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 Pardons of Purgatory on Ezekiel Forman by Michael Adelberg The Black Pioneers were officered by white Loyalists, including Ezekiel Forman. Unpleasant assignments like this compelled Forman to quit New York and resettle Freehold at war’s end. - October 1778 - Ezekiel Forman was born into one of the most prominent families in Monmouth County. As protests against British policies built and Americans formed committees to oppose them, his kinsmen—John Forman, Peter Forman and particularly, David Forman, played leading roles in the local Continental government. For whatever reason, Ezekiel Forman did not join them and, in fact, on July 1, 1776—the day before New Jersey adopted its first Constitution outside British control—Ezekiel Forman was arrested and brought before the New Jersey Provincial Congress. He was treated leniently—he posted a bond for his future good behavior and was released. Ezekiel Forman apparently laid low for a while, but when the British Army swept across New Jersey in late 1776 and Loyalists rose up, Ezekiel Forman participated in the Loyalist insurrection . He was again arrested and detained. Along with dozens of other captured Monmouth County Loyalists, he was sent to far off Maryland for detention. Ezekiel Forman returned to New Jersey in early 1777, with several other Monmouth Loyalists, but ahead of the many who remained in detention. Ezekiel Forman as a Loyalist Criminal In June 1777, Ezekiel Forman became an active Loyalist again. As the British Army prepared to quit its small New Jersey perimeter around New Brunswick and Amboy, Forman joined them. He wrote that he became a partisan for the British Army and was active in "taking rebel stores and taking up the most violent [Whigs] in that faction." He was again captured and detained in early 1778 and was tried for treason at the 2nd Monmouth Court of Oyer Terminer in June 1778. He was one of a dozen Loyalists sentenced to death. He wrote: After suffering every insult, indignity and abuse, he was brought to tryal -- and condemned for his loyalty to suffer death -- that his own numerous and family connections, as well as those of his wife, were all (one brother excepted, who was also tried and condemned to death for his attachment the King's cause) adherents to Congress, and to avoid the disgrace of having one of their family executed (and not for compassion for your memorialist) made use of their influence with the rebel government and procured a mitigation of his sentence to banishment, on pain of his being executed if he was ever afterward found in any of the States of America. Ezekiel Forman’s death sentence pardon is well documented. The New Jersey Legislative Council, the legislature’s upper house, considered Forman’s fate on August 10, 1778. It recorded: A representation… in behalf of Ezekiel Forman who was condemned for High Treason at the said Court. Also a petition from the Grand Jury and sundry inhabitants of the said County and some other papers in behalf of the said Ezekiel Forman and on deliberation, the Council advised his Excellency [Governor William Livingston] to respite the execution to Friday, the fifth day of September next. The respite became a pardon. The New Jersey Gazette further reported on September 28: "Ezekiel Forman, who was under sentence of death on a conviction of High Treason, is pardoned on condition of his leaving the State in two months, and the United States in six months, from the date of this pardon, never to return again to any of them." Ezekiel Forman as a Loyalist Refugee Forman left New Jersey in October and went into British lines in New York, but he did not leave the country. A British Colonel, A. Emmerick, recalled Forman’s role in saving four captured British soldiers in 1779: Ezekiel Forman, a Loyalist from New Jersey, at the risk of his life, came to the lines and informed me that four men belonging to my corps, who were prisoners of the rebels, were under sentence of death and that by this timely and useful information, I was enabled to dispatch a flag of truce to General MacDougall, so as to save their lives. Emmerick further noted that Forman "resided in the garrison of New York, and that he always appeared firmly attached to his Majesty." Perhaps because of this service, Forman was noticed by the British high command. An aide-de-camp of General Henry Clinton, leading British forces in America, wrote to Colonel Roger Morris, Superintendent of Refugees, on April 15, 1779: "I am desired by the Commander in Chief to request that you will order rations to be issued to the bearer, Mr. Ezekiel Forman. It is wished that he and others in his situation will find out some services for rendering themselves useful." Forman wrote that he became an officer in “the King’s militia” in New York City, but he did not stay in the city. He was captured again in New Jersey in 1781. He wrote: "was a second time thrown in prison, where he remained a long time & suffered much." The New Jersey Legislative Council again considered his fate on October 15, 1781. It recorded receiving "a petition from Ezekiel Forman, who was convicted of High Treason and received a sentence of death at a Court of Oyer and Terminer in the County of Monmouth in the year of 1778, praying to be pardoned of the offence." The Council again recommended a pardon and it was presumably granted. Forman returned to New York and was put in a supervisory role over a unit of African American Loyalists called the Black Pioneers. He was granted "an allowance of four shillings per diem until something better could be done for him." At times, the pioneers were employed digging trenches, at other times they performed even less glamorous tasks. One of their orders was to "assist in cleaning the streets & removing all Nuisances being thrown into the streets." It is safe to assume that Forman was unhappy with the role. Ezekiel Forman at War’s End It appears that Ezekiel Forman returned to New Jersey toward the end of the war to settle his estate. An Ezekiel Forman co-owned property in Princeton with Richard Stockton. Stockton was a signer of the Declaration of Independence who was captured by Loyalists in Freehold in late 1776 and compelled to sign a British loyalty oath. He died during the war. The fate of the Princeton property remained in limbo until April 1782 when Forman signed over the land to Alexander McDonald. In conveying this land, it was noted that Forman was in Philadelphia. A year later, Forman was still in Philadelphia with his wife. He requested that he and, his wife, Margaret Forman, be allowed to go now with "the liberty of bringing out such monies or effects as he may be able to discharge." With the war ending, Ezekiel Forman apparently planned to settle in New Jersey. He owned and paid taxes on a small 20-acre farm in Freehold in 1784. On this small farm, Forman lived far more modestly than he would have if not a Loyalist. It is probable that he suffered harassments or worse. Forman did not stay in New Jersey very long. On July 4, 1788, twelve years after his first arrest, Forman was in England, where he petitioned the British government for compensation for his lost pre-war estate . He recalled his service to the King and the poor state of his family: "he has been deserted and abandoned by all his relations and connections, and is reduced with a wife and a numerous family of children to extreme indigence." While Ezekiel Forman suffered for his Loyalism during the war, he also received two pardons and was repeatedly shown greater leniency by the government of New Jersey than poor men who committed the same deeds. He was allowed to move around and resettle in New Jersey at war’s end. This contrasts with the dozen or so Loyalists who were put to death in Revolutionary Monmouth County by local courts and to violence from Whig vigilantes later in the war. Ezekiel Forman’s family connections, however strained they might have been, spared him the rough treatment endured by other Loyalists and likely saved his life. Related Historic Site : Morris-Jumel Mansion (New York) Sources : Rutgers University, Special Collections, Loyalist Compensation Applications, Coll., Ezerkiel Forman, D96, PRO AO 13/109, reel 8; David Bernstein, Minutes of the Governor's Privy Council, 1777-1789 (Trenton: New Jersey State Library, Archives and History Bureau, 1974) p 83-4; The Library Company, New Jersey Gazette and Pennsylvania Evening Post, September-October 1778; Testimony of Col. Emmerick, Great Britain, Public Record Office, Audit Office, Class 13, volume 109, folio 296-7; Certificate regarding Ezekiel Forman, Great Britain Public Record Office, British Headquarters Papers, 30/55, #1919; The order to the Black Pioneers is in Black Loyalists: Our History, Our People ( https://blackloyalist.com/cdc/story/revolution/pioneers.htm ); David Bernstein, Minutes of the Governor's Privy Council, 1777-1789 (Trenton: New Jersey State Library, Archives and History Bureau, 1974) p 206; Princeton University Library, Stockton Family Papers, box 2, folder 4, Release of Land near Princeton, Ezekiel Forman to Alexander MacDonald. April 12 1782; Petition, Ezekiel Forman, David Library, Records of the Pennsylvania Revolutionary Government, film 24, reel 30, frames 477-9; David Forman to George Washington, Library of Congress, George Washington Papers, series 4, reel 91, March 23, 1783; Ezekiel Forman compensation claim, Great Britain, Public Record Office, Audit Office, Class 13, Volume 109, folios 296-297 and 302. 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 > Prominent Loyalists Captured and Scandal Ensues by Michael Adelberg George Taylor, Colonel of an illusory Loyalist militia, led several incursions into Monmouth County. He was taken in August 1780; after months in jail, he was exchanged back to New York. - August 1780 - Prior articles demonstrate that summer of 1780 was a particularly desperate time in Monmouth County. Colonel Tye and other Loyalist irregulars kidnapped more than a dozen county leaders. In response, hundreds of county residents formed an extra-legal vigilante association, the Retaliators . Disaffected county residents trying to weather the war at home had livestock impounded by Continental soldiers and were subject to shockingly high fines for missing militia duty. But it was an equally desperate time for Monmouth County Loyalists behind British lines in New York. The New Jersey Volunteers , which hundreds of Monmouth Loyalists joined in 1776-1777, were largely dispirited —and original recruits drifted into new military units or left the Army for irregular Loyalist paramilitaries such as the Associated Loyalists . Amidst this desperation, a party of prominent Monmouth Loyalists was tempted to land in Monmouth County on an ill-fated mission. Monmouth Militia Captures Loyalist Party The New Jersey Gazette reported that on August 2: Eight of the infamous refugees, five of whom pretended to be officers in the Tyrant's service, were brought to the Commissary of Prisoners at Elizabethtown from Monmouth. When they were captured, they pleaded they came over with a flag , and produced their orders; but their frivolous pretensions would not answer their ends, and they were sent to Philadelphia to occupy a corner of the new gaol until exchanged. The New Jersey Journal reported on the same incident: Yesterday, were brought to this town under guard, being on their way to Philadelphia, Col. George Taylor, Lt. Samuel Leonard, Lt. John Thomson, Ensign John Lawrence and Chrineyonce Van Mater, late inhabitants of Monmouth County, and three others -- they were made prisoners on Wednesday last by a party of militia." Five of the eight captured men were well-known Loyalists from prominent families: George Taylor was the colonel of the illusory Loyalist Monmouth County militia . In 1777, he led raids into Monmouth County and remained active in recruiting Loyalists from the county afterward. Samuel Leonard was a lieutenant in the (Loyalist) New Jersey Volunteers. He often commanded the troops at the Sandy Hook Lighthouse . He was kin to Thomas Leonard (a major in the Volunteers) and Joseph Leonard (the former county clerk who took the county’s records .). John Thomson was a former lieutenant in the New Jersey Volunteers who became an Associated Loyalist. He was involved in raids into Monmouth County. While others in the party were exchanged, Thomson remained in jail. He was convicted of two felonies and hanged. John Lawrence was an ensign in the New Jersey Volunteers. His kin co-led the Upper Freehold Loyalist insurrection of December 1776. Chrineyonce Van Mater was the first of Monmouth’s Loyalist partisans. He helped capture two leading Whigs in late 1776 and participated in the December Loyalist Insurrection. His daring escape on horseback gave birth to the place-name “Jumping Point” in present-day Rumson. The other men in the party—Timothy Scoby, Richard Freeman, and Adam Brewer—were from poor families. Scoby was a private in the New Jersey Volunteers early in the war before becoming an Associated Loyalist. In 1782, he was convicted of treason in the Monmouth County courts, but was pardoned by Governor William Livingston. Less is known about Freeman and Brewer. The purpose of the landing is not explicitly stated in any surviving document. It is known that George Taylor paroled home a captured Middletown militiaman, Daniel Covenhoven. Another militiaman, Cornelius Swart, testified that the Commanding Officer at Sandy Hook told Taylor “he could discharge them if he thought proper - at which time Taylor told them he paroled them both to return home and remain peaceable subjects until called upon.” Perhaps Taylor landed to conduct a prisoner exchange . However, as noted below, the Loyalists brought a large quantity of counterfeit money with them—and the discovery of this money likely ended any chance of the flag of truce being honored. Counterfeiting was a nagging problem throughout the war; various pre- and post-independence currencies and notes traded freely. Continental money was particularly prone to counterfeiting and rampant inflation. As early as April 1777, Thomas Clark, from a disaffected Middletown family, was brought before the New Jersey Supreme Court “for suspicion of receiving and passing counterfeit paper 30 dollar bills, in imitation of the 30 dollar Continental bills.” In January 1780, a bold raid against Sandy Hook resulted in the capture of counterfeit money by Continental soldiers. Major Henry “Light Horse Harry” Lee reported on the raid, noting that “the counterfeit money I sent to be burnt." No doubt, counterfeit money was circulated via London Traders and other disaffected New Jerseyans. On August 4, the Pennsylvania Packet reported that the Monmouth Loyalists had reached Philadelphia: Yesterday was brought to town, under guard, being on their way to Philadelphia, Col. George Taylor, Lt. Samuel Leonard, Lt. John Thomson, Ens. John Lawrence and Chrineyonce Van Mater, late inhabitants of Monmouth, and three others. They were made prisoners on Wednesday last by a party of militia. On reaching Philadelphia, the Loyalists apparently complained about the legality of their capture. If they had arrived under a flag of truce, with a British passport, they should have been permitted to present themselves to an officer and explain their purpose. After that, they could have been allowed to stay or sent back to their boats by that officer. If their credentials were appropriate, they should not have been taken. Hearing the Loyalists’ plea, the Board of War of the Continental Congress inquired to George Washington about the capture. Washington, perhaps not wanting to involve himself in a sordid local affair, claimed minimum knowledge of the incident. He wrote on August 14: I have not yet been fully informed of the circumstances attending the capture of Lieut. Leonard and the others sent to Phila. with him. I only know that they came out under the sanction of a Flag, but there being something irregular in the conduct of it, the Militia of Monmouth thought proper to apprehend and secure them. The Fate of the Captured Loyalists and Capturing Militia Officers The Loyalists remained in jail in Philadelphia until January 1781. On January 9, Colonel David Forman wrote to Governor William Livingston about them: The Grand Jury would esteem it a particular favor if your Excellency would take the earliest opportunity of ordering Chrineyonce Van Mater, Samuel Leonard, John Thomson, John Lawrence, Timothy Scoby, Aaron Brewer and other late inhabitants of Monmouth County, and now confined in Philadelphia to be sent to this place to stand for tryal. Forman was serving as a judge of the Court of Common Pleas in Monmouth County and was apparently eager to try the Monmouth Loyalists. Forman was also leading the vigilante Retaliators , raising questions about the impartiality of the justice he might administer. The impending transfer to Monmouth County seems to have tempted at least some of the Monmouth Loyalists to attempt an escape. The Loyalist New York Gazette reported on January 21: The following persons arrived in this city, they have been made prisoners by the Rebels and confined in Philadelphia goal, from whence they fortunately escaped the 10th inst., a reward of $2000 was published for apprehending them. The escapees were Chrineyonce Van Mater, Timothy Scoby, Nathan Tyson, Aaron Brewer, and Richard Freeman. Van Mater, Scoby, and Brewer were Monmouth Countians taken in August. Tyson’s biography and reason for arrest are unknown. Thomson was tried in Monmouth County in November 1781, found guilty of horse stealing and “felony” and hanged. The others were probably exchanged for captured Whigs (supporters of the Revolution). Scoby would be captured again in 1782, convicted of high treason, and sentenced to death. He was pardoned by Governor Livingston at the request of Guy Carleton, the conciliatory British commander in chief at war’s end. The investigation of the Loyalists led to inquiries into the conduct of the militia that took the Loyalists despite their arrival under a Flag of Truce. This led to the court martial of several officers, reported in the New Jersey Gazette on February 21. The gravity of the trials is underscored by the fact that they were presided over by General Philemon Dickinson, the commander of the New Jersey militia. The results of the courts-martial are below: Major Thomas Hunn was charged with "cowardice and unofficerlike behavior, and acquitted of the first charge buy unanimously found guilty of the last, and judged to be cashiered"; Ensign Peter Vanderhoff was charged on the same charges with the same results. However, he was fined 200 Continental dollars and permitted to continue serving; Ensign Barnes Bennett was charged with "disobeying orders with respect to the trunks brought from Staten Island with George Taylor and others under the sanction of a Flag.” He was further charged with "suffering those goods to be embezzled" and "for passing the counterfeit money which came over." He was found guilty on all charges and cashiered; Lt. Jacob Tice was charged with "not turning out upon his tour of duty, and adjudged to be guilty." He was fined 200 Continental dollars; Capt. Samuel Dennis was charged with "cowardice and disobedience of orders.” He was “acquitted on both charges"; Quartermaster Richard Hartshorne was charged with "neglect of duty in not supplying the men with provisions.” He was “unanimously acquitted." Surviving documents do not reveal if there were legitimate questions about the documents the Loyalists brought into Monmouth County, but the courts-martial results reveal that, whatever the official purpose of their landing, another purpose was to return with materials purchased with counterfeit money. On this alone, the Loyalists deserved to be detained, though the scandalous conduct of certain Monmouth militia—passing the counterfeit money into circulation—surpassed whatever “irregularity” might have existed with the flag of truce carried by the Loyalists. Related Historic Site : Jumping Point Park Sources : Library of Congress, Early American Newspaper, New Jersey Gazette, reel 1930; William Horner, This Old Monmouth of Ours (Freehold: Moreau Brothers, 1932) p 137; William Nelson, Austin Scott, et al., ed., New Jersey Archives (Newark, Trenton, Somerville, 1901-1917) vol. 4, pp. 551-552; State vs. Thomas Clark of Middletown. New Jersey State Archives, Supreme Court Records, #34610; Henry Lee to George Washington, January 16, 1780, Library of Congress, Early American Newspapers, Pennsylvania Evening Post; Pennsylvania Packet, August 4, 1780; Goerge Washington to Congress, Library of Congress, George Washington Papers, http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/mgw:@field(DOCID+@lit(gw190446)) ; David Forman to William Livingston, New Jersey State Archives, William Livingston Papers, reel 14, January 9, 1781; Library of Congress, Rivington's New York Gazette, January 21, 1781, reel 2906; The New Jersey Gazette report on the court martial is in William Horner, This Old Monmouth of Ours (Freehold: Moreau Brothers, 1932) p 162; William Nelson, Austin Scott, et al., ed., New Jersey Archives (Newark, Trenton, Somerville, 1901-1917) vol. 5, p 200; Daniel Covenhoven to William Livingston, New Jersey State Archives, William Livingston Papers, reel 14, February 15, 1781; Michael Adelberg, Biographical File , unpublished, Monmouth County 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 > The Decision to Station Continental Troops in Monmouth County by Michael Adelberg Throughout 1778, Gov. William Livingston lobbied George Washington to camp Continental soldiers in Monmouth County, near Sandy Hook. In January 1779, Washington finally agreed to do it. - November 1778 - Three major raids against the New Jersey shoreline in 1778—the Manasquan salt work s in April, against Middletown Point in May, and against Little Egg Harbor and Osborn Island in October—demonstrated that local militia, though increasingly competent, were unable to protect the shoreline against large enemy attacks. On top of that, dozens of disaffected Monmouth County farmers continued to trade illegally with the British through Loyalist middlemen and internal Loyalist gangs. Loyalist partisans living on the shore, so-called Pine Robbers , made large parts of the shore unsafe for travelers and small militia parties. Following the transfer of David Forman’s Additional Regiment out of Monmouth County, stationing a regiment of Continental soldiers in Monmouth County was discussed frequently. Governor William Livingston first requested troops for Monmouth County in April, but George Washington was opposed. He wrote that a regiment of Continentals would “do rather more harm than good” by attracting a larger British raiding party and then not having the strength to resist it. A Continental regiment that would not withdraw when attacked by a larger party would risk the same fate as Pulaski’s Legion on Osborn Island (the slaughter of 50 men). In July 1778, immediately after the Battle of Monmouth , Washington dispatched Colonel Daniel Morgan’s regiment to shadow the British Army on its withdrawal to Sandy Hook but Morgan left the county within two weeks. After that, Washington committed a 30-man guard under Major Richard Howell to Shrewsbury, but Howell was there more to monitor the movements of the British fleet than to enhance the security of the area. In November 1778, a British fleet gathered at Sandy Hook. It would head to Georgia to begin the British invasion of the southern states. But its destination at the time was unknown. Washington was irritated by the irregularity of Howell’s reports and Howell’s guard was too weak to stand any kind of attack if the British should attack from Sandy Hook. This rekindled talk of sending troops into Monmouth County. The Decision to Send Troops into Monmouth County Nicholas Biddle, a commissary officer , wrote his superior, Moore Furman, on November 14 "that Col. Moylan's horse [Stephen Moylan] for present be sent to Monmouth - this I think will be some relief." The next day, Lord Stirling (General William Alexander) speculated about going to the shore, “I would willingly go into Monmouth County, and with Small Vessels out of the Inlets on that Coast, give him [Washington] Intelligence of everything that passes at Sandy Hook.” Stirling did not, however, go into Monmouth County; Moylan likely did not go into Monmouth County either. In December, rumors of an impending British attack on Monmouth County spread. This prompted Livingston to again write Washington to request troops. On December 15, the Governor wrote of the county militia: One of their militia battalions has gone through a severe course of duty, as to be almost worn out and dispirited. The other principally consist of disaffected persons and should not be depended upon. Perhaps about 400 Continental troops stationed in that County at Middletown Point, the other at Middletown and the third at Shrewsberry [sic] might be sufficient guard, & prevent that insufferable communication and traffic constantly carried on between New York & the first and last of the places mentioned. Washington turned away the request: “I have already distributed largely for the security of the State, and that the security of inhabitants has been a particular consideration, but it is impossible to include every place." He said that his troops were already spread thin and set up in winter quarters. He repeated his prior concern about unsupported Continental detachments being an attractive target for the British, "small and unsupported cantonments might become objects of the Enemy.” A month later, new intelligence circulated. The Pennsylvania Packet reported on December 19: "It is reported that the Britons and Tories intend shortly to make an excursion from New York to Shrewsberry.” Rather than send troops, local authorities were carting away endangered livestock: It has been deemed proper to be prepared, and with this view, we are told an order has been issued to drive off the cattle from the neighborhood where it is most probable the enemy may attempt to land. That same month, Livingston wrote Washington in greater detail about the problem posed by illegal trade from Monmouth County to New York: Considering the number of disaffected in the County of Monmouth, it will be difficult for the Loyal citizens of that county to oppose an enemy aided by the open junction or at least secret cooperation of the Tories... I should therefore think a few Continental troops might be posted in that County to great advantage, particularly to prevent trade with New York. Conrad Alexandre Gerard, the French Diplomat at Philadelphia, also wrote of the threat to Shrewsbury and an apparent strategy not to defend it: It is reported that English and Tories intend to make an excursion from New York into Shrewsbury. Although it is not thought the excursion will be dangerous, and a considerable portion of the American Army is currently in the State, and an order has been given to withdraw the battle from those environs where it is most probable the enemy will try to attack. For the third time, Governor Livingston asked Washington to station a regiment in Monmouth County. This time, Washington was sympathetic: I find every disposition not only to afford security to the people of Monmouth and to lessen the duty of their militia, but to prevent the illicit trade and correspondence complained of between the disaffected in that county and the city of New York. Nonetheless, Washington declined to send troops saying that he had none to spare. But he did make a request of Livingston: The distance of any Continental troops… 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. Washington was probably prompted by an anonymous letter in his possession about illegal trading through Shrewsbury. The letter claimed that "not less than one thousand sheep, five hundred hogs and eight hundred quarters or upwards of good beef, a large parcel of cheese, besides poultry" were all likely to end up in British hands. A major action against Shrewsbury did not occur in December 1778, but intelligence continued to reach Washington about the pervasive trade with the British. Finally, on January 8, 1779, Washington was persuaded to send troops into Monmouth County. He wrote Lord Stirling: I have received such repeated information of the trade that is carried on between Monmouth and New York… that I find it an absolute necessity of sending down a party to that quarter to put a stop to that intercourse. Be pleased therefore, to order about 250 men of the line under the command of a field officer... to go immediately upon that service. Howell’s small guard would return to Morristown. However, it apparently took a few weeks to identify the best regiment for the Monmouth assignment. It was not until January 30 that Washington wrote Livingston, "I had ordered a party under Colo. North into Monmouth County with a view of restraining the malpractices which prevailed there, the measure may lighten the service of the militia." Colonel Caleb North commanded a regiment of Pennsylvania Continentals that would soon arrive in Monmouth County. North’s men would be the first of three Continental regiments (including Mordecai Gist’s mixed command and Benjamin Ford’s Marylanders ) sent to northeastern Monmouth County in 1779. All three would struggle while stationed there. Related Historic Site : Liberty Hall Sources : Nicholas Biddle to Moore Furman in William Mauer, Dragoon Diary, The History of The Third Light Dragoons (Author House, 2005) p186; Clement Biddle to Moore Furman in C.F. Maurer, Dragoon Diary: The History of the Third Continental Light Dragoons (Bloomington, IN: Author House, 2005) note on p 184; Lord Stirling, Report, Colonial and State Records of North Carolina, v10-0437http://docsouth.unc.edu/csr/index.html/document/csr13-0396; William Livingston to George Washington, Carl Prince, Papers of William Livingston (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987) vol. 2, pp. 512, 513-4; William Livingston to George Washington, Carl Prince, Papers of William Livingston (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987) vol. 2, p 510.Pennsylvania Packet, December 19, 1778; 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, p 404; Conrad Alexandre Gerard, Despatches and Instructions of Conrad Alexandre Gerard, 1778-1780, (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1939) p 439; 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; George Washington to Lord Stirling, John Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1932) vol. 5, p 388. 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 > Loyalist Refugees Go Into British Lines by Michael Adelberg Loyalist refugees camped on Staten Island and Sandy Hook lived in semi-permanent huts like the ones pictured here (used by British soldiers camped in Manhattan). - January 1777 - As discussed in prior articles, Monmouth County Loyalists began going over to the British within days of the British invasion fleet and army arriving at Sandy Hook. More Loyalists joined them through the summer and these men became the nucleus of the New Jersey Volunteers . But another and larger wave of Monmouth County Loyalists went behind British lines after the defeat of the three Loyalist insurrections (in Upper Freehold , Freehold-Middletown , and Shrewsbury ) and the toppling of the Loyalist militia at Freehold in early 1777. The leading Loyalist refugees were often from the most prominent pre-war families, such as Elisha Lawrence of Upper Freehold, Daniel Van Mater of Freehold (the subject of another article ) and George Taylor of Middletown. But most Loyalists came from yeoman families and families of modest means. There is no source that tracked and compiled all of the Loyalists who became “refugees” behind British lines. The best surviving source may be the muster rolls of the New Jersey Volunteers, a large number of which still exist. From these rolls, it is clear the largest body Loyalists joined the British cause between December 1776 and April 1777. The table below compiles the dates of officer enlistment in the New Jersey Volunteers between September 1776 and September 1777. Officer commissions were typically tied to recruiting success, so it is safe to assume that the officer totals roughly correlate with rank & file recruitment. The enlistment figures below do not include the first cohort of Monmouth County Loyalists who joined the Volunteers in July 1776: 1 officer enlistment in September 1776 1 officer enlistment in October 1776 7 officer enlistments in November 1776 24 officer enlistments in December 1776 10 officer enlistments in January 1777 11 officer enlistments in February 1777 4 officer enlistments in March 1777 9 officer enlistments in April 1777 0 officer enlistments in May 1777 1 officer enlistment in June 1777 0 officer enlistments July-September 1777 Below are a handful of examples of Loyalists who joined (or sought to join) the British cause between December 1776 and May 1777. Their experiences ranged from men who joined the New Jersey Volunteers, to becoming London traders and Loyalist partisans to those who attempted to join the British but failed to do so. Many more examples could have been included in this article. Examples of Loyalist Refugees According to a Loyalist compensation claim submitted after the war, James Stillwell of Middletown “took refuge with the British Army on their coming in December 1776." Stillwell “did join the British troops and continued with them until some time in the year 1779, when he did settle on Staten Island, leaving a wife and four children [on the family’s 300-acre farm]." Stillwell was one of many Loyalist men who separated from his family. This was because of the difficulties associated with moving a family behind British lines and hopes of holding onto estates by keeping kin on the family farm. The fate of Loyalist families on confiscated estates is the subject of another article. Brothers Wiliam Stevenson and Shore Stevenson provide examples of yeomen who became Loyalist refugees. They lived together, with their families, on a 400-acre Middletown farm before the war. At the height of the Loyalist insurrection, on December 23, 1776, Wiliam joined the New Jersey Volunteers as a Lieutenant and served into 1781. He died in New York in 1782. William’s brother, Shore Stevenson, was arrested by David Forman’s men in late November, 1776, but he escaped. He was active in the Freehold-Middletown insurrection and participated in Thomas Kearney’s Loyalist association. Shore Stevenson was a London Trader and Loyalist partisan throughout the war. He was captured while London trading in 1781 and indicted for burglary in the Monmouth County courts in 1782. Richard Reading also participated in the Freehold-Loyalist insurrection. He drifted back and forth between American and British lines, ran afoul of New Jersey authorities, and was jailed in Morristown. He and his family were banished to Hunterdon County in September 1779, but fled to Staten Island instead. In June 1780, Reading captained a small Loyalist privateer, Revenge , but was captured and set ashore at Egg Harbor. He made it back to Staten Island, but was killed during a Continental raid in 1781. (See appendix for a detailed retelling of Reading’s sad story.) Michael Price was a Shrewsbury Loyalist who joined the British when the Loyalist insurrection in Shrewsbury was toppled by Francis Gurney’s Pennsylvania troops . Price owned a three-acre lot at Red Bank and a 49-acre farm. He frequently carried goods from Shrewsbury’s farm to market in New York. He captained the trading vessel, Peggy , during the war. After the war, Price described that he “joined the British Army in 1776 upon their taking possession of New Jersey, and he was obliged to fly the country upon their abandoning it [in January 1777].” The 1782 memorial of John Williams discusses another route to active Loyalist, one that included several months in prison before joining the British in the middle of 1777: Whereas your humble petitioner has always, from the first of these times, been a uniform friend to Government, was five years past, taken up with thirty-five others and marched to Fredericktown in Maryland, and there continued for six months, for his Loyalty to his sovereign, then tried for his life and required, but still refused, to take up arms against his Majesty. Finding he could not live there, he came within British lines for protection, then the rebels seized all his property, lands and stock, stripped his farms, and turned them out of doors, his family thought proper to come into British lines, has a wife and three small children and an old mother to support, and finding their needs more than he is able to do." Another Loyalist insurrectionary, Thomas Fowler of Upper Freehold, described living in a cave for a month after the collapse of the Loyalist regime. He was captured and failed to join the British: He (Fowler) and Walter Milton Thorn & Samuel Woodward pushed off to Shrewsbury, but the boats were destroyed and they could not get off. and they set off and came home, staid about 30 days & then went to live in a cave. and so did Nicholas Williams & Samuel Woodward, after which Walter Milton Thorn made his escape. Nicholas Williams & Samuel Woodward went to live in a poplar swamp, near John Stewart's, and Nick came to Fowler and told him that Bestedo [Lewis Bestedo] would be going to Bordentown, and persuaded him (Fowler) to go with him & they would go and take him and carry him to Shrewsbury, and they would take him [Bestedo] to the Hook, and he thought he would get Jesse Woodward to go & pilot them to Shrewsbury." As discussed in another article, Fowler and others were captured by Bestedo and jailed in far-off Sussex County. In July, they petitioned Governor William Livingston for relief: Your Petitioners, being confined as enemies of the American cause for some time past, and deluded by false information, petition for leniency… may it therefore please your honor to consider your petitioner's unhappy situation, and as they are very distant from their families, who suffer hard thro' inadvertently, as your petitioners are will convinced of their error, are willing to comply with the law provided for such unhappy men, to return to their duty; [pray] release of your petitioners from this deplorable place on some mode which your honor may think best. Fowler and his colleagues were not released but were transferred to the Burlington County jail in order to be closer to their families. Early 1777 was a terrible time for Monmouth County Loyalists—their insurrections were crushed and Washington’s victories at Trenton and Princeton ended hopes of a rapid British victory. But it was also the highwater mark for the New Jersey Volunteers (which swelled to become the largest Loyalist corps of the British Army). Of course, not all Loyalists went into the British Army. Loyalist emigration in 1777 also created the first cohorts of embittered Loyalist partisans who would lead raids back into Monmouth County and change the character of the local war. Related Historic Site : Conference House (Staten Island, NY) Appendix: The Sad Case of Richard Reading Richard Reading joined the British during the Loyalist insurrections of December 1776, though much of his extended family stayed home in Middletown. He was arrested on a trip home in late 1777 but apparently was not detained for very long. He likely signed a loyalty oath as was permitted to return home. Reading sailed illegally between Middletown and Staten Island (probably a number of times). Nathaniel Fitzrandolph of Middlesex County captured him near Staten Island in December 1778 and took his sloop. Reading was jailed in Morristown. While there, the Monmouth County Court of Common Pleas imposed an exceptional order on September 2, 1779: Whereas six respected and well-affected [inhabitants] from the neighborhood in which you reside have made oaths before us, John Anderson and John Lawrence, two of the Judges of the Court of Common Pleas.... That they believe you, the said Richard Reading, Catherine Reading and Ferdinand Reading, to be inimical to the present Government, and that your continuance near the lines is dangerous to the liberties of the State & safety of the well-affected inhabitants - Therefore, you are hereby commanded [to] within ten days, to repair to the County of Hunterdon & to remain in said County until you are lawfully discharged. Instead, the Readings fled to New York. A month after being banished, Richard Reading petitioned the British for relief: Richard Reading of Middletown, New Jersey had been forced to flee his home in 1776 and had the misfortune to be taken prisoner twice afterwards, spending fifteen months in jail. Upon his release in the Fall of 1779 he found to his dismay his wife and five children sent into the lines by the Rebel authorities in Monmouth County. His finances in ruins, his property confiscated and without employment, he was forced to do what would become common for hundreds of Loyalist families: grudgingly request provisions from the British. A tough circumstance indeed for a people used to self-sufficiency and personal responsibility. Reading was given a pension by the British, proof that he performed a tangible service for them. He bought a small farm on Staten Island and was joined by his wife, Catherine. But Reading returned to the sea as the captain of a small Loyalist privateer aptly named Revenge . He was again captured by a rebel privateer. He was brought to Egg Harbor, where he signed the parole notice below: I, Richard Reading, late Captain of the Armed Sloop Revenge was captured and brought into this place by Captain Rufus Gardner lately from New York do acknowledge myself Prisoner to the United States of America and pledge my Faith and Sacred honour that I will not say, do, or cause to be said, or done, anything that may inquire the Welfare of the said states by holding any Correspondence with the enemies thereof or those in any way opposing the measures enforced into by them with defence of their Liberty or that they may in any shape be Constructed so to be that I will go to Philadelphia and there deliver myself to Thom Bradford Com. Of Pris. Within three days from this date in testimony with where I have been held. Reading likely did not go to Philadelphia. He somehow made it back to Staten Island. In 1781, he was killed on his farm during a Continental raid. Sources : Compiled Muster Rolls of the New Jersey Volunteers, Library of Congress, MMC, Courtland Skinner, box 1; William S. Stryker, The New Jersey Volunteers in the Revolutionary War (Trenton: Naar, Day and Naar, 1887) p. 59. Gregory Palmer, Biographical Sketches of Loyalists of the American Revolution (Westport, Conn.: Meckler Publishing, 1984), pp. 825-6; Peter W. Coldham, comp., American Loyalist Claims (Washington, D.C.: National Genealogical Society, 1980), p 387, 398. Gregory Palmer, Biographical Sketches of Loyalists of the American Revolution (Westport, Conn. and London, 1984) p 703. Rutgers University Library Special Collections, Great Britain Public Record Office, Loyalist Application Claims, D96, AO 13/19, reel 6 amd AO 13/110, reel 10; John Stillwell, Historical and Genealogical Miscellany (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1970) v1, p 306-14; Deposition of Thomas Fowler, New Jersey State Archives, Bureau of Archives and History, Manuscript Collection, box 38, #36-37; Petition of Thomas Fowler, Jesse Woodward and Richard Robins, New Jersey State Archives, Collective Series, Revolutionary War Documents, #44; Peter W. Coldham, comp., American Loyalist Claims (Washington, D.C.: National Genealogical Society, 1980), p 408. Gregory Palmer, Biographical Sketches of Loyalists of the American Revolution (Westport, Conn. and London, 1984) p 719; David Library of the American Revolution, Great Britain Public Records Office, British Headquarters Papers, #2246; Memorial of Richard Reading, 10/6/79: -- Memorial of Richard Reading, October 6, 1779, Great Britain, PRO 30/55/2358; Parole affidavit of Richard Reading, taken at "Forks of Egg Harbor" 6/13/80, Witness Liba Wescott -- David Library of the American Revolution, Prisoners of War, #264, Parole letter of Richard Reading. 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 > British Counter-Attack American Privateers Off Sandy Hook by Michael Adelberg British frigates were uncommon at Sandy Hook later in the war, but a few frigates were based at Sandy Hook in spring 1780. They took several American privateers during a temporary offensive. - April 1780 - Prior articles have discussed the rise of privateering along the Jersey shore starting in 1778. American attacks on British shipping climaxed in 1779 and 1780 when New England privateers , often in small packs, hovered outside of Sandy Hook and took dozens of British ships. In spring 1780, New York-based Loyalist privateers scored some victories against small New Jersey ships and boats. Further, the British navy, though spread too thin to chase off the privateers, also scored victories against a few larger privateers. HMS Galatea and Vulture Attack Privateers In spring 1780, British frigates based at Sandy Hook, came outside the Hook to engage American privateers. In May 1780, the Connecticut Journal reported an April 13 incident off Manasquan: A few days ago, the privateer brig Rattlesnake, from Boston, on a cruize, was drove ashore on Squan beach by a British frigate from New York. As soon as she struck, and the guns were thrown overboard, 33 of the hands determined to make their escape by swimming but unfortunately, three were drowned. In the interim, the brig, by the swelling of the tide and the wind setting on shore, drifted inside the bar, by which means the remainder of the crew, except one, got on shore before the enemy reached the vessel. On taking possession, they [the British] plundered and set fire to her. The New York Royal Gazette , on April 19, reported on three incidents close to Sandy Hook: Last Saturday, a rebel brig privateer of 8 guns and 52 men was driven ashore about a half a mile from the Light House at Sandy Hook by his Majesty's ship Galatea; the crew are now prisoners and the vessel will probably be saved. The report continued with two other actions, one being the Rattlesnake (discussed above) and the other being the ship, Blacksnake , “the same day was driven ashore on Deal Beach, 12 miles off the Hook, another rebel privateer brig, by his Majesty's ship Vulture .” It was noted that these two privateers “sailed in company with two [other] privateers." The report concluded by noting one additional action. A rebel privateer was driven ashore near Sandy Hook by the Galatea . The crew, consisting of six officers and forty-five men, fitted [sic?] their vessel and attempted escape into the country; but being observed by the officer commanding at the Light House, a detachment was immediately sent in pursuit under Lt. [Samuel] Leonard, by whose address and gallant behavior the whole were made prisoners. Leonard was an officer in the New Jersey Volunteers , a Loyalist corps of the British Army that camped on Sandy Hook to defend the lighthouse and peninsula. Word of the beached privateers spread quickly and reached William Marriner, the daring privateer of the Raritan Bay. Marriner loaded a crew into a whaleboat and rowed outside Sandy Hook and down the shore to the stranded Blacksnake , which he reached on April 20. Within sight of the Vulture , Marriner’s men moored themselves to the privateer and quietly climbed on board. They floated the vessel and sailed off. That evening, at 5:00, they came upon the Loyalist privateer Morning Star , under Captain Robert Campbell, with four swivel guns and 33 men. Marriner made for the ship and grappled onto it. After an “obstinate” fight, Marriner’s men took the Loyalist vessel and brought both vessels into Little Egg Harbor. The fifty-two prisoners taken from the two vessels were taken overland to prison in Philadelphia, and New Jersey’s admiralty courts would condemn both prizes to Marriner. The Attack on the Arterial The best-documented action off New Jersey in spring 1780 was the near-capture of the British ship, Arterial, carrying the Army’s mail. The Connecticut Gazette and Boston’s Independent Ledger reported on the May 23 incident: Yesterday, returned into port [New London] from a cruize, the Hancock, Experiment and Young Beaver privateers. Last Tuesday, the above privateers, in company with the Holker of Philadelphia, fell in the Arterial, a packet commanded by Charles Newman, mounting 20 guns, at which time, the ship being near the east point of Sandy Hook, run ashore, by which they [the privateers] carried off the mail. The prize would soon have been got off, but the fleet coming out of the Hook the next morning, the privateers were obliged to flee, taking out a few articles. The Virginia Gazette published a June 17 report from New Jersey that adds some additional details on the incident: We learn that four privateers, three of them belonging to New London, on Wednesday last, drove a copper-bottomed ship ashore on Long Island beach six miles from Sandy Hook; she mounted 22 nine pounders and by some papers found on board proves to be the London packet, from Falmouth. The report stated that Arterial had a 55-man crew. While the privateers had to give up the prize when British frigates sailed toward them, the privateers “escaped with the mail.” Christopher Prince, a Connecticut privateer sailor, confirmed the reports. He wrote in his autobiography: "sailed in Hancock , which, along with Experiment, Young Beaver , and Holker , chased Arterial , a twenty gun packet, on shore near Sandy Hook on May 23." The Cruise of the HMS Eagle There may only be a single British naval source that documents the spring 1780 crackdown on privateers along the Jersey shore. Captain Henry Duncan of the HMS Eagle recorded his sail down the Jersey shore, starting from Sandy Hook on May 27. He recorded that "I was sent along the Jersey shore to endeavor to pick up two privateers said to be on the coast." He spotted the vessels the next day: In the morning, I saw a sloop & a schooner & gave chase; drove them both close to the beach; they then separated, the sloop [carrying 12 cannon], by far the larger, went before the wind to the northward; chased her but she kept close to shore. When I found she would not quit, we drove her on shore; the people [privateer sailors] dropped from the bowsprit into the water and got to shore; the sea broke all over her & I suppose she will not get off again. One of our boats stood in close for her, [but] was fired at by the people on shore; called her off. Surviving documents do not reveal whether the British counter-attacks on American privateers in spring 1780 were part of a deliberate strategy to retake the waters outside of Sandy Hook or were merely the byproduct of a temporary increase in British naval strength. In either event, the spike in British activity proved temporary and American privateers again were attacking British shipping with impunity by the end of the summer. Related Historic Site : Connecticut River Museum Sources : Connecticut Journal, May 4, 1780; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 4, p 308; American War of Independence at Sea - American Privateers: http://www.awiatsea.com/Privateers/B/Black%20Snake%20Rhode%20Island%20Schooner%20%5bCarr%20Pierce%20French%5d.html; William Horner, This Old Monmouth of Ours (Freehold: Moreau Brothers, 1932) p 70; Henry Duncan, The Naval Miscellany: The Journals of Henry Duncan, vol. 1 (London: Navy Records Society, 1909) p 192. 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

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 > Forman's Additional Regiment Merged into the New Jersey Line by Michael Adelberg Israel Shreve of Burlington County commanded David Forman’s Additional Regiment for part of 1778. Forman’s diminished regiment was eventually integrated into the New Jersey Line. - March 1778 - As noted in prior articles, David Forman was the most powerful man in Monmouth County throughout 1777—he commanded the Monmouth County militia (and the militia of bordering counties) as its Brigadier General and commanded an Additional Regiment of the Continental Army assigned to defend Monmouth County. However, Forman abused his power in a variety of ways. In November, the New Jersey Legislature voided the county elections in which Forman influenced the outcome and then Forman resigned his New Jersey militia commission in a related dispute with the legislature. David Forman Loses His Regiment Shortly after that, the New Jersey Legislative Council, the Upper House, learned that Forman’s troops were being used as a private labor force to construct a salt works at Barnegat. The New Jersey government complained of Forman’s conduct to George Washington. On March 25, 1778, Washington wrote Forman accordingly: The opinion of the Council of your State is so directly opposed to the continuance of the men at the salt works you are erecting that, to avoid the imputation of partiality and remove all cause for censure, both with respect to you and myself, I am induced to direct they may for the present join and act with Colo. Shreve's [Israel Shreve] regiment. Forman followed orders. On March 28, he filled out a list of officers (Major William Harrison; Captains John Burrowes, William Wikoff, Thomas Marsh Forman, John Combs; Lieutenants Gilbert Imlay, William Hall, Robert Pemberton; Ensign William Schenck) and ordered them to join the main body of New Jersey troops (commonly called the “New Jersey Line”} at Valley Forge. The orders included a note that Lt. Hall was a prisoner of the British. Forman recommended that his officers be allowed to maintain their rank (officers were sometimes squeezed out of their commissions when regiments were combined). Forman’s regiment had only four companies, three of which were greatly undersized—a full regiment had eight full-sized companies. Forman’s men marched to Valley Forge, Pennsylvania on April 10 and were likely re-uniformed out of the red coats that had caused them so much trouble at the Battle of Germantown and elsewhere. Immediately after leaving their camp at Manasquan, a Loyalist raiding party razed Forman’s Union Salt Works they had been guarding. Forman and Shreve appealed for help. So, Washington returned the men to New Jersey. An orderly book for the New Jersey Line noted "the detachment from Forman's Regt now in camp to be got in readiness immediately to join their Regiment [4th New Jersey] now in the Jerseys." The New Jersey Line consisted of four under-sized regiments at the time with the 4th Regiment actively recruiting in Monmouth County. The New Jersey government would soon consolidate the four regiments down to two to regiments and implement a draft to fill the ranks in the remaining two. Defending the New Jersey Shore The transfer of Forman’s men to the New Jersey Line left the New Jersey shore undefended, and its salt works were an attractive target for British and Loyalist raiders eager to punish rebels and disrupt the Army’s salt supply (necessary for preserving its food). On April 14, Washington wrote Governor William Livingston regarding the requests from New Jersey to better defend both the Atlantic shore and the western bank of the Delaware River from British raiding parties. I have ordered the few men of Colo. Forman's Regiment who are here, to join Colo. Shreve, which will make a small addition to his force, and it is my intention, if I can do it consistent with the safety of the Army, to send over another of the Jersey Regiments; but as this is a matter of great uncertainty, and will depend entirely upon my reinforcements; I would not wish that the people should count upon it. Washington ordered Colonel Shreve to guard shore from Shrewsbury to Egg Harbor. But also ordered him to be ready to leave the shore on short notice: "You will keep your troops under your command in a most compact order" and rejoin the main body of the Continental Army when the British Army leaves Philadelphia. Washington also took the opportunity to state his philosophy about using a regiment of Continental troops to guard an area—such as Monmouth County—that was vulnerable to British-Loyalist raids. A few hundred Continental troops quiet the minds and give satisfaction to the people of the Country; but considered in the true light, they do rather more harm than good. They draw the attention of the Enemy, and being not able to resist them, are obliged to fly and leave the Country at the mercy of the foe. But as I said before, the people do not view things in the same light, and therefore they must be indulged, tho' to their detriment. Over the next three years, Washington would repeatedly send detachments of Continental troops into Monmouth County—though he was deeply suspicious of the value of stationing troops there. Within days of Forman’s regiment leaving the shore, a punishing British-Loyalist raid destroyed several of the salt works. The Dissipation of Forman’s Former Regiment As for Forman’s regiment, by the summer of 1778, hard service and low morale took its toll and it withered further. Desertion advertisements demonstrate this. Historian John Rees wrote of the strength of Forman’s former regiment in September 1778. While Captain John Burrowes’s Company remained large (roughly 40 men), the other three companies had withered to near-nothing: Thomas Marsh Forman: 1 captain, 1 sergeant, 1 corporal, 1 musician, 4 privates present, 2 privates sick; Capt. John Combs: 1 captain, 1 sergeant, 1 corporal, 13 privates; Capt. William Wikoff: 1 captain, 1 sergeant, 2 corporals, 3 privates present, 3 privates sick, 1 sick absent, 1 on command. William Stryker, who studied New Jersey’s Revolutionary War soldiers in the late 1800s, claimed that Forman’s former regiment was down to 68 men at year’s end. The company of Captain John Burrowes was the only functioning company left of Forman’s regiment. A March 1779 return of that company documents its difficulties. The company included: Lt Gilbert Imlay, Sergeant Michael Erickson (reduced in rank in September 1778) and Corporal Jacob Allen. Several months after being taken away from Forman, the men were still identified as “Forman’s Regt” on some Army documents. The company had raised 36 privates in early 1777. Of these 36 men, half had enlisted for three years and would soon be eligible to leave the Army, and half for the “length of war.” Few of the men served without some type of interruption. By March 1779: 5 had deserted (3 returned), 1 dead, 1 captured (exchanged), 12 missed time due to sickness (many noted as “sick at Freehold”), 9 missed time due to furlough, 2 confined by the Continental Army, 5 sent “on command” to Shrewsbury in September 1778. It appears that the withered Additional Regiment was eventually combined with Monmouth County’s 1778 draftees and other later recruits and consolidated into two companies under Burrowes, who was eventually promoted to Major, and put in command of the two companies. A third company of the New Jersey Line from Monmouth County was commanded by Captain Jonathan Forman and never had a relationship with Forman’s Additional Regiment. The Monmouth men were now integrated into the New Jersey Line. Their service under General John Sullivan in a campaign against the Iroquois is the subject of another article. Related Historic Site : Valley Forge National Historical Park Sources : David Forman, Troop Return, Library of Congress, George Washington Papers, Series 4, reel 48, March 28, 1778; Orderly Book, National Archives, Misc. Numbered Records, 3: 19; 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. 11, pp. 256, 436; Berg, Fred A., Encyclopedia of Continental Army Units: Battalions, Regiments, and Independent Corps (Harrisburg, Pa.: Stackpole Books, 1972) p 43; Forman’s Additional Regiment returns, Revolutionary War Rolls, National Archives Microfilm Publication M246, Record Group 93, reels 126-129. Transcribed by John U. Rees; Capt. John Burrowes, Muster Rolls, National Archives, Revolutionary War Rolls, Coll. 105, p2-33; William S. Stryker, Officers and Men of New Jersey in the American Revolution (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co, 1967); Israel Shreve, Return, The Papers of the Continental Congress, reel 169, 143, Israel Shreve to George Washington, February 25, 1779. Transcribed by John U. Rees. 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 > The Difficult History of the 1st Battalion of New Jersey Volunteers by Michael Adelberg Re-enactors in the uniform of the 1st Battalion of the New Jersey Volunteers. Raised from Monmouth County in 1776, the battalion would re-organize and lose cohesion as the war went on. - May 1777 - In the days leading up to the signing of the Declaration of Independence, Elisha Lawrence, the Monmouth County Sheriff under the Royal Government, led approximately 60 men from Upper Freehold Township to the British base at Sandy Hook. There, they joined the British Army. They became the 1st Battalion of the New Jersey Volunteers . Lawrence and his men went to Staten Island to drill and wait for the opportunity to be useful. Historian Todd Braisted, who has comprehensively studied the New Jersey Volunteers, notes that the 1st Battalion saw its first action in October 1776 when it participated in repelling a Continental incursion into Staten Island. Sergeant Lewis Barber was killed in a guard boat off of Staten Island shortly after that—the battalion’s first combat death. In December 1776, Lawrence returned to Monmouth County and raised 200 Loyalist militia and recruits at Freehold, only to be routed by a regiment of Pennsylvanians on January 2, 1777. After that, Lawrence withdrew inside British lines. The 1st Battalion spent the early months of 1777 at Woodbridge, New Jersey, helping to form the British perimeter that rimmed its encampment around New Brunswick and Amboy. These were hard months for the regiment. Lawrence recalled camping "at an outpost on the Raritan River, where he remained for six weeks until his party was reduced by deaths, prisoners & sickness to only 25 men fit for duty, owing to the exceptional duty & extreme cold weather." When the British quit New Jersey, they returned to Staten Island (July 1777). This would be the battalion’s home for the rest of the war. The 1st Battalion defended the island from Continental attack, but were caught off-guard when attacked by John Sullivan’s Continentals in August 1777. In that action, Lawrence, several of his officers, and 80 enlisted men were captured (64 from his battalion). While the 1st Battalion was the first and, initially, largest battalion, its character changed considerably over the course of the war—from a cohesive Monmouth County unit at the start of the war to a conglomerate of units and geographies by war’s end. Elisha Lawrence, himself, lost command of his battalion in 1778. 1st Battalion Guards Sandy Hook Defeated and depleted, the 1st Battalion was relegated to guard duty on Staten Island and Sandy Hook for the rest of the war. Most of the time, only a single undersized company of New Jersey Volunteers was stationed at Sandy Hook; they would stay for a month at a time; to be replaced by another undersized company. David Forman described the defenses at Sandy Hook a year after it was fortified in July 1778 (when the French Fleet threatened New York): The Hook at present is guarded by a Lieut and twenty of the new raised troops at the Light House - in the cedars are about 60 or 70 refugees, white and black... the enemy erected a battery at the point of the Hook; the works are now entirely out of repair, the cannon has long since been removed. The British navy supported the New Jersey Volunteers by stationing a ship at Sandy Hook. But by the later years of the war, rebel privateers and raiding parties made Sandy Hook vulnerable. Accordingly, General Courtland Skinner’s orders to the commanding officer at Sandy Hook mandated caution: You are to be careful that the men do not stroll about the Hook, but that they are always near the Light House & one half always within the stronghold during the day, & at night, the whole in the House, & a sentry always in the lantern by day… no expeditions with the refugees are to be made without permission. The orders allowed the New Jersey Volunteers to admit deserters from the Continental Army and militia, but “women who have joined their husbands and child within the lines -- they are not to be committed... they are to be sent back." Officers were also instructed to learn the geography of the Hook, including “the Gut,” a channel of water that, due to violent storms, made Sandy Hook an island during the winter of 1777: You will as soon as you can view the Gut, Spermacity Cove and the Cedars and the grounds in your front, that you and your officers may have knowledge of the whole & should the enemy pass, you may be able to follow with a party. -- You will not pass the Gut at any other time than high water, lest the enemy, who can pass easily [onto the Hook] at low water should be concealed in the high Cedars on the opposite shore... Never follow the enemy at night. The Monmouth militia was similarly interested in the Gut and widening it to prevent Loyalists from coming off the Hook, and opening Shrewsbury Inlet to sail vessels at present-day Sea Bright. Militiaman Peter Paterson recalled his company opening the channel in the summer of 1777: He was moved with others by Genl. Forman to Shrewsbury Inlet which was then closed and was there some time -- three weeks at least, in opening said Inlet, and by that means depriving the British and Refugees of the facility they had enjoyed of coming over from the Hook and plundering the inhabitants. Other Duty of the 1st Battalion Beyond guard duty on Staten Island and Sandy Hook, the 1st Battalion participated in numerous raids against New Jersey including several into Monmouth County. The larger actions included incursions against Shark River-Manasquan (April 1778), Middletown Point (May 1778), eastern Middletown (April 17779), Tinton Falls, (June 1779), Middletown (June 1781), and Toms River (March 1782). One historian estimated that the New Jersey Volunteers (all battalions) participated in over 100 raids over the course of the war. Actual raids mixed with rumored raids. In October 1778, for example, a Staten Island spy sent the following note an unnamed correspondent in New Jersey warning of a potential attack against Monmouth County: Last night, I rcd [received] a letter from a corespondant in [New] York informing me that the Army was returning from the English naberhood and that the report in town was that they wair [were] to imbarck [embark] and land on Jersey at Shroesbury [Shrewsbury] or Mideltown [Middletown]. And directly after, I saw a number of flat boats coming up the Kill as was sent to take the baggage of the different ridgt [regiments] on Board. This faulty warning of an upcoming raid came while a large British-Loyalist raid, involving the 1st Battalion, was occurring against the Little Egg Harbor area. This raises the possibility that the warning was a deliberate deception aimed to keep the Monmouth militia from marching against the raiders. Long periods of inactivity filled the time between short periods of action. It is likely that the majority of men, separated from families, likely hated camp life. Roughly one third of the men brought their wives with them. A May 1777 British Commissary report from Staten Island noted the need to supply rations to 582 men and 179 wives (drawing 1/2 soldier rations). The troops and their camp-followers did not farm or fish in any great amount and were dependent on British support. In 1778, the New Jersey Gazette noted that “they [the New Jersey Volunteers] have no provisions or stores of any kind, but what are drawn of N. York.” Shortages of military supplies were also acute at times. An inventory of James Nealon’s company showed that the company had only half a full complement of ammunition: “Ammunition in Possession - 768. Ammunition Wanting - 752.” With Lawrence captured and his battalion decimated, the battalion fell on hard times. According to a November 1777 muster roll, the battalion had 64 men held as prisoners and was 391 “wanting to complete.” An undated muster roll, likely late 1777 or early 1778, lists only 92 men “fit & present.” Other New Jersey Volunteer battalions were also under-strength. Lawrence was pushed out of his command while a prisoner—as the 1st, 5th and 6th battalions were combined in July 1778 into a new consolidated 1st battalion. Command given to Sussex County’s Joseph Barton, leader of the 5th battalion. Lawrence was retired on a half-pay pension without his consent. Braisted noted that resentments ran high between the original Monmouth County officers, who remained loyal to Lawrence, and the new Sussex County senior officers. This led to various quarrels between the officers, exacerbated by General Skinner, who remained friends with Lawrence. Lawrence returned as a staff major and was loaned a company from his battalion to lead a raid against a Continental detachment at Manasquan in April 1780. All of the squabbles and intrigue hurt the effectiveness of the 1st Battalion. It marched with British regulars and participated in the Battle of Springfield in June 1780, but was otherwise not requested to join with British regulars in formal battle. As noted by Braisted, the battalion continued to diversify, but with little success. An attempted absorption of a company of Gloucester County Loyalists led to most of the Gloucester-men deserting within weeks of the attempted integration. Continental Army deserters joined the battalion but these men were not committed Loyalists and most quickly deserted. New Yorkers, Pennsylvanians and Marylanders drifted into the battalion. In 1781, Barton was cashiered from service and replaced by Stephen DeLancey, a New Yorker. The original battalion of the New Jersey Volunteers was no longer led by a New Jersian. The 2nd Battalion of the New Jersey Volunteers, raised from Shrewsbury and the Monmouth County shore, was comparatively more successful. Led by John Morris, a career British officer who settled along the Monmouth Shore in the 1760s, the 2nd Battalion was judged worthy of campaigning with British regulars. It fought at Brandywine, Germantown and Monmouth. Later in the war, it sent companies with the British Army into the Carolinas and fought at Eutaw Springs and King’s Mountain. Morris did not last as battalion commander. In fall 1780, he was listed on a New Jersey Volunteer muster roll as a “cripple.” Morris finished the war on a half-pay pension in New York. Related Historical Site : Sandy Hook Lighthouse Sources : New Jersey State Archives, Adjutant General's Loyalist Manuscripts, Muster Rolls of New Jersey Volunteers, microfilm; Linda Grant-DePauw, FORTUNES OF WAR: NEW JERSEY WOMAN AND THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION New Jersey's Revolutionary Experience (Trenton: New Jersey Historical Commission, 1975) pp. 25-6, New Jersey Volunteers, Troop Return, Library of Congress, MMC - Courtland Skinner, box 5; Library of Congress, Early American Newspaper, New Jersey Gazette, reel 1930; Strangely Contaminated: The Loyalists of New Jersey; New York State Library, https://www.njstatelib.org/strangely-contaminated-the-loyalists-of-new-jersey-program-recap/ ; Braisted, Todd, A History of the 1st Battalion, New Jersey Volunteers, http://www.royalprovincial.com/military/rhist/njv/1njvhist.htm#:~:text=Led%20by%20the%20young%20and,grow%20in%20size%20and%20activity ; Rutgers University, Special Collections, Loyalist Compensation Applications, Elisha Lawrence, Coll. D96, PRO AO 13/110, reel 10; John Vanderhoven, Intelligence, in The Papers of George Washington, Revolutionary War Series, vol. 17, ed. Philander D. Chase. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2008, pp. 412–416, note 2; Nealon’s Troop Return, Clements Library, U Michigan, MacKenzie Papers, March 11, 1780; Monmouth County Historical Association, Diaries Collection, box 2, John Stillwell's Diary (photocopy); Return, New Jersey Volunteers, New Jersey State Archives, Dept of Defense, Military Records, Revolutionary War Copies, box 29, #14; Courtland Skinner, orders, David Library of the American Revolution, Great Britain Public Records Office, British Headquarters Papers, #4481; Spermacity Cove, the cedars and the ground in front so as to be able to follow should the enemy pass" -- BF Stevens, Report on American Manuscripts in the Royal Institution of Great Britain (London: Mackie & Co, 1906) v2, p468; National Archives, revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - Peter Paterson; Michael Adelberg, Biographical File, at the Monmouth County 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 > Lt. Colonel Gurney's Campaign Against Monmouth Loyalists by Michael Adelberg Francis Gurney led a regiment of Pennsylvanians on a month-long campaign during which he scattered Loyalists and seized large amounts of provisions intended for the British Army. - January 1777 - On January 2, 1777, Pennsylvania troops, under Lt. Colonel Francis Gurney, routed the newly-raised Loyalist militia of Monmouth County in a short battle just east of Freehold. Yet even with the Loyalist militia scattered, other aspects of the embryonic Loyalist regime remained in place in Middletown and Shrewsbury —at least until Gurney toppled them. Dispersing the Remaining Armed Loyalists A week after the battle near Freehold, a group of armed Loyalists caught the attention of the Continental Army. On January 9, General Israel Putnam, stationed at Crosswicks, wrote: “The Tories of Monmouth County are again in arms, Col. Gurney marched today to suppress them; the militia of the neighborhood of Cranbury are embodied and impatient to join and assist them." Two days later, Putnam reported to Congress on the continued Loyalist threat: The Tories of Monmouth are making great head, ravaging and plundering and disarming the well-affected inhabitants. I have sent off 200 men with Colonel Gurney, he will be joining some of the militia. I have no doubt of hearing of his success in a day or two. The location of the armed Loyalists is not stated but it is probable that they were based near present-day Matawan. A Loyalist association led by the wealthy merchant Thomas Kearney was operating there. This part of Monmouth County was near the British Army base at Perth Amboy and there are mentions in antiquarian sources of a stockyard there for supplying the British. One of Gurney’s soldiers, Robert Strain, recalled seizing a ship, presumably near the stockyard. “They went to Middletown NJ where they took a prize supposed to be worth 100,000 pounds, and which supplied the whole army all winter." Gurney likely scattered the Loyalists near Matawan and then moved on. By January 14, he was in Shrewsbury where he scattered another Loyalist party. He then wrote to Putnam to request a cannon and wagons: I must beg you Immediately send me one field piece. I find the enemy have not got their vessels out of the creek [Shrewsbury River], and should the Artillery come in time have no doubt of taking them. We have more plunder or rather King’s stores than we can get wagons to carry off. I wish you would send forward all the wagons you can collect. I would advise a company to be sent to the Court House in order to press wagons and bring them down. Gurney also warned about a future confrontation with Loyalists: “I am just now Informed that the Enemy have landed a party at Red Bank to the northward of Black Point, and am determined to march that way immediately with about one hundred men.” The next day, a party of Pennsylvanians under Colonel Richard Humpton chased a Loyalist group into a waiting boat. The Loyalists “were obliged to make a precipitate retreat on board the English men of war.” The Curious Case of the Good Intent Gurney also wrote the Pennsylvania Court of Admiralty (New Jersey lacked an Admiralty Court until 1778) a lengthy letter about the schooner, Good Intent , commanded by Captain Sands. The vessel was “employed to transport supplies to the Fleet and Army of the King of Great Britain” until it beached near Black Point. Gurney took possession of the vessel and claimed its cargo of sugar, spirits, and clothing as a “lawful Prize & Booty of War.” He asked the court to consider the capture so that it “may be adjudged and condemned as forfeited and a lawful Prize." According to depositions taken by Gurney, the Good Intent went from Jamaica to Sandy Hook and communicated with the Light House. But it was too far away to be protected when a French privateer under Captain Morderet chased it. The Good Intent beached at Black Point. A sailor from the Good Intent testified: That after landing they all went up to a small house & there slept that Night. That the next Day they applied to the Inhabitants for assistance and about eighty or a hundred came down for that Purpose & got on Shore a very considerable Part of the Cargo. From Sandy Hook, the British saw the activity. They “sent a Tender & two armed Boats to prevent the same means from saving any more of the Cargo & Destroy the Vessel.” But the crew of the Good Intent and locals (many of whom were likely disaffected from Continental cause) now fought the British in order to preserve the valuable cargo and vessel. The sailor testified that the British “were beat off by the Americans. This deponent & two of the Crew took arms to assist in beating off the Enemy.” With his vessel in the hands of Whigs, the owner of the Good Intent , D. Chenier, issued a public notice: To all Persons whom it may or shall concern in the Monmouth County in the Jerseys, Be pleased to deliver Capt. Sands the sundry articles saved from the Schooner Good Intent cast on Shore from Jamaica as he commanded that Vessel. The status of the Good Intent was not quickly decided. As late as 1779, the Pennsylvania Court of Admiralty was seeking to determine who was entitled to the vessel and its cargo. Benjamin Randolph, a merchant from Toms River, testified that he was releasing his claim to the vessel’s cargo, some of which was stored with him. Randolph suggested that he was the one who told Gurney of the vessel and Loyalist stores at Shrewsbury. Randolph also said he “went to Black Point, took some Prisoners & returning found some stores at the House of one Hartshorne [probably Esek Hartshorne].” Randolph suggested that the French privateer did not have a valid claim to the vessel because he accepted a lesser payment: ”While the wagons were loading, Morderet asked leave to put a little box of his on the wagons and go to Philadelphia and had leave.” It is unknown whether the Good Intent and its cargo were condemned to Gurney, Sands, or Morderet. It is unlikely that Chenier received any compensation for the lost vessel. Like the Betsy , profiled in an earlier article, the Good Intent shows how complicated it was to determine ownership of captured vessels. Capturing Loyalist Stores While Gurney was at Shrewsbury, Col. Humpton’s Pennsylvania soldiers entered Monmouth County and seized Loyalist stores on January 15. The Pennsylvania Journal & Weekly Advertiser reported: “A party of Col. Humpton's Regiment… went to Shrewsbury in Monmouth, where they took a large quantity of cloth and other stores collected by a sett of Tories, who infest that county.” Sergeant William Young, a prisoner of the British at Perth Amboy, reported on January 18: “Colonel Gurney has taken 90 baggage Wagons… 9 of the 90 wagons taken from the Enemy by Colonel Gurney are ammunition wagons.” General Putnam also wrote of Gurney’s windfall on the same day: He has taken a good quantity of stores that were sent there for the Tories enlisted under Morris [John Morris] and Lawrence [Elisha Lawerence] – thirty-five wagon loads of which have arrived at Crosswicks, and the Col supposes that about one hundred wagon loads still remaining; he discovers more daily -- they chiefly consist of rum, wine, pork and broad cloth. I have thought it best to let Lt. Col. Gurney stay down where he is, until the militia of that county are well-embodied, so as to be able to defend themselves. On January 20, Putnam noted receiving three prisoners from Shrewsbury – two were junior officers in the New Jersey Volunteers , John Throckmorton and Charles Cook. The third was none other than Colonel Charles Read. Read was the Burlington County militia colonel who led campaigns against Upper Freehold Loyalists in July and Shrewsbury Loyalists in November. After being confronted by Monmouth County’s Colonel David Forman and refusing to take a loyalty oath to the Continental government, Read sought to go over to the British. But he was taken by the Continental Army and detained. Read had been “discharged on giving his word not to quit Phila without leave.” Caesar Rodney at Trenton wrote on January 23 that Gurney had taken "a very large quantity of stores that were lodged there [Shrewsbury] and guarded by Skinner's Jersey Volunteers. Forty wagon loads of them arrived at Princetown, a great quantity of clothes and other English goods." The next day, General Putnam wrote Gurney about "Mr. Crane at Toms River” who “has collected a number of men and seized a quantity of wine.” Putnam asked Gurney to coordinate with Crane on the seizure. The enthusiasm with which the Pennsylvanians confiscated goods placed them at odds with leading local Whigs at least once. On January 29, Gurney wrote Daniel Hendrickson, the colonel of the Shrewsbury militia: "I am sorry that your man did not stay by the wagon; there is not the least foundation for us keeping the wagon, and let it be found where it will; you shall not only have it and the horses, but be paid for the hire of the team." Gurney, it appears, seized Hendrickson's wagon and team by accident. Gurney’s campaign was important enough to be reported in the newspapers of far-away cities. The Providence Gazette reported that “a party of our men under the command of General Putnam have taken 96 wagons at Monmouth, in New Jersey, loaded with baggage and belonging to the parcel of Tories." The Virginia Gazette half-correctly reported that Gurney “has retaken all the Hessian plunder which was stored at Shrewsbury meeting-house, with their clothes and necessaries, to the amount of 120 wagon loads." This report reveals that the Christ Church in Shrewsbury, a focal point of Loyalism before the war, remained so during the Loyalist insurrection. An inventory of one of Gurney’s wagon trains was compiled by Captain Francis Wade, the newly-installed Continental Commissary at Allentown. The caravan carried: “55 barrels of fresh pork, 59 sacks of peas, 3 turces of rice, 1 half-pipe of wine, 7 casks of rum, 3 barrels of sugar, 1 cask of limes, 17 hatchets, 2 iron pots, 3 iron kettles, and a half cask of oil.” Its total value was £905. Wade also noted that 20 casks of rum had already "went forward by Colo. Humpton to Morristown" and one pipe of wine and sugar was sent ahead to Philadelphia. The End of the Campaign By the end of January, Gurney was back in Freehold. General Putnam wrote to Congress about the improved conditions in Monmouth County: "The affairs in Monmouth wears a favorable aspect. The people of that County will again return to their duties. Col. Forman is sent there to command and put them in proper state of defence." Gurney’s campaign occurred without the Monmouth County militia, which had dissolved during the December Loyalist insurrections. But one Monmouth Countian, Dr. Nathaniel Scudder, was an important guide for Gurney. Scudder described his role: I myself marched with them until the enemy was entirely dispersed & their stores at Middletown seized, when I was obliged to attend at Freehold, on both account of furnishing a team to haul them [Tory stores] off & endeavor to rally the militia of the county. When Gurney left Monmouth County on February 5, Scudder wrote a thank you note that was printed in the Pennsylvania Gazette “expressing my gratitude to Col. Gurney” for his service in “a country where so many of the inhabitants were inimical to the cause.” Scudder continued: I have the greatest reason to think the salvation of the property and security of the persons of many friends of freedom [are]… owed to the spirited exertions of the two detachments which marched into Monmouth. In short, those detachments have rescued the county from the tyranny of the Tories and put it in the power of their own militia to recover and embody themselves in such a manner as to be able to stand on their own defence. Indeed, Gurney’s campaign was a great success. Monmouth County would never again have a Loyalist association capable of governing. Whether, as Scudder suggests, the Monmouth militia was ready to defend the county is another matter; the newly-reconstituted Monmouth militia would suffer its worst defeat of the war only a week later, at the Battle of the Navesink . Related Historic Site : Christ Church Sources : Letter, General Israel Putnam, January 9, 17777, viewed at http://www.fold3.com/image/#18947576 (original at the National Archives); National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, Thomas Brewer of PA, www.fold3.com/image/#10976408 ; Samuel Hazard, Pennsylvania Archives (Harrisburg: State of Pennsylvania, 1902) First Series, vol. 4, p 771; Francis Gurney vs. The Schooner Good Intent, Tam Ploy Claimant, Register of the Court of the Admiralty of State of Pennsylvania, Jan. 28, 1779, transcribed by Michael White; William Horner, This Old Monmouth of Ours (Freehold: Moreau Brothers, 1932) p 386; Pennsylvania Archives, Papers Relating to the War of the Revolution,1859, v 3, p89; Pennsylvania Archives, Series 1, Vol V, p186; Francis Gurney vs. The Schooner Good Intent, Tam Ploy Claimant, Register of the Court of the Admiralty of State of Pennsylvania, Jan. 28, 1779, transcribed by Michael White; Archives of the State of New Jersey, Extracts from American Newspapers Relating to New Jersey (Paterson, NJ: Call Printing, 1903) vol. 1, p 277; Letters of William Young, The Pennsylvanian Magazine of History And Biography. Vol.VIII, 1884, p269; National Archives, Papers of the Continental Congress, reel 178, item 159, #35; Pennsylvania Archives, Series 2, Vol I, pg 496; Caesar Rodney, Letters to and from Caesar Rodney 1756–1784, ed. George Herbert Ryden (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1933), pp. 170-1; Israel Putnam to Francis Gurney, Neilson Family Papers, box 1, folder: Rutgersania, Rutgers University Special Collections; Rutgers University Special Collections, Francis Gurney to Daniel Hendrickson, Hendrickson Papers, box 2; Providence Gazette, February 1, 1777; Virginia Gazette, February 7, 1777; 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. 185–186; Francis Wade, Inventory, Library of Congress, George Washington Papers, http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/P?mgw:7:./temp/~ammem_XXqo ::; Pennsylvania Archives, Series I, v5, p209; David Fowler, Egregious Villains, Wood Rangers, and London Traders (Ph.D. Dissertation: Rutgers University, 1987) p 49; Gaillard Hunt, Fragments of Revolutionary History (Brooklyn: Historical Publishing Club, 1892) pp. 112-5; Pennsylvania Gazette, February 17, 1777 (CD-ROM at the David Library, #23302). 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 > Associated Loyalists Embrace Policy of Retaliation by Michael Adelberg Gen. Henry Clinton restrained Loyalists from murdering American prisoners in retaliation for abuses against captured Loyalists. Loyalist mistreatment in Monmouth County was a major flashpoint. - January 1782 - As noted in a prior article, in October 1781, the Continental Congress issued a manifesto promising eye-for-an-eye retaliation against captured British and Loyalists for atrocities committed against citizens of the United States. Emboldened by this manifesto, Monmouth County’s Association for Retaliation , a vigilante society, increased the quantity and severity of its acts against its real and perceived enemies. The movement toward more severe retaliation—through which a prisoner would be punished for abuses unrelated to his own acts—progressed on both sides. From New York, the Associated Loyalists were a body of embittered Loyalist refugees who raided into the American countryside in order to punish rebels and bring much-needed farm goods into New York (for which they were paid good prices from British commissary officers). But British commanders never liked the Associated Loyalists—resenting their independence and indifference to the rules of war. Henry Clinton, commanding British forces in America, called the Associated Loyalists "over sanguine refugees whose zeal has but too often outrun their prudence." British Leaders Restrain Retaliation The Associated Loyalists embraced retaliation largely due to events in Monmouth County. In January 1781, Loyalists were loaded in irons in the Monmouth County jail. Thomas Crowell (formerly of Middletown) of the Associated Loyalists loaded rebel prisoners in his custody in irons as an act of retaliation. But Crowell did not undertake more violent retaliation. Loyalist leaders understood that extra-legal murders were a step beyond what the British would tolerate, and an act that could ruin the reputation of men associated with it. The conversation about retaliation, however, continued. James Robertson, the Governor-General at New York wrote to Clinton on January 23. Robertson alluded to Clinton asking him if the civil government headed by Robertson might embrace a policy of retaliation. He acknowledged that Clinton "did not think it expedient to threaten military retaliation." Robertson noted Loyalist requests for retaliation but declined to embrace it himself, writing that Clinton "had already fallen upon a better expedient to recover the confidence of the Loyalists." The next day, Clinton wrote Lord George Germain, the British Foreign Secretary, about his discussions with Robertson and William Franklin (Chairman of the Associated Loyalists) about retaliation: In the cause of debate upon this subject, General Robertson having expressed himself of the opinion that it might be necessary for me to issue a proclamation threatening the rebels with retaliation for any injury they should inflict upon the Loyalists for having joined the King's Army; I told him that I thought punishments of that nature operated more properly in the civil jurisdiction and that a threat of retaliation from the Army would be altogether nugatory to the present hour. Clinton avoided taking a stand on the policy of retaliation; he simply stated that it was not a military matter. Germain had a warm relationship with Franklin and was likely lobbied by Franklin on the need for the British to embrace a policy of retaliation. Germain asked Clinton to offer a gesture of support for the Associated Loyalists if he would not accede to their request on retaliation. Accordingly, on March 9, Clinton wrote a public letter that was published in the Loyalist New York Gazette . Clinton (insincerely) expressed his “continued affection” for the Associated Loyalists and offered "assurances that no post, place or garrison in which Loyalists are joined with the King's troops will be surrendered on any terms which might discriminate between them." He remained silent on retaliation. Clinton’s letter was little solace for strident Loyalists who craved revenge. One such Loyalist was James Moody, who played a prominent role in the raid that razed Tinton Falls in 1779, and whose brother, John Moody, was a Loyalist horse thief killed in August 1781. Moody would write that the Associated Loyalists were "hand-in-glove with similar bodies of depredators on the American side" but were checked by the British, while American vigilantes went unchecked. Moody further wrote of the Associated Loyalists: “One of the objects of the organization was that the Associators could retaliate upon the Americans for outrages and murders committed upon the Loyalists.” And yet the British restrained them: Our Generals suffered these [rebel] executions of the Loyalists to go on, without ever attempting to put a stop to them by threatening to retaliate. Nay, they would not permit the Associated Loyalists to save their friends, by threatening to execute the Rebels, whom these Loyalists had taken prisoners, and they [the Loyalists] held in their own custody. However, Moody also understood that acts of retaliation might beget acts of retaliation from the other side, leading to a cycle of pointless escalation: “It is asserted by the enemy, I fear with good ground, that they are compelled to retaliate for the violences committed by the crews of [Loyalist] whaleboats.” This inspired Whig privateers such as Adam Hyler “that frequently land on Staten and Long Island without a pretense of authority and commit the same cruelties & depredations." Moody also noted that prisoners in the custody of hostile localities such as Monmouth County were subject to abuse. These prisoners should be put in custody of "Continental or State Commissaries of Prisoners." Associated Loyalists Embrace Retaliation There is little doubt that the leadership of the Associated Loyalists, and William Franklin in particular, wanted to kill a rebel prisoner as an act of retaliation. Thomas Leonard, formerly of Freehold, who had served as a major in the New Jersey Volunteers , recalled speaking with Franklin on April 1, 1782. He and Franklin discussed “the relief of Captain [Clayton] Tilton” (jailed in Monmouth County) and the murder of the Loyalist Philip White. Franklin said "he knew of no means to prevent the cruel & barbarous treatment but retaliation, which had been his sentiment from the first." Franklin reportedly said he would "order retaliation" were it within his authority. Two weeks later, Richard Lippincott, at the verbal direction of Franklin, murdered Joshua Huddy of Colts Neck. (The subject of another article .) Henry Clinton did not support Huddy’s execution. He called it "a very extraordinary outrage” and “an unprecedented act of barbarity." He concluded that, "I cannot too much lament the great imprudence shown by the Refugees." He accused the Associated Loyalists of showing only a "trifling" concern to Clinton's misgivings about retaliation. He ordered Lippincott's arrest and court martial to determine who was at fault. On May 1, Clinton stripped the Associated Loyalists of the power to cross enemy lines: "no expedition or excursion against the enemy shall take place from the posts under their [the Board's] charge, without his Excellency's particular orders." No such permission would be granted. The Loyalist publisher, Hugh Gaine, recorded on May 1: "Orders for this day for no farther hostilities at any of our ports, and the Refugees not to go out any more without orders." He also reported "much talk about poor Lippincott." Franklin laid low and then left for England to avoid Lippincott’s court martial and the building taint on his reputation. From England, Franklin stayed interested in the plight of Loyalists but now seemed to understand that the Associated Loyalists lacked the authority to execute a man as retaliation for an unrelated abuse. In June, he wrote Guy Carleton, Clinton’s successor, about the fate of Timothy Scoby and William Herbert, two more Monmouth County Loyalists jailed in Freehold and sentenced to death. Franklin complained: No crime is alleged against them, as we are well assured, but their Loyalty, and one of them was taken on shore going to purchase provisions, and the other within British lines. As it is not within the power of the Board to afford these poor Loyalists the relief they are entitled, especially as retaliation nor threats of retaliation, can be made by them [the Board] without the concurrence of the Commander in Chief, they must beg leave to subject the whole matter to your Excellency's determination. In Great Britain, the ethics of retaliation was debated through the end of 1782. In July, the magazine, The Political Magazine and Parliamentary, Naval, Military, and Literary Journal , printed several letters related to Lippincott’s court martial and rebel abuses. The editor claimed that retaliation, though unpleasant, was effective: This they did in two other instances previous to the death of Huddy and it produced the desired result in the quarter where it was done. Rebel murder and assassinations immediately ceased, and the Loyalists, when taken, were treated with humanity and exchanged; and their cannot be a possibility of doubt, but that had our Generals conducted the war upon the same politic and just principles, the lives of many hundreds of faithful British subjects would have been saved, and the war carried on in a manner humane and civilized. Yet, we lack evidence that American leaders were intimidated into kindness for Loyalist prisoners because of the brazen mistreatment of rebel prisoners. The march toward the ultimate expression of retaliation—murder—in April 1782 suggests the opposite was true. The Associated Loyalists’ embrace of murderous retaliation was stoked by the Association for Retaliation of Monmouth County. Historian Simon Schama labeled retaliation a "brutal vendetta.” He also observed that the escalation toward murderous retaliation was "no surprise" given that men on both sides were motivated by revenge more than any other principle. Related Historic Site : Morris-Jumel Mansion (New York City) Sources : Henry Clinton, The American Rebellion; Sir Henry Clinton's Narrative of His Campaigns, 1775-1782, with an Appendix of Original Documents (Hamden, CT: Archon Books, 1971) p 192; Alexander Lawrence Flick, Loyalism in New York During the American Revolution (NY: Columbia UP) p113-4; James Robertson to Henry Clinton, Great Britain Public Record Office, CO5/1089, p415-6; Henry Clinton to George Germain, Great Britain, Public Record Office, Colonial Office, CO 5, v93, reel 8, #413; Transcript of the Court Martial of Richard Lippincott, http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/halew/Lippincott.html ; Cynthia Eldenberg, Jonathan Odell: Loyalist Poet of the American Revolution (Durham: Duke UP, 1987) p129-32; Library of Congress, Rivington's New York Gazette, reel 2906; Thomas Jones, History of New York During the Revolutionary War: And of the Leading Events in the Other Colonies at That Period (Ulan: 2012) pp. 481-3; Susan Burgess Shenston, So Obstinately Loyal, James Moody (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2000) p 138; Anonymous Account in Jared Sparks Collection, Harvard U - Houghton Library, MS Sparks, 49.2, #141; Thomas Leonard’s deposition at Richard Lippincott’s Court Martial, Great Britain, Public Record Office, Colonial Office, CO 5, v107, #240-2, 261, 268; Board of Associated Loyalists to Henry Clinon, Library of Congress, Richard Lippincott Court Martial, reel 1, #187; Henry Clinton to Board of Associated Loyalists in Edward H. Tebbenhoff, “The Associated Loyalists: An Aspect of Militant Loyalism,” New-York Historical Society Quarterly, vol. 63 (1979), pp. 142-3; Simon Schama, Rough Crossings, (NY: Harper Collins, 2006) p140-2; Francis Bazley Lee, New Jersey as a Colony and as a State (New York: The Publishing Society of New Jersey, 1902), vol 2, pp. 249-50; Paul Leicester Ford, ed., The Journals of Hugh Gaine, Volume I (New York: Dodd, Mead 81 Company, 1902), vol. 2, pp. 148, 152; Henry Clinton to George Germain, Great Britain, Public Record Office, Colonial Office, CO 5, v105, reel 8, #692-705; William Smith, Historical Memoirs of William Smith: From 26 August 1778 to 12 November 1783 (New York: Arno, 1971) pp. 507, 511, 529; William Franklin to Guy Carleton, Great Britain Public Record Office, British Headquarters Papers, 30/55, #4768; The Political Magazine and Parliamentary, Naval, Military, and Literary Journal, July 1782, v 4, p 420. 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 Associated Loyalists by Michael Adelberg In 1780, New Jersey’s last Royal Governor, William Franklin, established the Associated Loyalists, a vigilante group. Potentially, 20% of the Associated Loyalists were from Monmouth County. - November 1779 - By the middle of 1779, thousands of Loyalists had been living as refugees in New York for more than two years—and they were frustrated. The British Army had stopped campaigning in the North and the navy had lost control of the waters outside of Sandy Hook. The confiscation and sale of Loyalist estates spiked their resentments, and so did a steady diet of reports of rebel abuse in New York newspapers. This May 1779 report is just one example. Continental authorities were reportedly "chaining men together by dozens and driving them like cattle, flinging them into loathsome jails, confiscating their estates, shooting them in swamps and woods, hanging them after mock trials; and all because they would not abjure their rightful sovereign." Officers, whether British or Loyalist, believed rebels were guilty of abuses against peaceable Americans whose only crime was remaining loyal to their King. Patrick Ferguson, a British officer who commanded and conversed with Loyalists daily (and raided Monmouth County twice) similarly observed: Ravages everywhere wantonly committed, without regard for sex or age, friend or traitor, and consequent alienation of every thinking mind from the Royal cause. Most of the houses are indiscriminately plundered, beds cut up and windows cut to pieces, the man robbed of their watches, shoe buckles and money, while their wives and daughters have their pockets and clothes torn from their bodies, and the father and the husband who does not survey all of this placid countenance is beat or branded with the name traitor or rebel. Establishing of the Associated Loyalists William Franklin, the son of Benjamin Franklin and last Royal Governor of New Jersey, emerged as the leader of an aggrieved set of Loyalists. In early 1779, the Loyalist Andrew Elliot wrote about the illegal lumber trade from New Jersey: "The refugees [are] all employed in cutting wood on rebel lands by which they make money and help keep the town well supplied; they wish much to be embodied under a command of their own." Franklin would soon provide Loyalists with “a command of their own.” On May 29, 1779, Franklin proposed a plan to General Henry Clinton, commanding British forces in America, to establish "a Board of Intelligence” through which Loyalists would be "united & employed for the purpose of procuring, digesting & communicating intelligence of the designs & motions of the enemy." The Board would take testimonies under oath, inspect captured letters, issue rewards for intelligence, maintain spies in rebel territory, and report useful intelligence to the British. While it is unclear if Clinton approved of this plan, the Board began forwarding intelligence to him in June. The Board of Intelligence soon gave way to a bolder endeavor. In November, Franklin and colleagues established the Board of Associated Loyalists. The Board sought broad powers to maintain its own: armed bodies, conduct raids, and capture and exchange prisoners. Clinton responded with suspicion. He did not ban the group, but limited its powers in two key respects. Clinton wrote that Associated Loyalist “descents” (raids) required the approval of a British officer and he further warned Franklin that "any persons whatsoever who shall attempt to pass the King's ships or posts or make a descent on the enemy, excepting on the above terms, shall be treated as disaffected persons or robbers." Clinton acquiesced to the Board regarding taking rebel prisoners and negotiating prisoner exchanges, but required that all exchanges be subject to the British-Continental negotiated prisoner cartel. Over time, the Associated Loyalists pushed past these rules. Historian Edward Tebbenhoff estimated that as many as 4,000 men participated in the Associated Loyalists but that, on any given day, the Associated Loyalist could only muster a fraction of their associators—as these men were employed in other pursuits. It is unfortunate that no list of Associated Loyalists has survived. On November 10, Franklin evaded Clinton’s request for a list, writing: “They are so scattered and have been so fluctuated from the practice of engaging themselves under different officers under different excursions that it is impossible to ascertain their numbers." While aspects of the Board’s powers remained at issue, the Associated Loyalists moved ahead. On November 24, the Board’s Secretary, Daniel Coxe, wrote Clinton about the Board’s formation. With false-sincerity, he stated: "We trust our conduct will always be such as to merit your Excellency's patronage and encouragement." A similar letter was sent to Admiral Marriot Arbuthnot, commanding the navy in America, two weeks later. The formation of the Associated Loyalist may have pushed Clinton to do more to govern Loyalists in New York. He wrote on December 15: "I have appointed Colonel Morris [Roger Morris] and William Bayard… to be inspectors of Refugees, from them chiefly, I will know what objects they desire and deserve." Clinton also complained about “a class of these men of more ardent & enterprising disposition, whose zeal & courage I have not been able to bend to useful purposes.” He went on: Their wish is to ravage from their oppressors the property which had often in the past been their own. Such dispositions, as they have induced the capture of obnoxious persons, militia, of forage wood and cattle, I was willing to encourage; but fearing indiscriminate depredations... I have endeavored to restrain their irregularities and invited proposals for introducing a certain discretion and subordination; these efforts have not yet had the wished for effect. However, it was not until spring 1780 that the Associated Loyalists publicly emerged. In March, they conducted a lottery to raise money for suffering Loyalist families; in June, they published a letter in the New York Gazette about the need for "the proposed association of Loyal Refugees." The emergence of the Associated Loyalists was watched in Monmouth County. On or about July 1, the county’s vigilant Revolutionaries founded their own extra-mural group to punish enemies, the Association for Retaliation . The Associated Loyalists, sometimes calling themselves "the Board of Refugees," advertised meetings in the New York Gazette and Weekly Mercury twice in October 1780. The delay likely was because of continued tensions with General Clinton. Tebbenhoff notes that Clinton had to be ordered to cooperate with the Associated Loyalist by British Secretary of State George Germain. It was not until December 1780 that the Associated Loyalists published their charter. In it, they noted that since start of the war: It has been often wished that some regular and efficient system was adopted for employing the zeal of that class of his Majesty's loyal subjects who were unwilling to become soldiers, though ardently inclined to take up arms and contribute towards reducing the rebels. The Board would coordinate Loyalist paramilitaries "for the purpose of annoying the sea-coasts of the revolted provinces, and distressing their trade, either cooperation with his Majesty's forces or by making diversions in their favour." The Board would conduct raids and take prisoners. They declared that "all captures made by associators will be their entire property." They noted that "the prisoners they take will be exchanged only for Associated Loyalists as the Board may name." Despite their independence, Associated Loyalist raiding parties would be supported with British ships, provisions, and hospitals. William Franklin was named to chair their seven-person board. Monmouth Countians in the Associated Loyalists In January 1781, the Board commissioned captains to raise companies of men; three--Richard Lippincott, Thomas Crowell, and Clayton Tilton—were Monmouth Countians. Lippincott reported on February 16 that he had raised 52 men, with two junior officers, Lieutenant John Woodward and Ensign John Irons. Since all three officers were from Monmouth County, it is probable that all or most of the 52 men were too. That same month, Franklin wrote that the Associated Loyalists numbered 500-600 men. If Crowell’s and Tilton’s companies were half the size of the Lippincott company, then roughly 100 Monmouth Countians were in the Associated Loyalists—nearly 20 percent of their membership—a remarkable figure from a single county, given that Associated Loyalists were recruiting from four states. Despite the large participation of Monmouth Countians in the Associated Loyalists, only a few postwar Loyalist compensation claims mention them. This is likely because the group fell into disrepute after Lippincott hanged Captain Joshua Huddy of Colts Neck (detailed in other articles). Lippincott’s application contains only a brief mention of the Associated Loyalists; John Leonard testified on behalf of Lippincott, "that he [Lippincott] was an officer with the refugees of New York & frequently was out with parties." Besides Lippincott, only one other Monmouth Countian explicitly discussed service in the Associated Loyalists. Jesse Smith, formerly of Shrewsbury, had William Franklin testify to his service. Franklin noted that Smith "was a very active and zealous partisan… particularly serviceable in bringing into New York, Lord Cornwallis' [Gen. Charles Cornwallis] men after the surrender at Yorktown.” Smith also “produced supplies for the navy & garrison at New York from the Jersies.” Franklin also noted Smith’s sacrifice: He was several times dangerously wounded; that I recommended him to Admiral [Robert] Digby who furnished him with twenty-five staves of arms, ammunition & provisions for the purpose of bringing off British prisoners kept by the rebels; that he is now greatly disabled, having had his right arm broke & several shot still remaining in him, which gives him great pain and renders him unfit to get his living by manual labor. All three Monmouth County captains were active. Thomas Crowell took prisoners, engaged in prisoner exchange negotiations with Colonel Asher Holmes of the Monmouth County militia, and was warned by the New Jersey legislature regarding his mistreatment of prisoners. He refused to hang Captain Barnes Smock in retaliation for abuses against Loyalists but testified in support of Richard Lippincott when Lippincott did so a few months later. Clayton Tilton was captured and indicted for murder in 1781. Rebecca Shepherd, wife of militia captain Moses Shepherd recalled his capture after the war: Samuel Carman came and & informed her husband that Clayton Tilton, a refugee of notoriety, was off & at home, her husband, John Truax and several more of his men went and took him - and brought the prisoner to their house. Tilton was exchanged and then attempted to negotiate another exchange. In March 1782, he led the incursion into Monmouth County that went badly and resulted in the capture of Philip White, who was subsequently murdered by his guards. Tilton was loaded in irons and convicted of High Treason, but exchanged. Like Crowell, he also testified about rebel cruelties at Lippincott’s court martial trial. Lippincott was the most active. In April 1780, he was in a raid that resulted in the murder of John Russell, Sr., and near death of John Russell, Jr. (the subject of another article.) He raided Toms River in early 1781, but was unable to take the ship that prompted the attack. He raided Manasquan in March and defeated the militia party there, and then captured a vessel near Egg Harbor. He captured a Monmouth County leader in April and then launched another raid from Sandy Hook in May. He attempted to negotiate a prisoner exchange in November without success. In April 1782, with the verbal approval of the Board of Associated Loyalists, he hanged Captain Huddy . The Disrepute of the Associated Loyalists The Associated Loyalists were known to the governments of New York and New Jersey, both of which appealed to the Continental Congress for help. The New York Assembly, in July 1781, wrote to Congress that parties of Associated Loyalists "come in small crafts to plunder, burn and destroy all in their power and carry into captivity unarmed citizens or lay them under parole.” It called on Congress “to stop the inroads and incursions of the Associated Loyalists." In December, Thomas Henderson of Freehold wrote the Continental Congress for the New Jersey Assembly. He called the Associated Loyalists "a new fangled body of Executioners” and further wrote: For the declared intention of distressing the Country [they] have commissioned a body of ruffians for the express purpose of plundering and destroying the well-affected inhabitants and kidnapping the most active defenders of the Country... and of carrying them into the loathsome dungeons of New York where, deprived of the necessities of life, they linger out a few days of painful existence till nature, overpowered by hardships, finds its relief to its sufferings in death. Henderson wanted Congress to threaten the British with eye-for-eye retaliation so that "the vengeance of an injured people may fall on British officers.” He called for New Jersey’s delegates to "press Congress not to make any empty declarations of purposes never to be executed." Henderson personally delivered the report to Congress. It is impossible to know the full activity of the Associated Loyalists. Newspaper accounts and the Board’s minutes mention their larger raids, including one against Toms River in March 1782. From these sources, we know that they raided north into Connecticut and Westchester County, east to the Hamptons on Long Island, and into New Jersey from Bergen to Monmouth counties. But small groups of Associated Loyalists made descents that were not explicitly authorized by the Board and went undocumented. For example, the small raid of Long Branch that led to Philip White’s capture would have gone undocumented were it not for White’s capture and murder being a prelude to Huddy’s hanging. Franklin claimed that the Associated Loyalists "occasioned alarm among the Rebels" because his men had "zeal to suppress the rebellion, heightened by the remembrance of the many insults & injuries they received." This ‘zeal” and “remembrance” of past injuries would push the Associated Loyalists to commit murder. In April 1782, Lippincott took Captain Huddy out of jail in New York, brought him to the Navesink Highlands, hanged him, and left his corpse swinging with a note proclaiming the act a retaliation for the murder of White, three weeks earlier. Retaliation was not a new idea in April 1782. After the surrender at Yorktown six months earlier, Franklin worried that the Loyalists with Cornwallis would “suffer death on account of their allegiance to the Crown” unless Clinton adopted a policy of retaliation. Franklin urged a proclamation: That retaliation shall be allowed to take place in the fullest context possible; or if this should be thought proper with respect to the British Army, that the Loyalists and refugees may have free permission to take and detain prisoners, & retaliate for the particular injuries they or their friends may sustain. Historian William Benton called the Associated Loyalists a "private army for personal reasons." In reality, the Associated Loyalists were much less than an army. They were a set of coordinated gangs tolerated by a British command unwilling to make the hard choice of reining them in. On the other side, the same dynamic existed between Monmouth County’s Retaliators and the New Jersey government. Related Historic Site : Harbor Defense Museum (New York) Sources : William Franklin to Henry Clinton, William Clements Library, Henry Clinton Papers, vol. 58, 60; Wallace Brown, The Good Americans: The Loyalists in the American Revolution, (New York: Morrow, 1969), p. 133; Ferguson quoted in North Callahan, Royal Raiders: The Tories of the American Revolution (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1963), p 10; Joseph Williams discussed in Gregory Palmer, Biographical Sketches of Loyalists of the American Revolution (Westport, Conn. and London, 1984) p 934; Elliott’s letter is in B. F. Stevens, ed., Facsimiles of Manuscripts in European Archives Relating to America, 1773–1783, [25 vols., London, 1889–1898], vol. 1, #115; William Franklin to Henry Clinton, William Clements Library, Henry Clinton Papers, vol. 74; Library of Congress, Rivington's New York Gazette, reel 2906; Henry Clinton to Lord Germain, Great Britain, Public Record Office, Colonial Office, CO 5, v99, #26; The lottery is noted in Wallace Brown, The Good Americans: The Loyalists in the American Revolution, (New York: Morrow, 1969), p. 107; Library of Congress, Rivington's New York Gazette, reel 2906; New York Gazette and Weekly Mercury, October 2, 1780, October 23, 1780; Transcript of the Court Martial of Richard Lippincott, microfilm, Library Congress; Library of Congress, Rivington's New York Gazette, reel 2906; Edward H. Tebbenhoff, “The Associated Loyalists: An Aspect of Militant Loyalism,” New-York Historical Society Quarterly, vol. 63 (1979), pp. 118-25, 127-39; William A. Benton, Whig-Loyalism: An Aspect of Political Ideology in the American Revolutionary Era (Rutherford, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1969) p 197; Loyalist compensation claims of Richard Lippincott and Jesse Smith in: Jones, E. Alfred. The Loyalists of New Jersey, (Newark, N. J. Historical Society, 1927) p 200. Rutgers University Special Collections, Great Britain Public Record Office, Loyalist Compensation Claims, D96, AO 13/111, reel 10; Rebecca Shepherd’s narrative is in National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - John Truax; George W. Kyte, “Some Plans for a Loyalist Stronghold in the Middle Colonies,” Pennsylvania History, vol. 16 (1949), p 179-87; William Franklin to Henry Clinton, Great Britain, Public Record Office, Colonial Office, CO 5, v93, reel 2, #454; Howard Peckham, Sources of American Independence: Selected Manuscripts from the Collections of the William L. Clements Library (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978) pp. 502-3, 529, 559 note; Clements Library, Proceedings of the Board of Directors of the Associated Loyalists, January 1781, p. 6; Howard Peckham, Sources of American Independence: Selected Manuscripts from the Collections of the William L. Clements Library (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978) pp. 604-7; Rutgers University, Special Collections, Loyalist Compensation Applications, Coll. D96, PRO AO 13/18, reel 6; William Franklin to George Germain, Great Britain, Public Record Office, Colonial Office, CO 5, reel 12, #382, 399; William Franklin to George Germain, Great Britain, Public Record Office, Colonial Office, CO 5, reel 12, #382, 399; George Germain to William Franklin, Great Britain, Public Record Office, Colonial Office, CO 5, v178, #455; New York Assembly to Congress, National Archives, Papers of the Continental Congress, M247, New York State Papers, v2, p430; The New Jersey Assembly’s report on the Associated Loyalists is in the Library Company, New Jersey Votes of the Assembly, December 15, 1781, p 58; Franklin‘s estimate is in North Callahan, Royal Raiders: The Tories of the American Revolution (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1963), pp. 244-5. Previous Next