkered down for the winter at Valley Forge. The British navy patrolled the Delaware River. Given the crisis in Pennsylvania and the lack of production at its salt works, it is not surprising that the Pennsylvania government lost patience with its grandiose project at Toms River. Pennsylvania Government Sours on Pennsylvania Salt Works Thomas Savadge managed the salt works. His letter of November 11 to the state’s Council of Safety proved a tipping point. He detailed his continued labor shortage. Specifically, he lacked six carpenters, one smith, one bricklayer, one wheelwright, three cart men, laborers, and two guards who “must go on day and night; one must always be on duty that nothing be embezzled” by untrustworthy laborers . Savadge had further obligated the Pennsylvania government ($3,500) to harvest wood from James Mott's land. And he informed the Council that he sent Daniel Griggs of Toms River to Pennsylvania to collect the funds. Finally, Savadge called for fresh troops to protect the works: “Capt. Sutter's people's time will be up the first of January… should be glad to know whether they leave their arms and ammunition here or not.” Before responding to Savadge, the Council asked Colonel John Cox of Gloucester County (stationed at Little Egg Harbor) to assist them: “We have at length employed the bearer, Mr. Davison, to visit the works and furnish us… with a distinct account of the matters there." James Davison was at Little Egg Harbor and would proceed up the shore to Toms River. Along the way, he could observe other works. Davison’s November 19 orders told him that, upon reaching Toms River, if the Pennsylvania Salt Works lacked salt, he should "purchase [salt], if in his power, from other salt works, as will make up the deficiency." He should also report back to the Council on why the salt works remained unproductive. Finally, Davison was told to keep the mission secret "lest the forestallers should get notice of it." That same day, Thomas Wharton, President (Governor) of Pennsylvania and Chair of its Council of Safety, informed Savadge of Davison's mission. Wharton said that Davison "has directions from the Council to inspect the books and papers relating to the works." Wharton put Savadge on notice: We had reason to believe you would have furnished this State long since with considerable quantities of salt, we have however been most egregiously disappointed and are almost induced to give up the matter and pursue some other method to furnish this State with that article. The Council of Safety next considered the Pennsylvania Salt Works in January 1778. Despite its misgivings, it ordered another detachment to protect its investment at Toms River. On January 16, Commodore John Hazelwood of the state navy was directed to send 30 men to the salt works. The Council wrote Savadge on the same day. Despite "unaccountable delays… it is not the design of the Council to sell the salt works." The Council reminded Savadge of his prediction that the salt works would produce 30,000 bushels of salt a year. It informed Savadge that he would now report to Davison: "he is empowered and instructed to do everything that may be effectual in attaining the much desired end." The Council sent corresponding orders to Davison, noting that the salt works have “not produced any salt, tho' a very considerable sum has been invested.” Davison should “go to the works, take up the management and direction of them as fully and amply as the Council would do were they present.” On February 5, Savadge complained to the Council. Hazelwood's men had not arrived; the works were unguarded. Further, "such men as Commodore Hazelwood could furnish are not the men I want, neither will I pretend to carry on the works with such men." Savadge threatened to quit, "I cannot think of carrying them on any longer, for it is only deceiving the public, myself and my family, and getting an ill name for what I have not deserved." And he was predictably unhappy with Davison: The appointment of Mr. Davison as an agent here can be of no use to me or the works, it will be an additional expense on them and there is no use for such a person here; furnish me with proper men and I will take care of the rest... I think, agreeable to my contract, I can have no superintendent over me, but the Council themselves. Savadge wrote again on April 4. He informed the Council that British-Loyalist raiders had just razed the Union Salt Works at Manasquan (the other large salt works on the Jersey shore). Savadge stated that the raiders were "expected here this morning, but am informed that ye are returned to the Hook, but intend these works a visit very soon." Savadge was still waiting on Hazelwood’s guard and noted that the "the militia under Col Forman [David Forman] were here today" but had left for Manasquan. He complained: I have but a few men at the works, and them going to leave me on the above account -- I have heard nothing of Mr. Davison since he left about two months ago -- am without the cash to pay the people or purchase provisions of which I have no kind, other than the bread & pork -- am not able to make any salt for want of hands. Savadge followed up two days later: "We learnt this morning that the enemy, after leaving Squan, went to Shark River and destroyed the salt works there." He pleaded for a guard: "I apprehend it should be done so immediately, as in all likelihood they will make an attempt to destroy them [the salt works] in a few days." The Council’s response was prompt and unsympathetic. As [for] guards being sent to defend the salt works under your care, there does not appear to be any propriety in it -- these works have been greatly long in hand, and been altogether fruitless. This greatly discourages the Council from pursuing the business any further until they are satisfied that there is a reasonable prospect of something effectual being done. The Council would send no additional money until "they are satisfied of the propriety of the disposal of that already issued for that purpose. You are hereby directed to lay your accounts before the Council as soon as may be." Davison was sent back to the salt works in May 1778, and it appears that 20 bushels of salt (a modest amount) were produced that month. The End of the Pennsylvania Salt Works After May, there is a gap in surviving documents until November 25, 1778. Savadge had left Toms River and was in Philadelphia. He offered a weak excuse for not providing the Council with the requested financial records of the salt works: They were sent by a man who said he lived between Reading and Lancaster… [He] promised to deliver them with his own hand to the President [Wharton]. I do not recollect his name but have a copy of the letter I wrote him to the President, which I believe will give his name. On December 7, Savadge wrote to see if the Council might again invest in the salt works or, alternatively, reimburse him for past outlays: If the Council should think proper to carry the works into execution, it will be necessary that a further sum should be granted for that purpose... the sum of five hundred pounds should be sufficient to complete the five pans and carry them on so far as to satisfy your Honor... If on the other hand, the Council should decline carrying on the works any further, I beg they would inform me with whom I settle my accounts. Savadge likely met with the Council. He was again asked for his books and his original contract with the State. Savadge apologized: “I must confess with shame that I have used [the Board] extremely ill by inadvertently imposing a falsehood, by saying I had a copy of articles from Mr. Biddle, I cannot but with the greatest shame account for [them].” Savadge was similarly unable to produce the contract to harvest wood from James Mott. He called on the Council to “appoint a committee of judicious men” to consider “my character, my conduct and my accounts, respecting the works." On December 12, Savadge wrote the Council yet again: I beg your pardon for interrupting you so often, but necessity has no law. I have family in town, and I have not one stick of wood for them to burn nor money to buy any; I have been for almost seven weeks waiting to know when I am able to settle the ration bill and sundry other matters... I beg to know when I am to settle for my family cannot be wanting the necessities of life. It is not clear if Savadge’s account were ever settled; he was dead within the year. On November 5, 1779, the Council issued its last order respecting the Pennsylvania Salt Works: Whereas the Salt works belonging to this State in the State of New Jersey have been attended with great expense and no advantage to the Public, and the manager [Thomas Savadge] being dead, Resolved--that the said works be sold at public vendue. A few days later, the Pennsylvania Packet advertised: “To be sold at public vendue, the salt works belonging to the State of Pennsylvania on Barnegat Bay… These works have been erected on an extensive plan, calculated to produce a great quantity of salt.” They were purchased by John Thompson of Burlington for £15,000, and produced some salt until they were destroyed by Loyalist raiders in March 1782. Some financial records of the Pennsylvania Salt Works survived. They list expenditures for land, equipment, foods, and labor. The records offer no evidence of incoming revenues from salt sales. There are at least two substantial accounting errors noted (credits to Daniel Wilson and James Randolph). The Jersey shore salt works did not bring great wealth to investors. The two large scale works, the Pennsylvania and Union salt works, were less productive than hoped, and then destroyed by the enemy. Smaller salt works were more successful, but many of these were also destroyed. With the entry of France into the war in 1778, the British naval blockade weakened and salt returned to American ports. Salt prices fell; only a few salt works outlasted the war. Related Historic Site : State Museum of Pennsylvania (Harrisburg, PA) Sources : Arthur Pierce, Smugglers' Woods, (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1960) p 237; Samuel Hazard, Pennsylvania Archives (Harrisburg: State of Pennsylvania, 1902) First Series, vol. 5, p 763-4; Samuel Hazard, Pennsylvania Archives (Harrisburg: State of Pennsylvania, 1902) First Series, vol. 6, pp. 16-8; Samuel Hazard, Pennsylvania Archives (Harrisburg: State of Pennsylvania, 1902) First Series, vol. 6, p 236; Samuel Hazard, Pennsylvania Archives (Harrisburg: State of Pennsylvania, 1902) First Series, vol. 6, p 398; Samuel Hazard, Pennsylvania Archives (Harrisburg: State of Pennsylvania, 1902) First Series, vol. 6, p 417; Orders to James Davison, January 16, 1778, in Samuel Hazard, Pennsylvania Archives (Harrisburg: State of Pennsylvania, 1902) First Series, vol. 6, pp. 181-2, 186; Thomas Savadge to Vice President Bryan, Samuel Hazard, Pennsylvania Archives (Harrisburg: State of Pennsylvania, 1902) First Series, vol. 7, pp. 96-116; Thomas Savadge to PA Council of Safety, Samuel Hazard, Pennsylvania Archives (Harrisburg: State of Pennsylvania, 1902) First Series, vol. 7, pp. 96-116; Thomas Savadge to PA Council of Safety, Samuel Hazard, Pennsylvania Archives (Harrisburg: State of Pennsylvania, 1902) First Series, vol. 7, pp. 96-116; Pennsylvania Historical Society, Pennsylvania Salt Works Account Books; Arthur Pierce, Smugglers' Woods, (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1960) p 237; Pennsylvania Council of Safety, Instructions in Arthur Pierce, Smugglers' Woods, (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1960) p 237; Library Company, Minutes of the Pennsylvania Council of Safety, vol. 12, p160; Minutes of the Supreme Executive Council of Pennsylvania (Harrisburg: Theo. Fenn, 1853) vol. 12, pp. 160; The concurrent sale of the Union and Pennsylvania Salt works is in Arthur Pierce, Smugglers' Woods, (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1960) p 234 and 238; Charles Thomson purchase is discussed in Harry B. Weiss, The Revolutionary Saltworks of the New Jersey Coast (Trenton: Past Times Press, 1959) p 44. Previous Next