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

The articles in the collection 250 for the 250th: The American Revolution in Monmouth County represent the most complete history of this topic ever assembled. < 250 Home < Previous pg. Next > The Greatest Privateer of the Jersey Shore by Michael Adelberg Philadelphia’s Fair American was the most prolific privateer vessel to sail the Jersey Shore during the Revolutionary War. Captained mostly by Stephen Decatur, it took at least sixteen prizes. - June 1780 - Prior articles discussed the rise of privateering on the Jersey shore starting in 1778. Yelverton Taylor and a number of small vessel captains from Philadelphia based themselves at Little Egg Harbor (called Egg Harbour) and took dozens of smaller British and Loyalist ships coming to and from New York. In 1779, New England privateers began “cruising the lanes” outside of Sandy Hook. They engaged and took dozens of larger British ships. The greatest prize taken off the Jersey shore may have been the Triton , a British troop transport that separated from other ships in its flotilla during a storm and lost a mast. The wounded ship was taken by Taylor and a second privateer. On October 1, 1779, they brought the Triton into Egg Harbour with 214 German soldiers as prisoners. After this event, Captain Taylor retired. The captain of the second privateer, Rhode Island-born Stephen Decatur, emerged as an even greater privateer captain. Decatur’s first documented prize was brought into Egg Harbour on November 11, 1779. Zuriel Waterman, a surgeon on board the privateer Providence , reported from Clamtown (near the southern tip of Monmouth County) that the privateer Comet under Captain Decatur had captured a prize vessel and brought it into Egg Harbour with cargo of "naval stores." With prize money from this capture and a share of the Triton , Decatur was apparently able to move to a larger ship, the 16-cannon, 125-man Fair American . He prepared for greater activities. Decatur soon teamed with the Massachusetts privateer, Jack , (captain Nathan Brown) and the Pennsylvania privateer, Argo, to capture Swallow . The 4-gun merchant vessel was on its way from Madera to New York with cargo of foods and gunpowder. Decatur then took a second vessel off Jersey shore. He escorted his prizes to Cape May to prevent their re-capture. Stephen Decatur’s Greatest Jersey Shore Prize The Pennsylvania Evening Post reported on June 3, 1780, Decatur’s actions on May 29. Decatur was “standing in here [Philadelphia] with our prize, brig Nymph , formerly the privateer Neptune of Philadelphia” when he came upon a second vessel. The report continued: We perceived two small sail standing in for Sandy Hook, which we gave chase to and came up to very fast; at eight o'clock the smallest sail bore away, and we stood after a small river schooner, which we soon took; she proved to be a prize loaded with indian corn, taken by a whale boat of thirty or forty feet long, open decked, called Lewistown Revenge, commanded by Hall, mounting one blunderbuss in her bow, one swivel in her head, and sixteen muskets and thirteen men; we then gave her chase, and took her about ten o'clock. He has a proper commission, and has been on our coast since the 13th of March, during which time he has taken twenty-eight prizes, loaded with different products for the Philadelphia market, and the boat which has so much annoyed the trade with our bay and river this spring. Decatur had taken Lewistown Revenge , the daring and famous Loyalist privateer that had been lionized in Loyalist newspapers. While the claim that Lewistown Revenge had taken 28 prizes is certainly exaggerated, Decatur’s capture of the most famous Loyalist privateer cannot be minimized. The New Jersey Gazette happily reprinted the news on June 14. Decatur’s Other Prizes According to the online database, American Independence at Sea , the Fair American , in concert with one or two other vessels, took a dozen vessels in the summer of 1780 alone. This makes Decatur the most successful privateer of the Jersey shore during the Revolutionary War. See table 11 for Decatur's 1780 successes. Throughout August, Decatur teamed with captain Roger Keane , commanding the 16-gun Philadelphia privateer, Holker . For most of his captures, teamed with a third vessel as well. As described by historian Donld Shomette, Decatur’s greatest loss was inflicted by the Continental Navy. On August 31, Fair American , General Greene, and Holker sailed for Philadelphia. While entering the Delaware River, the privateers were stopped by two Continental vessels--Trumball and Deane--and boarded. Continental press gangs took 59 sailors off the privateers. Maritime historian Donald Shomette notes that there was a shortage of American sailors by the middle years of the war, privateer captains were forced to rely on "untrained landsmen" to man their ships. Decatur did not put to sea again until October—probably because he needed to recruit and train new sailors. When he sailed again, he headed for South Carolina, perhaps to avoid additional run-ins with Continental ships. Off Charleston, Decatur took a British vessel carrying specie—the L175,000 cargo was his most valuable prize of the war. After this capture Decatur, now a rich man, apparently retired. Fair American , with a Captain Eldrigdge at the helm, took to sea again in 1781. It was involved in four more captures. On October 17, 1781, the Pennsylvania Evening Post reported: The privateer Fair American under Capt. Eldridge has brought four prizes from the same fleet into Philadelphia... All were part of a British fleet that was scattered in a storm from its navy escorts before entering Sandy Hook. Cargoes of foodstuffs, porter, dry goods, etc… the loss of which goods will be greatly felt by the enemy. This would be the last successful voyage for the Fair American . On January 16, 1782, the New Jersey Gazette printed a January 2 report from a Loyalist newspaper. The report noted that the British ship, Garland , had taken the “famous privateer” Fair American in the Delaware Bay. The report noted that the elusive Fair American "for the past two years, always escaping our cruisers by the swiftness of her sailing." Stephen Decatur would not take to sea again during the Revolutionary War, but he would continue on as one of the great heroes in American maritime history. He was a United States Navy captain who took a number of prizes during the naval war between the United States and France during the Washington administration. His son, also named Stephen Decatur, would become a national hero for his daring marine attacks during the American war against the Barbary Pirates during the Jefferson Administration. Related Historic Site : National Museum of the U.S. Navy Sources : Zuriel Waterman, Rhode Islanders Record the Revolution: the Journals of William Humphrey and Zuriel Waterman (Providence: Rhode Island Publications Society, 1984) pp. 77; Donald Shomette, Privateers of the Revolution: War on the New Jersey Coast (Shiffer: Atglen, PA, 2015); Library of Congress, Early American Newspapers, Pennsylvania Evening Post; Library of Congress, Early American Newspaper, New Jersey Gazette, reel 1930; Pennsylvania Evening Post, June 3, 1780; American War of Independence at Sea - American Privateers: http://www.awiatsea.com/Privateers/F/Fair%20American%20Pennsylvania%20Brig%20%5bDecatur%20Jakways%20Eldridge%5d.html ; Library of Congress, Early American Newspapers, Pennsylvania Evening Post; Library of Congress, Early American Newspaper, New Jersey Gazette, reel 1930. 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 British Burn the Sloop, Endeavor by Michael Adelberg In April 1776, a British Navy sloop sailed off Little Egg Harbor where it chased, beached and burned a small Continental vessel. This may have been the first maritime battle on the Jersey Shore. - April 1776 - With a British naval squadron in possession of Sandy Hook, it was perhaps inevitable that an enterprising British officer would request and receive permission to cruise the New Jersey shore in order to disrupt Continental shipping, avenge prior British captures , and acquire needed fresh provisions for hungry sailors deprived of New York’s markets. Though accounts differ on the exact date and other details, it appears that a well-armed tender of the British frigate, Phoenix , a sloop commanded by a Lieutenant Butler, left its mothership April 10, 1776. Its destination was Little Egg Harbor, the busiest port on the New Jersey shore and the only one capable of admitting deep-hulled vessels. At Tucker’s Island, outside of Little Egg Harbor (on the southern end of Monmouth County, which included present-day Ocean County), the tender found an attractive prey. The Pennsylvania Journal printed an account of what happened next: A small boat belonging to a sloop from Dartmouth, bound to Philadelphia in the Continental service, came on shore at Tucker's on Flat Beach, in whom came a Captain, a mate, and three foremast men belonging to said sloop, which was taken the first inst. in the evening by a King's tender, from out of Sandy Hook, who boarded and rifled her of everything valuable on board; after which they set fire to her and burnt her to the water's edge. The same report further detailed the skirmish that occurred when the Continental boat was captured: “The Capt. has one of his thighs broke and a musket ball thro' the other and the mate is badly wounded in the breast.” And the report revealed the intentions of the British, based on intelligence from a Barnegat man who was aboard the British ship: The said tender intended to come into our inlet with the first north-west wind to take off the cattle from the beaches and destroy all the vessels that were in here. The tender is a small sloop, mounted with two six pounders, four four pounders, some swivels and some small arms, with 36 men on board. Another account of the incident revealed that the Continental boat, Endeavor , commanded by Captain Job Tripp, “was chased and came up with” by the British tender: The tender was not content with firing a broadside at Capt. Trip's vessel, after she had hauled down her sails, but went alongside, after using much scurrilous language, ordered another broadside to be fired, by which Capt. Trip received a ball in his thigh, which has broke... The Mate also had a ball went through one thigh, and lodged in the other; an officer afterwards came on board and told Capt. Trip, that Butler, the Captain of the tender, out of his clemency had consented to give him his boat, on condition he would make the best of his way ashore. Captain Tripp initially claimed that he and his crew were too badly wounded to get themselves to shore, though they eventually did so by driving the Endeavor onto the beach. This likely angered the British and may be the reason they burned the ship. This report concluded that, “The Captain and Mate are both dangerously ill, having been thirty-six hours without any suffering to their wounds. The tender's people, after plundering the sloop, scuttled and set her on fire." On April 20, depositions were taken from two of the surviving sailors, Job Tripp and James Cathill. Their accounts add visceral details about the skirmish: We hailed them twice with our trumpet, but received no answer, but another firing, and hove about, and made after us. We still kept our course, and they after us, continually firing, till about ten o' clock at night. At that time they were about a swivel-shot distance from us ... We immediately hove to, and hauled down our foresail, and were busy in hauling down our mainsail, when they fired a broadside at us; which felled both the Captain and Mate. By their account, they fired two volleys of small-arms just as they fired their cannon and swivels; each volley ten guns. Their carriage-guns and swivels were two four-pounders and six swivels on each side. The Captain was wounded in the thigh, which we imagine to be a swivel-ball, which broke the bone, and shattered it very much. The Mate was also wounded in both thighs; the ball went through the fleshy part of the right, and lodged in the left. A follow up report on the incident, also published in the Pennsylvania Journal , revealed an important additional fact. The man from Barnegat who was aboard the British tender was Arthur Green, who reportedly gave the British “an account of all the inlets about there.” The British used him as their pilot during the attack and the report suggested they would do so again. This appears to be the first instance of a shore resident working directly against the Continental cause; it certainly would not be the last. American sailors were undeterred by the defeat and destruction of the Endeavor . On April 22, a six-gun tender of a British frigate was captured off the New Jersey coast by Captain Barry of Pennsylvania; that same month, the Continental government, in combination with the state of New York, assigned two midsized ships, General Schyler and General Mifflin , to cruise the Jersey shore to pick off vulnerable British shipping and to protect American shipping. The British countered with their own naval build-up, which is the subject of another article . Related Historic Site : National Museum of the Royal Navy (Portsmouth, UK) Sources : Peter Force, American Archives: Documents of the American Revolution, 1774-6 (digitized: http://dig.lib.niu.edu/amarch/find.doc.html), v5: p 1003-4; Gardner W. Allen, A Naval History of the American Revolution (1912, 1940, reprinted New York: Russell & Russell, Inc., 1962), p 86; Pennsylvania Journal, April 10, 1777; The North British Intelligencer or Constitutional Miscellany (Edinburgh: William Auld, 1776) v 1, p 347; John Jay Papers, Columbia U., digitized, http://wwwapp.cc.columbia.edu/ldpd/jay/image?key=columbia.jay.01088&p=3&level=2&originx=0&originy=0&fullheight=2768&fullwidth=2133ℑ.x=129ℑ.y=20 ; Journals of the Provincial Congress, Provincial Convention, Committee of Safety and Council of Safety of the state of New-York (Albany: Thurlow Weed, printer to the State, 1842) vol. 1, p414; Maryland Journal, May 1, 1776; Pennsylvania Journal, April 17, 1776. 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 "Tory Ascendancy" in Shrewsbury and Down the Shore by Michael Adelberg At the Battle of Trenton, the Continental Army routed the Hessians and turned the British Army back toward New York. Monmouth County volunteers joined the Continental Army for the attack. - December 1776 - As discussed in other articles, in late November, 1776, the Continental Army retreated across New Jersey and the British Army entered New Jersey. On November 30, General William Howe, the British Commander in Chief, invited the citizens of New Jersey to sign a loyalty oath and receive British protection from any future rebel harassment. Across New Jersey, but particularly in Monmouth County, disaffected New Jerseyans switched sides. In Monmouth County, Loyalist insurrections sprung up in Upper Freehold, Freehold-Middletown, and from Shrewsbury down the shore. The December 1776 Loyalist insurrection that occurred from Shrewsbury to Toms River was less organized than the insurrections in Freehold-Middletown and Upper Freehold . This may have been more a reflection of the region’s far flung geography than a lack of disaffected residents to power the counter-revolt. Just a few weeks before the December insurrection, Samuel Wright’s Loyalist association from the neighborhoods of Long Branch, Deal and Shark River was exposed and broken up. Wright and twelve of his men were captured. Immediately after, Colonel Charles Read of Burlington County led a short campaign that captured 70 more Loyalists. These events removed more than 80 committed Loyalists just before the start of the general insurrection. But even with these men in prison, there were many disaffected residents in the shore communities ready to support the British. The Insurrection Begins Pro-British rioting occurred immediately after Charles Read’s militia left Shrewsbury Township. On December 1, John Halloway, a Shrewsbury Township yeoman, plundered the home of Garrett Longstreet, an officeholder under the new government. According to the Supreme Court Indictment, Halloway led a gang of ten men who: With force and arms, to wit, sticks, staves, swords, guns and other offensive weapons… assembled and gathered together at the dwelling house of Garrett Longstreet, there situated, unlawfully & riotously did break open & enter a quantity of rum, sugar and cyder belonging to certain persons... in the said dwelling house, did take and carry away. This riot occurred on the eve of the insurrection—an insurrection that would begin with the return of John Morris and his battalion of Loyalists. The prior July, Morris (a former British Army officer who settled near Manasquan in the 1760s) led 68 Shrewsbury Loyalists to Sandy Hook and joined the British Army. They became the 2nd Battalion of the New Jersey Volunteers. When the tide of the war shifted and the British Army marched into New Jersey, Morris’s Loyalists entered Shrewsbury, probably on December 3. On that day, Robert Bowne, a Shrewsbury merchant, wrote that the British were “9 or 10 miles this side of Amboy, which has occasioned the Provincials [Morris’s men] to brave the guards along the coast." Bowne also noted that his kinsman, Thomas Bowne, from Queens, New York, was illegally traveling back and forth and transporting goods between Shrewsbury and British-held New York: Thomas has been down here several times this fall... the last he was here was about two weeks ago, when he brought down 1500 [Continental] dollars. Seeing no prospect of laying it out to advantage in these parts, we concluded [it] best for him to go to Virginia and lay out the same. From this letter, it can be inferred that disaffected Shrewsbury farmers were consorting with pro-British New York traders and that Continental dollars were not viewed as valid tender along the largely disaffected shoreline. Corroborating evidence of this is provided in prior articles about New York Loyalists hiding out in Shrewsbury and disaffected residents refusing to muster for the Monmouth militia. Loyalists Take Control A number of militiamen, including William Brinley of Shrewsbury, “laid down their arms” on the arrival of John Morris’s armed Loyalists. This may have forced several Shrewsbury Whigs (supporters of the Revolution) to leave the township in early December. William Davis, a solid Whig from Shrewsbury Township, recalled that he “volunteered under Benjamin Dennis to go to Philadelphia to join General Washington.” But his party of Shrewsbury volunteers did not make it. On the way to Philadelphia, prior to reaching Freehold, Davis “with some others (among whom was Captain John Dillon of Dover) were captured by a scouting party of British Colonel John Morris - He was then marched direct to the City of New York. There he was detained as a prisoner for 22 months.” It is impossible to know whether Davis’s decision to leave Shrewsbury was motivated by patriotism or the need to avoid arrest back home. Other Shrewsbury Whigs did make it to the Continental Army. Thomas Patten, for example, left Shrewsbury for the Continental Army: I entered a company of volunteers who were forming for the purpose of operating with the Army of Washington against the Hessians at Trenton... I was severely wounded by a musket ball near the Assunpink Creek & being removed to Pennington, New Jersey was confined there. One of the first of Morris’s Loyalists to return to Shrewsbury was Thomas Okerson, formerly of Tinton Falls (and a lieutenant in the New Jersey Volunteers). He was sent back into Shrewsbury township to capture an unnamed militia officer (probably Colonel Daniel Hendrickson or Lt. Colonel Aucke Wikoff, both of Tinton Falls). But Okerson was ordered to show restraint when making the capture, "you are on no account to touch his life.” There is no record of Okerson making the capture. An aversion to violence characterized the Shrewsbury insurrection—this aversion would not last the war. John Wardell, the former judge whose disaffection was exposed by David Forman weeks earlier, was appointed Commissioner for administering British oaths in Shrewsbury. His name appeared as one of three commissioners (along with John Taylor and John Lawrence) on an advertisement circulated across the county calling on citizens to “qualify” for British protection. As Wardell began administering oaths, John Morris pushed south toward Toms River in Dover Township. Captain Robert Morris (not related to John Morris) remained in Shrewsbury with a newly-raised company of New Jersey Volunteers. James Corneilius would later testify that Morris was assisted by two disaffected Quakers, Walter Curtis and Peter Brewer: Sometime about the latter end of December last, saw the above Walter Curtis with the enemy & in company with Robert Morris at the town of Shrewsbury, and at the same time that he saw Peter Brewer with sd Morris and his party. John Morris reached Toms River on December 23. Another article discusses his meeting with Thomas Savadge, the Administrator of the Pennsylvania Salt Works , the largest enterprise in the township. Morris chose to spare the salt works and left them in the custody of two local Loyalists. Morris apparently relied on Joseph Salter (the first militia colonel for the area, but now disaffected) to line up residents to take British loyalty oaths. Salter induced many to sign. Daniel Griggs of Toms River later recalled Salter’s approach: About the 27th day of December last, he, sd deponent, did sign a paper of protection of Col John Morris at Toms River, of which sd paper Joseph Salter, of the township of Dover, was the first signer. The sd Mr. Salter was very often at the deponent's house in company with sd Morris & his officers, that on a certain day the sd Salter clapt his hand on the deponent's shoulder & said 'the times are very much altered, as [I] always expected it would be'. Thomas Potter, of Toms River, vividly recalled John Morris’s visit to Toms River and the prominent role played by Joseph Salter in supporting the Loyalists. In an April 1777 deposition, Potter described "being sent for by Colonel Morris & threatened to be sent to the guard house if he did not come.” Potter went to the house of John Cook, the senior militia officer at Toms River, “where he saw Joseph Salter of said county & John Williams with the said colonel John Morris.” Morris showed Potter “a paper with a number of signers & that the first name subscribed thereto was Joseph Salter.” He was told that the “purpose of the said paper was to put us on the same footing we formerly were, under the King.” Potter was compelled to sign and accept British protection when Major John Antill of Morris’s battalion “tendered him an oath of allegiance to the King.” When Potter initially declined, “Morris told him that unless he [Potter] did [take the oath], he [Morris] would strip him of everything, upon which & being also threatened to be sent to the guard house & the said oath being explained to him [Potter] by the said Salter, he at length complied.” Because Potter had accepted British protection, he was told by Salter that he did not need to surrender his gun. The End of the Insurrection But time was running out on the nascent Loyalist association that Potter had just joined. On January 2, 200 newly-mustered Loyalist militia from Upper Freehold, Freehold and Middletown townships were routed in a short battle near Freehold. The British Army, defeated at Trenton and Princeton, pulled back across New Jersey. John Morris took his troops out of Monmouth County and the most strident Loyalists either joined him or went into hiding. The first Pine Robber gangs, covert Loyalists operating in salt marshes along the shore, included Loyalists who fled as the Loyalist insurrections crumbled. Concealing Loyalists was dangerous. Richard Lippincott, a disaffected Shrewsbury resident who had received a loan to start a salt works the prior summer, was accused of aiding a Loyalist-in-hiding; for this, he was jailed in Burlington County. On release, Lippincott fled to British-held New York. By the end of war, he would be the most despised man in Monmouth County for hanging Joshua Huddy . Related Historic Site : Washington Crossing Historic Park Sources : New Jersey State Archives, Supreme Court Records, State v John Halloway, # 35895; New Jersey State Archives, Supreme Court Records, State vs Samuel Longstreet, #36663 and 36665; National Archives, revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - William Brinley; New Jersey State Archives, Bureau of Archives of History, Council of Safety, James Cornelius; Robert Bowne to Thomas Bowne, Rutgers University Special Collections, AC 1246; New Jersey State Archives, Bureau of Archives of History, Council of Safety, box 1, document #3; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, William Davis of Ohio, www.fold3.com/image/#14680717 ; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, Thomas Patten of NJ, www.fold3.com/image/#27227091 ; Lorenzo Sabine, Biographical Sketches of Loyalists of the American Revolution, 2 vols. (Boston: Little, Brown, 1864), vol. 2, p 562. Jones, E. Alfred. The Loyalists of New Jersey, (Newark, N. J. Historical Society, 1927) p 165; Deposition of Daniel Griggs, New Jersey State Archives, William Livingston Papers, reel 4, April 7, 1777; United Empire Loyalists, Loyal Directory, Richard Lippincott: http://www.uelac.org/Loyalist-Info . United Empire Loyalists, Loyal Directory, Richard Lippincott: http://www.uelac.org/Loyalist-Info ; Deposition of Thomas Potter, New Jersey State Archives, William Livingston Papers, reel 4, April 7, 1777. 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 > Prosecution of Loyalists Intensifies in Monmouth County by Michael Adelberg Daniel Hendrickson of Middletown was found not guilty of perjury at the Monmouth Court Oyer and Terminer in May 1782. But the Court was hard on Loyalists, meting out six death sentences. - May 1782 - On April 12, 1782, a Loyalist party hanged Joshua Huddy on the Navesink Highlands. A note pinned to Huddy’s chest proclaimed the execution an act of retaliation for the killing of the Loyalist, Philip White, two weeks prior. The hanging of Huddy escalated to the highest levels of the Continental, British and French governments and included the near-hanging of a British officer in retaliation for Huddy. Locally, the leaders of Monmouth County vented their outrage through Monmouth County’s courts. David Forman, formerly focused on military affairs, leveraged his recent appointment as a judge of the Court of Common Pleas to move the county’s courts toward an aggressive anti-Loyalist posture. In May, the Court of Common Pleas restarted the Loyalist estate confiscation process and the county convened a new Court of Oyer and Terminer that was the most punitive court in four years. Monmouth County’s Sixth Court of Oyer and Terminer Monmouth County’s first court of Oyer and Terminer (January 1778) was restrained in its punishments; the second Court of Oyer and Terminer (June 1778) was stoked by the punishing raid against Middletown Point and the imminent invasion of the British Army. That court meted out twelve death sentences, resulting in six executions (six men were pardoned). The Third (July 1779), Fourth (December 1780), and Fifth (November 1781) Courts of Oyer and Terminer were all less punitive. The Sixth Court of Oyer and Terminer was presided over by a five-judge panel comprised of four veteran local judges—Peter Forman, Denice Denice, Richard Cox, Joseph Lawrence—and David Forman, new to the bench. As was the custom, a member of the New Jersey Supreme Court, Isaac Smith in this case, attended the court. The court heard 178 indictments, only the Second Court of Oyer and Terminer had a larger docket. Table 16 lists the 23 men who were tried for crimes that had the potential to carry a death sentence. Six are recorded as receiving a death sentence, one was found not guilty. Nine of the other sixteen men appear in later documents, demonstrating that they were not executed. At the misdemeanor level, the court took on a number of pre-war squires known to be disaffected. It found Edward Taylor (a longtime rival of David Forman) guilty on two counts of perjury and imposed on him an unusually large £200 for a misdemeanor fine. Two other disaffected former officeholders—James Wardell and Daniel Grandin—were charged with seditious words, but the outcome of their cases is not known. Wardell was further charged and found guilty on two counts of trading with the enemy (fined £30). Another disaffected former officeholder—Daniel Hendrickson of Middletown (not the militia colonel of the same name) was also charged with perjury but found not guilty. As with prior courts of Oyer and Terminer, women were tried for misdemeanors at the Sixth Court of Oyer and Terminer. However, the number was lower than at previous courts. The seven women were: Widow Abigail Parker (fined £5); Esther Wilson (charges dropped), Cornelia Johnson, Hannah Davis, Phoebe Brown, Charity Stout (fined £10), and Deborah Leonard (not paying bail from a prior charge). A few prominent Whigs were tried and fined. Elias Longstreet, the captain of the first Continental Army company raised from Monmouth County, was found guilty of assault and fined £10. Captain Stephen Fleming of Shrewsbury Township was charged with an unnamed misdemeanor. Daniel Hendrickson, Jr., son of the militia colonel, was convicted of two unnamed misdemeanors—fined £3 and a whopping £500 for the second count. His brother had been killed by Loyalists in March—raising a likelihood that young Hendrickson did something very ill-advised while grieving. Fines were the common punishment for misdemeanors, but there were two exceptions: David Jones of Stafford Township was sentenced to twenty lashes and Michael Howland was sentenced to nine months in jail. The rationale for these unusual sentences is not offered, but it is likely that these were poor men who it was presumed would be unable to pay a fine. They have also been flight risks. Concurrent with the Sixth Court of Oyer and Terminer Concurrent with the court, David Forman issued warrants to impress horses from eight disaffected Monmouth County residents. On May 20, he directed a former Continental Army officer, Abraham Woolley, "You are hereby, in the name of the State, to impress three good saddle horses from Thomas Thomson, Joshua Anderson, John Anderson, Benjamin Covenhoven, Jacob West or either of them." Similarly, on June 2, Forman directed Constable Peter Sutton, "You are hereby, in the name of the State, to impress a good saddle horse from John Anderson, son of Joshua, Solomon Combs, David Covenhoven, [and] Thomas Thomson." (Thomson was the subject of an impressment order twice.) Forman would later be reprimanded for these orders—lacking the authority to act on behalf of the State. As the court convened, men were left in jail without being charged. 24 petitioners claimed: We have no form of tryal - if any crimes are laid to our charge, we have no chance of defending ourselves, nor any account of how our property, thus torn away, is disposed of tho’ diverse of us have been imprisoned, and one [John Taylor] for months, confined in the common gaol, in the course of which time a court of Oyer & Terminer was sitting over his head - Writs of habeus corpus have been disregarded by the Sheriff - in short, every attempt for relief by course of law has been of no effect. The petitioners blamed the irregularities on David Forman’s “prevailing influence” as “the first judge of the court of common pleas” while also leading an extra-legal vigilante society, the Association for Retaliation . Petition signers were some of the same disaffected squires charged at the court, including Daniel Hendrickson (of Middletown) and Edward Taylor. The Sixth Court of Oyer and Terminer was the first one held in Monmouth County without the threat of Loyalist reprisal. Prior courts were conducted with companies of Continental or state troops stationed at Freehold to provide security. The safer atmosphere was noted by attorney William Paterson who wrote from Freehold on June 2: We have passed our time more agreeably than we have done at any former court, as we have not been under the most distant apprehension of the enemy. The business, as usual, has been troublesome, indeed we have dispatched more [cases] than I expected we should have done. The Pardons of Timothy Scoby and William Herbert Of the Loyalists sentenced to be hanged, it appears that the death sentences on Timothy Scoby and Wiliam Herbert particularly distressed Loyalists. William Corlies, a Shrewsbury Loyalist in New York, wrote William Franklin, head of the withering Associated Loyalists , about Scoby on June 10: Timothy Scoby, as Associated Loyalist, taken prisoner by the rebels on Sandy Hook, within his Majesty's lines, and William Herbert, also an Associated Loyalist, taken by the Rebels on the beach at the Highlands, near Sandy Hook, where he was going to purchase a little bread for the use of his shallop, have been tried for their Loyalty at a rebel court in Freehold, in the County of Monmouth, and have been sentenced to death, to be executed on the Fourth Day of July next. Corlies was “well convinced by his friends within the Rebel's lines that the sentence will be carried into execution” called on Franklin to take action “for the preservation of their lives." Franklin’s Associated Loyalists had been dry docked by the British in the aftermath of hanging of Joshua Huddy. So, Franklin lacked the ability to attack Monmouth County or threaten retaliation. But he promptly wrote to General Guy Carleton, commanding British forces in America, “respecting two Loyalists who were lately made prisoners by the rebels and have been tried for High Treason.” Franklin claimed that “no crime is alleged against them… but their Loyalty.” He complained, “one of them was taken on shore going to purchase provisions, and the other within British lines.” Franklin acknowledged he lacked authority to retaliate, so he put “the whole matter to your Excellency's determination." Carleton promptly wrote Governor William Livingston, on June 12: "Timothy Scoby, taken prisoner at Sandy Hook, and William Herbert, taken also prisoner on the beach at the Highlands, Sandy Hook.” He appealed to the Governor's "moderation and candor." Carleton drew a connection between his inquiry about Scoby and "General Washington justly demanding inquiry concerning the rash execution of Huddy.” Carleton worried that Livingston might be "informed by misinformation" and that Livingston should not be motivated by vengeance against Loyalists. He then flattered Livingston: I will take the fullest measure of reliance on you taking such measures as your own prudence shall dictate to place these men out of danger and that you will not suffer the terms of local law to violate general principles or mingle private or mutual revenge with fair and liberal customs. Scoby and Herbert were spared. On June 20, the Judges of the Monmouth Court of Oyer and Terminer wrote to Governor Livingston: The following persons were capitally convicted, vizt. Richard Phillips and the Negro Jacob for murder, William Herbert & Timothy Scoby for High Treason, the two last, the said Court recommend to your Excellency as the proper objects of mercy, and that they be pardoned accordingly. It is unusual that the Judges did not provide a rationale for the pardons. It seems probable that the Monmouth County judges knew of Carleton’s interest in Scoby and Herbert. They likely looked to lessen the attention on their other sentences by requesting these pardons. Two more Courts of Oyer and Terminer would be held in Monmouth County, in November 1782 and July 1783. The November court had 92 indictments, half the number as the May court, but the court did hand down seven death sentences (one more than the May court). The July 1783 Court of Oyer and Terminer had only 36 indictments and no capital convictions. Concurrent with this court, taxes were effectively collected from the shore region for the first time. James Craig testified (in Jacob Pettinger’s veteran’s pension application) that he and Pettinger were “warned out” in summer 1783 “for the purpose of assisting William Morris on the tax gathering.” They were needed because of “the great number of Tories & disaffected, the taxes could not be gathered without the assistance of the militia.” Craig and Pettinger performed the service "on horseback… for about one month." As the war finally cooled down, normal government functions came into disaffected neighborhoods and the prosecution of Loyalists receded. Related Historic Site : Monmouth County Historical Association Museum Sources : New Jersey State Archives, Judicial Records, Court of Oyer & Terminer, box 2, folder - May 1782; Orders from David Forman, New Jersey State Archives, Dept. of Defense, Revolutionary War, Numbered Manuscripts, #4360-4361; Library of Congress, William Paterson Collection, Paterson to Cornelia Bell; William Franklin to Guy Carleton, Great Britain Public Record Office, British Headquarters Papers, 30/55, #4768; Guy Carleton to William Livingston, David Library, British HQ Papers, Carleton Papers, #4780; Court Docket, New Jersey State Archives, William Livingston Papers, reel 17, June 20, 1782; Petition, New Jersey State Archives, Collective Series, Revolutionary War documents, #32; New Jersey State Archives, Judicial Records, Court of Oyer & Terminer, box 2, folder - December 1780; New Jersey State Archives, Judicial Records, Court of Oyer & Terminer, box 2, folder - November 1781; New Jersey State Archives, Judicial Records, Court of Oyer & Terminer, box 2, folder - November 1782; New Jersey State Archives, Judicial Records, Court of Oyer & Terminer, box 2, folder - July 1783; Court Records, Monmouth Court of Oyer and Terminer, NJ State Archives, #33980; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - Jacob Pettinger. Previous Next

The articles in the collection 250 for the 250th: The American Revolution in Monmouth County represent the most complete history of this topic ever assembled. < 250 Home < Previous pg. Next > Colonel Tye and the Black Brigade by Michael Adelberg The British promised freedom to slaves who would run away and come behind British lines. One of these men, Tye, led a group of former slaves on a string of raids into Monmouth County in 1780. - June 1780 - Even before the Declaration of Independence, British leaders sought to use America’s large African-American population as Loyalist soldiers. In 1775, Lord Dunmore, Virginia’s Royal Governor, promised freedom to the slaves of rebels who would join his Ethiopian Brigade. When Dunmore was chased out of Virginia, he brought these men with him. They boarded a ship bound for Sandy Hook and relocated to New York shortly after the British Army’s landing in America. As noted in prior articles, Monmouth County’s large African-American population was restive at the start of the Revolutionary War. Whether enslaved or free-but-poor, nearly all African Americans in the county were agricultural laborers. While the county’s Quakers were committed to the manumission of slaves , they only impacted a fraction of African Americans in the county. Shortly after the British Army landed at Sandy Hook on June 30, 1776, runaway slaves sought their freedom with the British. Individual African American Loyalists in the Local War African Americans were not permitted in the New Jersey Volunteers (the British Army corps for white New Jersey Loyalists) but they were active in the local war around Monmouth County. Individual African Americans participated in the December 1776 Loyalist uprisings . In early 1777, shortly after Whigs (supporters of the Revolution) regained control of Monmouth County, a slave named Sip warned about a posse coming after him. According to a deposition: The said Negro [Sip] supposed that the damn Rebels would soon be after him, but if they did, he would take shot amongst them; Sip at this time had a gun with him, that he got from Peter Wardell, a Refugee Tory. Also in 1777, two slaves were arrested for “having been in arms and aiding the Enemy” and two other slaves, Joe and Scipio, were arrested by Captain John Dennis of Shrewsbury “on suspicion of intending to join the enemy.” They were released back to their masters after spending five months in jail. African Americans were soon serving as sailors on Loyalist ships on the Jersey shore. In September 1778, the Continental Army’s Commissary of Prisoners, Thomas Bradford, noted that privateers at Little Egg Harbor had taken Black men prisoner. He asked Congress if "Negroes or mulattoes taken at sea by the States should be liberated or held for exchange, or in what manner they should be disposed of?" A year later, the New Jersey Admiralty Court advertised a court in Burlington where the Philadelphia privateer, Samuel Ingersoll, would have "the following Negro slaves lately captured by him, to wit Edward McCuffee, William Bristol, John Coleman, Joseph, Cato and Richard" condemned to him as prizes of war. There are scattered mentions of individual “Negroes” and “Blacks” participating in Loyalist raiding parties from 1778 into 1780. As larger Loyalist raiding parties under military officers gave way to smaller, irregular parties that practiced “man-stealing,” the prominence of African-Americans increased. The Loyalist Royal Gazette reported that on June 6, 1779, “an inhabitant of said County was taken off by four Negroes." Then, on July 20, the Loyalist New York Gazette reported that: About fifty Negroes and refugees landed at Shrewsbury and plundered the inhabitants of about eighty head of horned cattle, about twenty horses and a quantity of wearing apparel and household furniture. They also took off William Brinley and Elihu Cook, two of the inhabitants. A few months after that, Samuel Lippincott was kidnapped out of his bed by a small party of African Americans. Another small party of African-Americans stole horses and then skirmished with militia at Little Silver, as recalled by Samuel Johnson: That in the night, one John Newman, a sentry, was fired upon and his pocket was shot through by some of the refugees. The next morning, about sunrise, a colored man, a Negro by the name of Moses, with his gun on his shoulder, was approaching the house where the company was stationed. When he perceived the militia, he immediately turned about & went down the field, upon which the deponent and others followed him, he then turned short and made for a creek called Little Silver of about 200 yards wide. He went in the creek, and the light horse under Captain Walton [John Walton] followed him, as did this deponent and the rest of the company all of whom followed at him whilst in the water, and just at the time he was making the land on the other side of the creek, a rifleman by the name of Alexander Erlich [Alexander Eastlick] fired and wounded said Negro. In the actions above, African Americans operated under white officers or in small parties. However, in early June 1780, a “company” of “fierce” African-Americans battled militia at the Battle of Conkaskunk . This is the first mention of a large unit of African Americans acting together. It was also the first mention of their very effective leader, Tye. The men would be known as the “Black Brigade” and Tye would be known as their “Colonel”. (Most historians presume that Tye was the former slave, Titus, who freed himself from John Corlies of Shrewsbury in 1775. Some argue that Tye went to Virginia in 1775 to join Dunmore’s African American brigade.) The Raids of Colonel Tye and the Black Brigade We know little about the men who served in the Black Brigade. The author’s prior research and the research of Graham Hodges shows that several dozen Monmouth County slaves escaped slavery during the Revolutionary War, but only a few can be traced to the Black Brigade. There are no British documents that discuss the formation of the Black Brigade, but we know that it was not part of the British Army because it is not listed in any British muster rolls or pay records. It can be presumed that the Black Brigade lived off the sale of goods taken during their raids. By 1780, at least in the warm months, Sandy Hook had a settlement known as Refugeetown—populated by London Traders and partisans who raided for a living. There are just a few fleeting descriptions of Refugeetown. In 1777, when the Loyalist camp was likely only a few huts, Ambrose Serle, a British officer, called it “a dismal, barren spot.” In 1780, Colonel David Forman estimated that “in the cedars are about 60 or 70 refugees, white and black." By 1781, Refugeetown, which was raided by the bold privateer , Adam Hyler, included a fortification described as “a small fort, in which twelve swivel guns were mounted.” Refugeetown was also described a place “where the horse thieves resort.” But Refugeetown was no resort—it lacked fresh water and soil for crops. It is doubtful that men stayed there any longer than necessary. From Refugeetown, Tye (carrying the honorific title of “Colonel”) carried out a string of raids into Monmouth County. The first Tye-attributed raid occurred in June 9, reported in the New Jersey Gazette : Ty, with a party of about twenty blacks and whites, last Friday took and carried off prisoners, Capt. Barnes Smock and Gilbert Van Mater; at the same time, spiked up the iron four pounder at Capt. Smock's house, but took no ammunition; two of the artillery horses, and two of Capt. Smock's horses were likely taken off. The above Ty is a negro who bears the title Colonel and commands a motley crew at Sandy Hook. Philadelphia newspapers carried the same article. A Loyalist New York newspaper reported: "The noted Col. Tye with his motley company of about twenty blacks and whites, carried off as prisoners Capt. Barney Smock and Gilbert Van Mater, spiked an iron cannon and took four horses. Their rendezvous was at Sandy Hook." The raid was discussed by David Forman in a letter to Governor William Livingston: A party of Negroes about thirty in number did this afternoon attack and take Captain Barnes Smock and a small party that were collected at his house for their mutual defence. This was done with the sun one hour high, 12 miles from one of the landings and 15 miles from the other. Tye’s next raid occurred on June 21, printed in the New Jersey Gazette and Pennsylvania Evening Post : Yesterday morning, a party of the Enemy, consisting of Ty with 30 Blacks, thirty six Queens Rangers and thirty Refugee Tories landed Conkaskunk. They, by some means, got in between our scouts undiscovered and went to Mr. James Mott, Sen., plundered his & several neighbor's houses of almost everything in them and carried off several… We had wounded, a Lieutenant Hendrickson had his arm broken, two privates supposed mortally, and a third slightly, in a skirmish with them on their retreat. The enemy acknowledges the loss of seven men, but we think it much more considerable." The Black Brigade captured Mott, Jonathan Pearce, James Johnson, Joseph Dorsett, William Blair, James Walling, Jr., John Walling, Sr. (son of Thomas), Philip Walling, James Wall, and Matthew Griggs. Tye also captured: "several Negroes and a great deal of stock; but all of the negroes, one excepted, and the horses, were re-taken by our people.” This raises the possibility that Tye’s men, many of whom were runaway slaves, captured other slaves. Militiaman, James Wall, recalled being taken in this raid in his postwar pension application: “While at the house of one Joseph Dorsett, together with eight others in the neighborhood, were taken prisoner by a party of Tories & carried to the city of New York & confined there in the Sugar House for six months.” The most prominent man taken that day, Assemblyman James Mott, later prepared "A List of Goods Taken by the Enemy on the 20 or 21st Day of June, 1780.” His losses included: "a Negro boy about 15 years old" - £100; Wagon, iron traces, collar & tuck line - £18; 1 bull calf - £3; 4 beds & blankets - £40; 500 lb. of beef - £18 15s; 4 pair of pants, shirts, stockings and jackets - £3 5s; 2 mirrors and books - £1 10s; Pewter dishes, plates & spoons; lines & ropes; knives & forks; earthen ware and glasses; desk; "1 barrel of tobacco and sundry other articles"; Several additional items were listed as damaged: 2 desks, case & bottles broken; great cupboard; chest of drawers; boots; shoes and handkerchiefs; house doors, windows and closets. The Black Brigade also took "1 side of leather taken from Joseph Dorsett, three hides burnt at Joseph Dorsett's." The long list of home goods suggests that the Black Brigade was as focused on plunder as any military objective. The militia fought Tye’s party. A receipt from Dr. Thomas Henderson shows that he treated Walter Hyer for wounds from a cutlass blow to the head, and Garrett Hendrickson lost the use of his right arm from wounds during fighting. A few days later, on June 25, another militiaman, Benjamin Van Cleave (not the farmer of the same name whose grain was seized , sparking a fight between local leaders), recorded another skirmish with the Black Brigade at Shrewsbury, "was in a quite a smart engagement with a band of Refugees headed, or said to be, by a Negro called Colo. Tye.” (Appendix #1 collects mentions of Tye in postwar pension applications that are not pegged to a time or place.) After this string of raids, Tye was apparently less active. No doubt, selling plunder and dividing up prize money took some time. Tye’s men, with money in their pockets, were likely happy to have some time away from the dangerous work of raiding. Tye’s next raid was apparently on August 17. A militia document titled “A List of those of Warned on the Alarm of August 17, 1780, to march after Colo. Tye" documents that only two militiamen on the list - Joseph West, Thomas West – responded to the alarm, while fifteen men were delinquent. The document demonstrates that the combination of punishing manstealing raids and Tye’s renown had dispirited the Shrewsbury militia company. The details of Tye’s August 17 raid are unknown. A Loyalist party, likely led by Tye, raided again on August 22. The New York Gazette reported: "Yesterday were brought into this town a Colonel and Major Smock, of the Monmouth County militia, one of these was of the community of Associated Retaliators upon the Tories." The New Jersey Gazette wrote of the same incident, "Hendrick Smock, Esquire, and Lieut. Col. John Smock of Monmouth County were lately made prisoners by a party of the enemy from Sandy Hook and carried to New York." Tye would launch one more raid. On August 31, he led his largest party—some 70 men—further inland than any previous raid. He went to the tavern of Captain Joshua Huddy at Colts Neck and took Huddy after a stubborn defense. The Loyalists were engaged by a militia party while loading their barges. Huddy escaped and Tye was fatally wounded in the ensuing skirmish. (This raid is the subject of another article .) The Black Brigade was never again as successful as it was in summer 1780, though African American Loyalists continued to participate in raids well into 1782. British proclamations of freedom to runaway slaves (see Henry Clinton’s Philipsburg Proclamation in Appendix #2) were not beneficent. Upon reaching British lines, former slaves had few options. There was a continual need for trench diggers and sailors, but these low wage jobs were likely unattractive to most New Jersey African Americans, who had been farmhands. Idle black men were often kidnapped and forced to become sailors; some were sold back into slavery in the Caribbean. Through the end of the war, African Americans were unwelcome in the Loyalist corps of the British Army, even as the Continental Army integrated. While the British freed slaves, they did little to assist them. The remainder of the Black Brigade were relocated —with families—to Canada at war’s end. Remembering Colonel Tye Eighteen months after Tye’s death, after Associated Loyalists razed Toms River . They recaptured and hanged Captain Huddy. Outraged Whigs used the opportunity to compare Tye favorably to the White Loyalists who led the Toms River raid: "[Tye was] justly to be more feared and respected than any of his brethren of a fairer complexion.” Some antiquarian accounts, perhaps informed by verbal tradition, assert that Tye was more respected by Whigs than white Loyalist leaders. Some recent documentaries on the Revolutionary War have included content about Tye, as have recent African American history documentaries. A handful of modern historians, including those of Graham Hodges and David Hackett Fisher—have written about Tye. Feats have been attributed to Tye that may have been performed by other Loyalists and “facts” have been attached to Tye that appear unprovable. Fisher noted that the Black Brigade was "allied with British forces, but they were independent fighters for their own freedom." Indeed, the men of the Black Brigade maintained their freedom through raiding—but we lack evidence to suggest that the Black Brigade were “freedom fighters” beyond meeting their own needs. By any measure, Tye was the most effective of Sandy Hook’s Loyalist irregulars. But the pervasive racism against Tye and other Black men does not change that the Black Brigade were kidnappers and plunderers. Human motivations are complex, but the men of the Black Brigade likely turned to raiding because it offered more autonomy and money than the alternatives. Like others caught in Monmouth County’s vicious local war, Tye and his men did what they needed to keep coins in their pockets during a very difficult period. We lack evidence that service in the Black Brigade was a higher calling. Related Historical Site : Sandy Hook Lighthouse Appendix 1: Other Mentions of Colonel Tye or Black Brigade in Veterans’ Pension Applications Matthias Handlin “He was about 15 years of age when he went out in the militia under Captain Benjamin Van Cleave … at the time, the Tories and Negroes landed at Long Branch about 3 or 6 miles below Shrewsbury... they had a battle with them, he well recollects that they killed Mr. Talman's negro, who appeared to be the commander of the Negroes." Samuel Herbert “Was in a skirmish with a company of refugees said to have been commanded by a Negro called Col Tye -again was out as a substitute for one Samuel Hendrickson.” William Lloyd “At one time the Negro refugees fired upon a sentinel and pursued them to a place called Jumping Point on the Shrewsbury. We went into the river with one of the men, he got tired a distance from land and could swim no further. I swam to him... and saved his life.” William McBride "Marched down to Cedar Bridge in search of Colonel Tye, who had a party of Negroes and runaways under him, and were plundering the inhabitants, remained along the shore until the month expired." Elisha Shepherd “Continued guarding the lines… until taken prisoner by the refugees under Col. Tye when he was taken to New York and put in the provost’s or hangman’s jail… and continued confined in said prison to the end of the war.” His brother, Jacob Shepherd, testifies: “himself and his brother, Elisha, was taken prisoner by the British in the year that Cornwallis was taken, they were kept prisoners for about five months and he thinks they were exchanged in the month of March.” Jacob Truax “Jacob Truax's pension application excerpted: ln 1780, "was in skirmish with Coll. Tie near Eatontown, the refugees were commanded by Tie, a black who was killed during that skirmish." Appendix #2: General Henry Clinton’s Philipsburg Proclamation By His Excellency Sir Henry Clinton, K. B. General and Commander in Chief of all this Majesty’s Forces, within the Colonies laying on the Atlantic Ocean, from Nova Scotia to West-Florida, inclusive, &c., &c., &c. PROCLAMATION. Whereas the enemy have adopted a practice of enrolling Negroes among their Troops; I do hereby give notice, that all Negroes taken in arms, or upon any military duty, shall be purchased for a stated price; the money to be paid to the captors. But I do most strictly forbid any person to sell or claim Right over any Negroe, the property of a rebel, who may take refuge with any part of this Army; and I do promise to every Negroe who shall desert the Rebel Standard, full security to follow within these Lines; any occupation which he shall think proper. Given under my Hand at Head-Quarters, Philipsburg, the 30th Day of June, 1779. H. Clinton. Sources : Michael Adelberg, “’A Motley Crew at Sandy Hook’: Monmouth’s African American Loyalists,” in The American Revolution in Monmouth County (History Press: Charleston, SC, 2011); Thomas Bradford to Congress, National Archives, Papers of the Continental Congress, M247, I78, Misc Letters to Congress, v 3, p 185; Library of Congress, Early American Newspaper, New Jersey Gazette, September 1779, reel 1930; the June 6, 1779 raid is excerpted in William Horner, This Old Monmouth of Ours (Freehold: Moreau Brothers, 1932) p 403; William Horner, This Old Monmouth of Ours (Freehold: Moreau Brothers, 1932) p 406; William Nelson, Austin Scott, et al., ed., New Jersey Archives (Newark, Somerville, and Trenton, New Jersey: 1901-1917) vol. 3, p 504; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, Samuel Johnson of NJ, www.fold3.com/image/#24646107 ; John C. Dann, The Revolution Remembered: Eyewitness Accounts of the War for Independence (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980) pp 125-6; David Forman to William Livingston, Carl Prince, Papers of William Livingston (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987) vol. 3, p 423. Francis Pingeon, Blacks in the Revolutionary Era (Newark: New Jersey Historical Society, 1975) p22; Library of Congress, Early American Newspapers, Pennsylvania Evening Post, November 1781; Ambrose Serle, The American journal of Ambrose Serle, secretary to Lord Howe, 1776-1778 (New York: Arno, 1969) p 240; David Forman to George Washington, Monmouth County Historical Association, Diaries Collection, box 2, John Stillwell's Diary (photocopy); Monmouth County Historical Association, J. Amory Haskell Coll., folder 3, Document A; Library of Congress, Early American Newspapers, Pennsylvania Evening Post; Library of Congress, Early American Newspaper, New Jersey Gazette, reel 1930; Library of Congress, Early American Newspapers, Pennsylvania Evening Post; New Jersey Gazette, reel 1930, June 28, 1780; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, James Wall of NJ, www.fold3.com/image/# 20365301; List of Goods Taken by the Enemy, Monmouth County Historical Association, Cherry Hall Papers, box 15, folder 11; Walter Hyer and Gerrett Hendrickson’s wounds are discussed in William Horner, This Old Monmouth of Ours (Freehold: Moreau Brothers, 1932) p 407; National Archives, revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - Benjamin Van Cleave; Militia List, New Jersey Historical Society, Holmes Family Papers, box 4, folder 2; New York Royal Gazette excerpted in William Horner, This Old Monmouth of Ours (Freehold: Moreau Brothers, 1932) p 137; Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application of William McBride of NJ, National Archives, p3-4, 20-2; John Stillwell, Historical and Genealogical Miscellany (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1970) v5, 50-9; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, Matthias Handlin of Ohio, www.fold3.com/image/#23563620 ; National Archives, revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - Jacob Truax; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, Samuel Herbert of NJ, www.fold3.com/image/#23218962 ; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, Elisha Shepherd of OH, www.fold3.com/image/# 16277477; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, John McBride of Middlesex Co, www.fold3.com/image/#26202858; New York Royal Gazette, July 4, 1779 (see: https://www.philipsemanorhall.com/blog/the-philipsburg-proclamation ); Gilje, Paul A. and William Pencak, eds. New York in the Age of the Constitution, 1775— 1800, (Rutherford, N.J.: Fairleigh Dickinson Press, 1992), pp. 36, 46 note 63; Graham Hodges, African Americans in Monmouth County during the American Revolution (Lincroft, NJ: Monmouth County Park System, 1990) p 19; David Hackett Fischer, Washington's Crossing (NY: Oxford UP, 2004) p169-70. 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 > Captain John Walton Captures Loyalist Boat by Michael Adelberg William Borden’s boat and its passengers beached at Manasquan on a patch of shoreline that likely resembled this one at Fisherman’s Cove. The boat and crew were captured by the Monmouth militia. - March 1777 - Even before the Declaration of Independence was signed, Loyalists from across the Thirteen Colonies sought refuge with the British in New York. Moses Kirkland, for example, attempted to go from South Carolina all the way to New York in May 1776. The journey to New York was dangerous—Loyalists needed to make the trip without having their identities or purpose discovered. And for those traveling to New York by sea, they also needed the weather to cooperate. The Monmouth County shore was the site of numerous shipwrecks through the Revolution, exacerbated by desperate people sailing small craft in unfamiliar waters. In early March 1777, a small sailing vessel left Philadelphia. The boat had a two-man crew and carried five (some reports say four) “Scotsmen” on board. The Scotsmen were likely immigrants living in Pennsylvania who were now seeking British protection in New York. The vessel sailed down the Delaware River and proceeded up the Jersey shore. The Loyalists beached near Manasquan in bad weather (probably the same storm that dropped several inches of snow on Brigadier General David Forman’s men as they marched on Sandy Hook ). The first man to come on the grounded vessel was Daniel Randolph, a merchant from Toms River. He alerted the closest militia patrol, which was led by Captain John Walton of the Freehold Township. Walton took custody of the men and boat. On March 16, David Forman sent Governor William Livingston a letter that was brought to him by Captain Walton. Forman noted that Walton was bringing nine prisoners to the Governor: Capt. Walton will wait on you with nine prisoners, five of them are Scotsmen from Philadelphia bound to N. York in a small boat, worked by one man and a boy - the boatman & boy denied they were going to New York - all five of the Scotsmen agreed that they were but disagree about what way they obtained the boat - some of them say the boatmen had agreed to go with them - others say they had agreed to take the boat by force if refused, but had not when taken. A certain Samuel Leonard, proven to have professed himself a Captain under John Morris, & Aaron Brown, a person of little importance although a professed Tory are also sent along. It is noteworthy that, upon capture, the boat’s crew and their Loyalist passengers told different stories about the vessel and its destination. It is also curious that the men were captured and detained in concert with Samuel Leonard, a Monmouth Loyalist and an officer in the New Jersey Volunteers . These details raise the possibility that the vessel’s trip might have had more to it than just carrying a few inoffensive Loyalists to New York. Two days later, Livingston wrote to David Rittenhouse of the Pennsylvania Council of Safety. He noted that the Monmouth militia (under Capt. Walton) seized a boat at Manasquan and that Walton claimed the boat as a prize because it was bound for the enemy at New York. Livingston briefly discussed the prisoners. Of the boat captain, a man named Borden, Livingston said he "expressed himself in a most violent manner against the Congress” but otherwise professed innocence. Livingston sent the Scotsmen back to Pennsylvania but ordered the two boatmen detained until they could appear before the New Jersey Council of Safety . In a second letter about the incident, Livingston noted that Captain Walton was carrying the Scotsmen to Philadelphia. The minutes of the New Jersey Council of Safety corroborated the information above; the Council also compensated Captain Walton for the expenses incurred while transporting the prisoners. The decision to keep the two-man crew in New Jersey to stand before New Jersey’s Council of Safety indicates that the boatmen were believed to be from New Jersey. The boat captain named Borden was likely William Borden. Borden was one of a half dozen disaffected listed in a March 15 letter from Col. Samuel Forman to John Walton in which Forman directed Walton to take Borden to jail in Philadelphia: “The following persons you are to take to Philadelphia & deliver them to the proper authorities, viz William Curry, John Magee, James Scott, William Borden, George Brewer and James Lawton." That William Borden was part of a larger cohort of prisoners taken on the shore again suggests that the Loyalist boat may have been involved in more than just taking the Scotsmen to New York. William Borden had a colorful record during the Revolution. He was from a large Quaker family that was largely disaffected. While he leaned Loyalist early in the war, Borden’s loyalties turned dramatically. He joined the New Jersey State Troops in 1782 and was one of three soldiers ordered to convey a captured Loyalist, Philip White, from Long Branch to jail at Freehold. The soldiers, however, abused White and provoked him into attempting a futile escape that ended when the soldiers murdered White. White’s murder provoked the murder of Captain Joshua Huddy in April 1782. Huddy’s murder lit a diplomatic bonfire that reverberated across the American, British and French governments. Related Historic Site : Fisherman Cove Conservation Area Sources : David Forman to William Livingston, New Jersey State Archives, Dept. of Defense, Revolutionary War, Numbered Manuscripts, #4097; William Livingston to David Rittenhouse, in Carl Prince ed., Papers of William Livingston (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987) vol. 1, p 284-5; Selections from the Correspondence of the Executive of New Jersey, From 1776 to 1786 (Newark, NJ: Newark Daily Advertiser, 1848) pp. 32-3; Minutes of the Provincial Congress and the Council of Safety of the State of New Jersey 1775-1776 (Ithaca: Cornell University Library, 2009) pp. 7, 9; Samuel Forman to John Walton, New Jersey State Archives, Dept. of Defense, Revolutionary War, Numbered Manuscripts, #1062. 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 > Crackdown on Militia Delinquents in Shrewsbury Township by Michael Adelberg By summer 1780, Monmouth militia was regularly skirmishing with Loyalist raiders. In parts of the county with poor militia turnout, officers cracked down on delinquents with massive fines. - August 1780 - Prior articles show how Monmouth County’s local war grew especially desperate in summer 1780. Irregular Loyalist raiding parties, such as the Black Brigade , penetrated the county’s shores and took off a dozen militia officers and many other leaders. Monmouth Countians, largely unable to attack enemies shielded behind British lines, set their sights on internal enemies instead. The Retaliators , a vigilante society, practiced eye-for-an-eye retaliation, mostly against the kin of Loyalists rather than actual Loyalists. Continental soldiers took 160 head of livestock from people living near the shore based on alleged or past disaffection outside of the legal system. Militia service was compulsory in Revolutionary New Jersey. So, the same men judged disaffected (and punished for it) were also required to serve in the militia. In Monmouth County’s three Atlantic shore townships—Shrewsbury, Dover, and Stafford—many men skipped militia duty ; some likely did not serve at all. Documentation is best for Shrewsbury Township where the original militia Colonel, Samuel Breese, resigned due to the “backwardness ” of locals who “secreted” themselves in order to avoid serving. Several shore township militia companies were unreliable long into the war. Frustration with militia delinquents was expressed throughout the war. A May 1779 Monmouth County petition noted the suffering of Whigs (supporters of the Revolution) and then discussed militia delinquents: Many of the inhabitants capable of bearing arms who refuse to turn out with their neighbors, possess the common enemy, have by staying at home injured both persons and estates. Now they are subject to only a trifling punishment, whilst they that obeyed their Country's call not only hazard their lives but have lost almost their whole estates. The petitioners called for “just relief” without specifying what it might be. There are a few surviving documents showing “trifling” fines for militia delinquency in 1778. See table 12 a . If these returns are typical, delinquency rates commonly ranged between 15 and 45 percent. The New Jersey Legislature was aware of poor militia turnout in parts of the state and the desire to more strictly punish delinquents. It was also aware of difficulties raising men for the Continental Army . To address both problems, the legislature nearly passed a law in March 1780 that would require delinquents to serve a year in the Army. In June, it passed a milder law that required six months of army service for delinquents. The law would sunset in a year unless re-passed. Historian Mark Lender wrote about the law, and noted that it only raised 200 men for the Army—a small fraction of the state’s militia delinquents. Militia officers were, it appears, reluctant to cooperate with the Army to identify and gather up delinquents. The New Jersey Assembly received several protests against the law, including one from the Shrewsbury Quaker Meeting. Their petition set forth “that the militia bill now in force, more especially that passed sixteenth day of June last, proves very grievous in the manner they have been executed against some of the persons belonging to the meeting." The law was not renewed. Meanwhile, Monmouth County militia leaders started taking a tougher stand against militia delinquency. In June 1780, the Middletown militia company of Captain Barnes Smock (recently captured ) identified sixteen delinquents, including Lt. Tunis Vanderveer and Stephen Seabrook (bayoneted three years earlier in a Loyalist raid ). Interestingly, the men were fined £10 rather than $50. The conversion of the fines from inflationary dollars to stable pre-war pounds suggests that the June 1780 fine was more considerable than prior fines. £10 was roughly half the value of a good horse. In July, Captain Daniel Hampton listed 23 delinquents from his company, but the fine amount is not listed. On August 4, Captain Thomas Bennett wrote his Colonel (Daniel Hendrickson, leading the Shrewsbury militia) about "being unable to come at this time with my return, am under the necessity of writing to you and sending my return." Bennett also wrote about some men in his company: Thomas Truax "has been unable for some months past to do any work and consequently unfit for military duty" and "Philip Lewis's wife and William White's wife are both in a condition not to be left alone" so they were excused from service. Only fourteen of Bennett’s men were listed as "present and fit for duty." Two weeks later, an unnamed Middletown militia officer compiled, "A List of those of Warned on the Alarm of August 17, 1780, to march after Colo. Tye." Only two militiamen answered the alarm; sixteen were delinquent. A week after that, Governor William Livingston wrote Colonel Hendrickson: I cannot observe but with great concern that of 27 men lately called from your Regiment to rendezvous at this place [Morristown] by the first of this month, not one of them have appeared, and I should now order them to be immediately detached. Hendrickson was further ordered to prepare 27 more men for deployment the following month. Crackdown on Militia Delinquents in Shrewsbury Township The reprimand from the Governor ignited a crackdown on militia delinquency in Shrewsbury Township. Hendrickson started convening courts-martial for militia delinquency at the inn of Lydia West in Colts Neck. Colts Neck was the furthest inland and safest village in the township, but even with this, a Loyalist raiding party attacked Colts Neck as the courts-martial were being held. The court’s five officers Capt. Stephen Fleming, Lt. Jacob Fleming, Lt. Ephraim Buck, Lt. Hendrick Vanderveer, Lt. Hendrick Van Brunt, were not, however, endangered by Loyalist raiders at this time. Documentation on the courts-martial is confusing, but at least two courts were held at West’s tavern in late August. The first one fined 25 men from Captain James Green’s company a total of £7,115. Five men were fined £500, the largest amount. Other men were fined as little as £5. No document explains this variation but it is probable that fine size was impacted by the length of the delinquency (an entire month vs. a day) and by individual circumstance. It is also possible that alleged acts of disaffection or the acts of Loyalist kin may have increased the size of the militia fine. A second court fined 32 additional men on August 31, with the largest fines of £500 being imposed upon six men. However, another document dated August 31, lists 135 men fined for delinquency across the entire regiment. This document notes that officers were "commanded to levy on the goods & chattels of the several delinquents... and dispose of said goods and chattels by way of public vendue." The crackdown continued in September. Another court martial at West’s tavern occurred on October 4 (for delinquencies in September). Fourteen men were fined £2,346. The largest fine was again £500. Attention shifted to collecting fines. According to a list of "Warrants Granted for the Collection" of militia delinquency fines, a staggering £38,429 (approximately the value of twenty mid-sized estates) was owed by Shrewsbury militia delinquents. Fine collectors were selected for each of Shrewsbury’s eight militia companies. Table 12b shows the collectors for each company. The table reveals strains in the Shrewsbury militia. Only three of the August collectors were collectors for the same company in September. One company had no collector in August. Two companies had no captain in August and one captaincy remained vacant in September. By September, three collectors were serving for two companies each. Given the flux, it is improbable that fine collection went well. Adding to the militia’s woes was a profound lack of ammunition . An October appeal to the New Jersey Assembly complained that there were only four dozen cartridges for the entire Shrewsbury regiment—though the state did send more war materials in November. It is easy to imagine that collectors were reluctant to go into some neighborhoods and that many delinquents were uncooperative. At least once, a militiaman was fined in error. Daniel Covenhoven of Middletown was a good militiaman who was captured and jailed for a year and a half in New York. He was paroled home in January 1781. As a condition of his parole, he was not allowed to serve, but was fined nonetheless. He wrote Governor Livingston in protest: My circumstances will not permit me to turn out in the militia, being now upon my parole, as the enclosed deposition will show, and having been fined by the Court Martial for refusal upon sd principles, I would appeal to your Excellency for redress. Existing documents do not reveal how much of the massive fine total was ever collected. A “return of delinquents” compiled in November 1780 for the Middletown militia company of Capt. William Schenck lists eight delinquents. They were only fined £10 each. It is unknown why the largest Shrewsbury militia fines were 50 times that amount. Because no returns exist from militia companies outside of Shrewsbury for the months of August and September, it is impossible to know if the massive fines of the Shrewsbury regiment were mirrored in the other two regiments. State Law Improves Punishments for Militia Delinquents In January 1781, the New Jersey Legislature considered uncollected militia delinquency fines. Minutes from their deliberations note that Monmouth County was specifically discussed: "the County of Monmouth shall on account of its present circumstances have one common treasurer to the three regiments, to be appointed by the officers of the said regiments jointly." Following deliberations, the legislature passed a law to enhance fine collection. The law is summarized below: Sergeants of each company were required to go to the homes of militiamen and determine that each man had arms to attend the militia. Arms would be made available to men lacking arms. Once supplied, men would unable to skip service due to lack of arms; To encourage greater militia participation, half of all collected militia fines would be distributed as a bounty to men who attend the militia muster; Four days a year, there would be a general muster of all militia companies (first day of April, June, September, November) for completing a muster roll and inspection of the men; Regimental colonels were required to file bi-annual reports on the condition of their regiments; Every militia delinquent was ordered to appear before a local magistrate to pays fines or arrange a schedule for paying fines. The new law, by bringing magistrates into the process, likely regularized the collection of fines. Militia delinquents faced consequences for repeated delinquency. On January 14, 1782, an auction was held to pay the delinquency fines of Peter Hulsart, a tailor from Freehold. The auction notice read: Give notice that there will be sold on Thursday, the fourteenth of January next, at two o'clock in the afternoon at the house of William Mount, a cow and a bed, it being for fines as delinquent of Lt Hendrick Vanderveer's company, who did not turn out for his monthly tour of duty. A second auction in July 1782 was held against Hulsart to auction off "horse and horned cattle” to pay off his additional militia delinquency fines. In May 1782, Sheriff (and militia officer) John Burrowes deputized John North to collect militia delinquency fines from sixteen men: "You are hereby empowered to collect upon my company for not turning out in monthly duty April last.” The largest fine was £20 and a second fine was £15. The other men were fined £10 or less. In August 1782, Colonel Samuel Forman ordered Captain John Covenhoven to call out two classes of Dover militia. Forman noted upcoming court martials under Captain Samuel Brown to fine militia delinquents. He warned Covenhoven that disaffected shore residents would quit the militia camp if not watched by an officer: "Never let such a thing be known at night again, as the men will go and return for want of an officer." He also warned that Colonel Asher Holmes, the senior colonel for the county, was insisting on the collection of militia delinquency fines: Col Holmes is now on his command, that now comes under his direction, do press the collecting of the money from the militiamen. I am drummed hard. Don't forget last year's money, I really want that too & it ought to be doubled. Militia delinquency was a complicated problem. If delinquency fines were “trifling” or not collected, more delinquency would result. If the fines were draconian, resentments against the new government would grow. After being too lax, militia fines were clearly too draconian in August 1780. It is not a coincidence that the shift to draconian fines coincided with the rise of the Retaliators, the vigilante society. The same desperate circumstances that drove people to mete out punishing fines led other men to embrace vigilantism. The 1781 state law may have created a reasonable path for addressing militia delinquency—but delinquency persisted through the end of the war. Related Historic Site : Captain Joshua Huddy’s Homestead and Marker Sources : Petition, Monmouth County Historical Association, J. Amory Haskell Collection, folder 22, Document A; List of Militia Delinquents, Monmouth County Historical Association, Cherry Hall Papers, box 15, folder 7; List of Militia Delinquents, Monmouth County Historical Association, Cherry Hall Papers, box 6, folder 6; Captain Stephen Fleming, Muster Roll, New Jersey Historical Society, Holmes Family Papers, box 5, folder 6; Mark Lender, “The Enlisted Line: The Continental Soldiers of New Jersey”(Ph.D. diss., Rutgers University, 1975) p 90; Muster Roll, National Archives, Collection 881, R 593, 640. Barnes Smock, Muster Roll, National Archives, Collection 881, R 593, 640; Captain Daniel Hampton, Militia Return, New Jersey Historical Society, Holmes Family Papers, box 5, folder 4; Thomas Bennett to Daniel Hendrickson, New Jersey Historical Society, Holmes Family Papers, box 5, folder 4; “A List of Those Warned Out…”, New Jersey Historical Society, Holmes Family Papers, box 4, folder 2; William Livingston to Daniel Hendrickson, New Jersey State Archives, William Livingston Papers, reel 11, August 29, 1780; List of Militia Delinquents, New Jersey Historical Society, Holmes Family Papers, box 5, folder 5; Militia Court Martial List, New Jersey Historical Society, Holmes Family Papers, box 5, folder 5; Militia Court Martials, Holmes Family Papers, Revolutionary War Series, Court Martials, New Jersey Historical Society; Warrants Granted for the Collection of Fines, Holmes Family Papers, Revolutionary War Series, New Jersey Historical Society; The Library Company, New Jersey Votes of the Assembly, November 8, 1780, p 20-21; Return of Delinquents, National Archives, Revolutionary War Rolls, New Jersey, folder 58, #122; Discussion of militia delinquency fines are in Anderson, John R. "Militia Law in Revolutionary New Jersey." Proceedings of the New Jersey historical Society, vols. LXXVI and LXXVII (July 1956 and January 1959), p 14; Daniel Covenhoven to William Livingston, New Jersey State Archives, William Livingston Papers, reel 14, February 15, 1781; New Jersey’s 1781 militia law is discussed in Anderson, John R. "Militia Law in Revolutionary New Jersey." Proceedings of the New Jersey historical Society, vols. LXXVI and LXXVII (July 1956 and January 1959), pp. 16-8; Auction Advertisements, Rutgers University Special Collections, Holsart Family Papers, folder: A2; John Burrowes to John North, Monmouth County Historical Association, J. Amory Haskell Collection, folder 12, Document M; Samuel Forman to Captain John Covenhoven, National Archives, Collection 881, R 640. 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 > Monmouth County's Jail and the Jailbreak of February 1781 by Michael Adelberg The jail in York, PA. was one of a few buildings in America built to be a prison. The Monmouth County jail was in the basement of the court house. It suffered a jail break and many irregularities. - February 1781 - The Monmouth County jail was in the basement of the county courthouse in Freehold. While no surviving document describes it in detail, it can be assumed that the prison consisted of few rough rooms that were neither designed nor expected to house dozens of dangerous prisoners at a time. Even early in the war, it was understood that Monmouth County was incapable of handling all of its prisoners. For example, in late 1776, roughly 200 Loyalist insurrectionists were taken during the campaigns of Colonels David Forman and Charles Read. Most of these men were sent to jail in Philadelphia—and then further west in Pennsylvania and to Fredericktown, Maryland . Back in Freehold, there was apparently a string of prisoner escapes in early 1777 as Colonel Francis Gurney brought in new prisoners . The escapes promoted a petition to New Jersey Assembly in March: The gaol of said County has been frequently broken out, and prisoners rescued; and praying that their Magistrates may be empowered, in extra-ordinary cases, to send disaffected persons out of the County to be confined. William Perrine, a Loyalist, was one of those escaped men. After the war, he wrote: He was applied to by agents of Congress to sign a paper called the Association, and on refusal of the same was deemed an enemy to my country and committed to close confinement, from thence I found means to break prison & escape to the British Army and left my house and family to the mercy of my enemies. Dangerous prisoners, such as Jesse Woodward and Richard Robins, a few other leaders of the Loyalist insurrections were jailed in distant Sussex County . Far off confinement was harsh punishment in an era when travel was difficult—it made regular family visitation impossible. Men confined far from home appealed to come home which, in turn, created a need to better secure the county prison. In 1777, Upper Freehold militia companies served as prison guards. Josiah Dey wrote of this service: [He] was a considerable time stationed at Monmouth Court House to guard the prisoners confined in jail and prevent their being liberated by the enemy, and served as one of the guards to remove the prisoners thereupon to the jail in Burlington County. In June 1778, Monmouth County’s 2nd Court of Oyer and Terminer sentenced twelve men to death, though six were quickly pardoned by Governor William Livingston. On June 22, Baptist Minister Abel Morgan, ministered to the men on death row. He noted afterward, "At the request of some prisoners, I preached to 8 under sentence of death. A moving sight." However, on June 25, Sheriff Nicholas Van Brunt took the condemned men to Morristown. But another felon housed in the jail, the Loyalist partisan Chrineyonce Van Mater, stayed in jail until he was freed by the British on June 27. The Pennsylvania Gazette reported: The court sentenced him to pay a fine of £300 and to suffer six months imprisonment. We hear that the enemy in their late passage through that country released Van Mater; who, after having piloted them through his neighborhood, went off with them to New York. Mistreatment of prisoners began after the British Army razed a neighborhood near Freehold, a hostile, gratuitous act that stoked local resentments. This may have led to two Loyalist deaths at the county jail in the months that followed. The Loyalist, Joseph Williams wrote that his brother, Obadiah Williams "was taken prisoner & confined in the dungeon in Freehold gaol, until he was emaciated & soon after died.” James Pew, of Middletown before the war, left for New York and then was captured in late 1778 while visiting his family. Pew was jailed and murdered by the prison sentry, James Tilley, who shot him in his prison cell. In late 1779, as Loyalist arrests trended up, Monmouth Countians started worrying again about the security of the county jail. In October, Sheriff Van Brunt again transported prisoners out of the county, to Burlington. And militiaman, John G. Holmes, when describing his service in later 1779 noted that his company was “stationed at Monmouth [Court House] to guard the prisoners then in jail, as the jail was not thought sufficiently strong." The security of the Monmouth County jail worsened in early 1780. In March, the jailkeeper, William Lawrence complained to the New Jersey Assembly about Major Henry “Light Horse Harry” Lee taking his quarters at the Court House. He also claimed that Lee “had also taken charge of and maintained a number of different prisoners confined for different crimes and misdemeanors” in the jail. This glut of prisoners may have led Kenneth Anderson, the county clerk, to write Governor Livingston in April: There now being confined in Monmouth County several prisoners, committed for sundry most atrocious robberies perpetrated in this county, and many persons out of the gaol who expect their trials, and we being apprehensive that the prisoners may effect an escape. In August, as Loyalist irregulars penetrated all the way to Colts Neck (five miles from Freehold), Chief Justice David Brearley, worried "there is a design to rescue them [Loyalist prisoners] by a party from the Pines." This, again, prompted a cohort of prisoners to be moved out of the county. In September, the jailkeeper compiled "A List of Prisoners of War in Monmouth Gaol to be Sent to Philadelphia by order of the Governor and Council of the State in New Jersey." The list included six British sailors, five British soldiers, and five Monmouth County Loyalists (Obadiah Parker, Nathaniel Tyron, Elijah Curtis, Richard Freeman, and Aaron Brewer). The Prison Break of February 1781 As noted in a prior article, a crackdown on illegally trading shore residents swelled the dockets of Monmouth County’s courts in late 1780, which in turn, swelled the number of prisoners in the county jail. The county’s leaders worried about the jail’s vulnerability. In October 1780, at the start of the crackdown, David Rhea, the quartermaster officer responsible for purchasing foodstuffs in the county wrote that a food shortage at the county jail was causing problems "as there are a number of prisoners, very impudent, in the gaol now." That same month, David Forman worried about the security of the county jail: We now have some atrocious villains in gaol & they would have made their escape had I not providentially discovered them and had them secured in irons - no guard having been kept at the court house since the elections. The decision to put prisoners in irons sparked the Loyalist, Thomas Crowell, to do the same with captured Whigs. While Forman may have foiled this attempted prison break, he was not in position to stop the next one a few months later. In February 1781, the New Jersey Gazette reported: On the night of the 4th instant, the prisoners in the gaol of the County of Monmouth made their escape by sawing off their irons and some of the window grates; it is thought that the sentry was remiss in his duty. Among those who escaped were Humphrey Wade and Joel Parker, both under sentence of death for horse stealing. There were several others who were charged with capital offenses; one of whom, of the name DeNight (together with a Negro man) was retaken. The Monmouth County prisoners may have been inspired by a group of five Monmouth County prisoners who escaped from the Continental jail in Philadelphia on January 10. The Loyalist New York Gazette reported on January 20 that: The following persons arrived in this city, they have been made prisoners by the Rebels and confined in Philadelphia gaol, from whence they fortunately escaped on the 10th inst., a reward of $2000 was published for apprehending them. The five Philadelphia escapees included Chrineyonce Van Mater, who had been freed from jail in Freehold in June 1778 only to be retaken in the summer of 1780. The prisoners who escaped the Monmouth County jail likely committed a robbery in Upper Freehold on February 5, the day after their escape. The New Jersey Gazette reported on February 6 that the prior day, "at eleven o'clock in the forenoon, a certain Samuel Read of Philadelphia, being on his way to Freehold in Monmouth County, was robbed by three villains, disguised in frocks and trousers, of sixty guineas, twenty half Joes and nine hundred Continental dollars." They may have been seeking to link up with Pine Robbers who dwelled in the county’s pine forests. The escape of the death row convicts likely prompted an inquiry to Chief Justice Brearley about the men who were now on the run. Brearley wrote Governor Livingston on February 6: The following persons were capitally convicted and sentenced to be hanged on Friday next, Robert James for High Treason… Humphrey Wade and John Parker for Horse Stealing, their cases are very clear -- they were in the company of stolen horses, and taken together at a place called Squankum in Shrewsbury. They acknowledged that they stole the horses out of the pasture of John Coward of Upper Freehold. Wade is an elderly man, Parker is a youth about seventeen. James would be pardoned by Livingston on March 20. Three other Loyalists (who apparently were quickly retaken) were hanged. On February 8, the Royal Gazette reported: "On Thursday last, three Loyalists were put to death, on a gibbet in Monmouth County, New Jersey, their crime being an attachment to the old Constitution." Problems at the County Jail Continue There is no evidence that the February 1781 prison break led to any substantial changes at the Monmouth County jail. In April 1782, Richard Lippincott, a captain in the Associated Loyalists (who would soon be scandalized for hanging Captain Joshua Huddy) proposed a raid against Freehold to free Clayton Tilton, another Associated Loyalist jailed there. Samuel Blowers of the Board of Associated Loyalists, testified that: Captain Lippincott then proposed to make an expedition against the Jerseys with a view to force the gaol in Monmouth County, with a party of about thirty Loyalists, and to rescue Clayton Tilton, or if that was found impracticable, to make an attempt to seize General Forman. If a party of twenty might force open the county jail, it could not have been heavily guarded. While Tilton was not freed by Lippincott, he did escape. He wrote in his post-war Loyalist compensation application: He had the great misfortune of being made a prisoner by the rebels, who tried him by their own laws for High Treason against the State & condemned him to be hanged for his loyalty, but he had the good fortune to be rescued, and got safe again to British lines in New York. Clayton Tilton’s brother, Ezekiel Tilton, was jailed in Freehold just three months later. According to his wife, Elizabeth Tilton, Ezekiel “endeavored to gain an occupation of fisherman to support his family” until he was “taken by a row boat fitted out in the Jersies.” She continued: He is carried to Monmouth Gaol and confined, and it is reported as a State prisoner -- So much oppressed with close and heavy irons that his flesh is in a state of mortification, in which apartment [cell] one of his neighbors [James Pew] has been shot & murdered without provocation, and others led to the gallows for their loyalty. She appealed to British authorities for a prisoner exchange to free her husband. Another Loyalist taken that summer, Peter Stout, claimed that he was extorted into forfeiting his estate after being confined as a prisoner in the Monmouth County jail. He wrote: He was about the month of August 1782 taken prisoner by the Americans & confined in Freehold gaol for near four months, after which he was exchanged upon giving bond & security in £1000 that he would not leave the county, but should return to gaol when called for. However, after Stout agitated for permission to return to New York, he ran into problems with John Burrowes, Jr., the new sheriff, and David Forman: Who absolutely refused suffering the deponent to come within British lines and discharging his security bonds -- upon which the deponent's mother conveyed her right to the deponent's confiscated estate unto Mr. John Burrowes, the purchaser thereof, upon which being done, the deponent was retrieved from irons, and discharged from the dungeon by John Burrowes, Jr. Historian David Fowler noted that captured pine robber leaders raised fears of Loyalist attacks to liberate prisoners. When John Bacon, for example, was captured in 1782, David Forman, now a judge, secured a writ to put him in irons at a secret location. The writ states "safely keep him close, confined in irons to answer charges of High Treason, murder and horse stealing, whereof he stands accused." Despite the special treatment, Bacon escaped. Meanwhile, other dangerous prisoners continued to be shuttled outside the county, and not returned until trial. In November 1782, Sheriff Burrowes, hired and paid Captain John Walton for “bringing Edward Price, Peter Patton, Joseph Sheldon, John Okerson, Ezekiel Tilton, William Horner, Fuller Horner & others from Burlington to Monmouth gaol.” A Court of Oyer and Terminer was held in early 1783, but there were no capital convictions at that court. The insecure Monmouth County jail was never greatly improved, but hostilities did wind down. The retrieval of prisoners in 1782 may have been the last time that the Monmouth County jail needed to be emptied of dangerous prisoners. Related Historic Site : National Prisoner of War Museum (Andersonville, Georgia) Sources : Joseph Holmes to Asher Holmes, Monmouth County Historical Association, Cherry Hall Papers, box 5, folder 9; The Library Company, New Jersey Votes of the Assembly, March 3, 1777, p 90; Jones, E. Alfred. The Loyalists of New Jersey, (Newark, N. J. Historical Society, 1927) p 171. Gregory Palmer, Biographical Sketches of Loyalists of the American Revolution (Westport, Conn. and London, 1984), pp. 682-3. Rutgers University Special Collections, Great Britain Public Record Office, Loyalist Compensation Claims, D96, AO 13/19, reel 6 and AO 13/111, reel 10; National Archives, revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - Josiah Dey; R.T. Middleditch, "Abel Morgan of Middletown", The Baptist Quarterly, 1874, vol. 8, p332; Edwin Salter, History of Monmouth and Ocean Counties (Bayonne, NJ: E. Gardner and Sons, 1890) p 90; Franklin Ellis, The History of Monmouth County (R.T. Peck: Philadelphia, 1885), p196-7; Pennsylvania Gazette, July 14, 1778 (CD-ROM at the David Library, #24982); Minutes of the Provincial Congress and the Council of Safety of the State of New Jersey 1775-1776 (Ithaca: Cornell University Library, 2009) pp. 276-277; Journals of the Legislative Council of New Jersey (Isaac Collins: State of New Jersey, 1779) p104; National Archives, revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - John G. Holmes; The Library Company, New Jersey Votes of the Assembly, March 1, 1780, p 132; New Jersey State Archives, William Livingston Papers, reel 11, April 27, 1780; David Fowler, egregious Villains, Wood Rangers, and London Traders (Ph.D. Dissertation: Rutgers University, 1987) p 242; David Library of the American Revolution, Prisoners of War, #66, “A List of the Prisoners of War in Monmouth Gaol to be Sent to Philadelphia by order of the Governor and Council of the State of New Jersey”; David Forman to William Livingston, New York Public Library, William Livingston Papers, vol. 3, pp. 55-58; William Horner, This Old Monmouth of Ours (Freehold: Moreau Brothers, 1932) p 163; William Nelson, Austin Scott, et al., ed., New Jersey Archives (Newark, Trenton, Somerville, 1901-1917) vol. 5, p 194; David Brearley to William Livingston, Carl Prince, Papers of William Livingston (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987) vol. 4, pp. 139-40; William Horner, This Old Monmouth of Ours (Freehold: Moreau Brothers, 1932) p 162; Library of Congress, Rivington's New York Gazette, reel 2906, January 20, 1781; Royal Gazette (Georgia), February 8, 1781; Howard Peckham, Sources of American Independence: Selected Manuscripts from the Collections of the William L. Clements Library (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978) p 562; David Fowler, egregious Villains, Wood Rangers, and London Traders (Ph.D. Dissertation: Rutgers University, 1987) p 252; Elizabeth Tilton to Guy Carleton, David Library of the American Revolution, Great Britain Public Records Office, British Headquarters Papers, #5097; Peter Stout, Affidavit, David Library of the American Revolution, Great Britain Public Records Office, British Headquarters Papers, #9154, 9177; Rutgers University, Special Collections, Loyalist Compensation Applications, Joseph Williams, Coll. D96, PRO AO 10/20, reel 7; Rutgers University, Special Collections, Loyalist Compensation Applications, Clayton Tilton, Coll. D96, PRO AO 10/20, reel 7 and AO 13/112, reel 10; New Jersey State Archives, Dept. of Defense, Revolutionary War, Numbered Manuscripts, #4100. 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 > Thomas Seabrook and Other Whigs Move Inland for Safety by Michael Adelberg Thomas Seabrook was a militia officer who moved inland after Loyalists bayoneted his son. Over the course of war, at least twenty Monmouth County families moved inland for safety. - June 1777 - Thomas Seabrook and his family lived comfortably on the Raritan Bayshore before the war. In April 1776, Seabrook was commissioned a major in the new Monmouth County militia. Weeks later, he became a major in the regiment of Flying Camp raised by Nathaniel Heard and David Forman. He served for five months, enduring a string of defeats and privations with the Continental Army. In spring 1777, Seabrook was commissioned as the new Lt. Colonel of the 1st Regiment of Monmouth Militia following the disastrous Battle of the Navesink . In April, his adult son, Stephen Seabrook, confronted the disaffected squire Edward Taylor over assisting Loyalist raiding parties led by his son, George Taylor. The Seabrook family was now known to the Loyalist refugees that began raiding the Monmouth shore in spring 1777. On June 16, a raiding party led by George Taylor entered the Seabrook house, probably looking to take Thomas Seabrook. Thomas was not home, but Stephen was. He hid in a ceiling loft. A Loyalist raider noticed a sag in the ceiling and thrust his bayonet upward, stabbing Stephen. The Seabrook family lost £31 in taken items. After the incident, the Seabrooks left the family home and moved to a rented house in present-day Manalapan. A year later, the Seabrooks suffered again when the rented house sustained heavy damage during the Battle of Monmouth. Other Monmouth Whigs Move Inland The Seabrooks were among the first Whig (pro-Revolution) families to move inland after suffering at the hands of Loyalists, but they certainly were not the last. Table 4 documents 21 families that moved inland for safety—and it is safe to assume that this table is not a complete accounting of all the Whigs who re-located inland. The table omits families with incomplete evidence. For example, a farm near Freehold was rented to a man named Carr. The farm was damaged during the Battle of Monmouth (June 1778). Based on tax records, all Monmouth County families named Carr lived in the shore townships of Shrewsbury, Dover and Stafford. But because the identity of the Carr family living near Freehold is unknown, they are not included in the record compilation above. There are additional families that moved inland but are not well documented. Even with this limitation, the records above shows that families moved inland from all three Atlantic shore townships (Shrewsbury, Dover, and Stafford) and the Raritan Bayshore township of Middletown. Half of these families relocated near the county seat of Freehold, a safe place because it was fifteen miles inland and the county militia muster site. Other families went even further inland to Upper Freehold, Cranbury (in Middlesex), and even out of state. Families that owned boats moved to Woodbridge and Middletown Point, but both of those villages were only somewhat safer than their homes—both villages suffered Loyalist raids during the war. Families moved inland every year of the war in which there were Loyalist raids, but 1777 was the year in which the most families moved. Six of the twenty (30 percent) families that moved inland were the families of militia officers—while leaders represented less than 20 percent of the general population. The author’s prior research documents that leaders suffered twice as often during the war as non-leaders because they were targeted by Loyalists. A number of veterans (or their widows) recalled moving inland in their postwar veteran pension applications. A few examples follow. Mary Wall, the wife of Lieutenant James Wall of Middletown, recalled: Her husband was regularly obnoxious against the [Loyalist] refugees and always slept with his arms at his side; his house was frequently searched and one time he very narrowly escaped by availing himself to the darkness of night when the enemy came to the door. The family moved to Spotswood for safety, but Mary Wall noted that Spotswood was also unsafe: At that time he lived in Spotswood when his house was again plundered of everything valuable and portable and he then lost the sword which had been surrendered to him by the British officer at the Battle of Monmouth. Matthias Handlin of Long Branch turned sixteen, joined the militia, and participated in a battle against an African American Loyalist raiding party. After that, his father decided his son needed to move inland: At Long Branch, there were a great many Tories and said Handlin believed himself to be in great danger from them, owing to the active part he had been taking against them... His father, about this time, persuaded said Matthias Handlin to go to Allentown at which place he had a sister living. That, being obedient to his father's request, did so proceed to Allentown. William Aumack joined the militia upon turning 16 in 1778. "He lived almost on the shore of New York Bay, within about one hundred yards of it... and for his own safety he was forced to seek the ranks of a soldier... When called into service, he removed from said Township, it being on the shore, with his father, into the township of Freehold for two years." Job Throckmorton's pension application was submitted by his widow, Mary Throckmorton. She described the family’s move inland in 1780. That year, the family moved “into the interior of the county at a place called Englishtown, upwards of twenty miles distant, and the reason for his doing so was that himself and his family would not be murdered by the enemy." Not included in the table are the nineteen women from Tinton Falls who are listed in a 1780 militia return of Captain James Green. These women likely had been burned out of their homes during a particularly punishing Loyalist raid and now were under the care of the Colts Neck militia captain. These women and their families moved inland for safety and poor relief. They are not included in the table because their time inland was likely short term. The movement of Whigs to inland locations was noticed by Loyalists in New York. The Loyalist New York Gazette reported in October 1779 that “the well-affected inhabitants” to the Revolution in Monmouth County were “removed to the back part of the county.” The report further stated that: The more moderate and sober Whigs have lately remonstrated against this practice and procured their return, declaring that they looked upon the Tories as their protectors, and unless the Loyalists were recalled would, themselves, follow them into retirement. In September 1782, David Forman wrote George Washington about a rumored promise from the British Commander in Chief, Guy Carleton, that "he will prevent small parties coming within the American lines… for plundering and man stealing .” Forman asked for information about this rumored British directive on behalf of “a respectable body of Whigs who have been compelled to leave their homes on the shore on acct of their affection to the American cause and are exceedingly distressed." Forman, living near Freehold, was obviously in contact with the shore-residents who had moved to the Freehold-area. These Whig refugees were likely hoping for news that would allow them to go home; their grievance may have contributed with the radicalization of Forman and other political leaders around Freehold—this radicalization was evident in the election-coercion and vigilantism embraced by Forman a clique of Freehold leaders. Related Historic Site : Seabrook-Wilson House (Spy House) Sources : John Stillwell, Historical and Genealogical Miscellany (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1970) v4, p247-8; John Stillwell, Historical and Genealogical Miscellany, 4 vols, Genealogical Publishing Co, 1970, v4, p236; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, David Cooper of NJ, www.fold3.com/image/#12873752 ; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, Peter Crawford of PA, www.fold3.com/image/#15198310 ; National Archives, revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - Burrowes Norris; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, James Wall of NJ, www.fold3.com/image/#20365758; National Archives, revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - William Aumock; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, Matthias Handlin of Ohio, www.fold3.com/image/#23563620www.fold3.com/image/#23563620 ; Thoms Brown’s pension application in John C. Dann, The Revolution Remembered: Eyewitness Accounts of the War for Independence (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980) pp 141-3; National Archives, revolutionary War Veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - Derrick Sutphin; Franklin Ellis, The History of Monmouth County (R.T. Peck: Philadelphia, 1885), p 508; National Archives, Veterans Pensions, Isaac Covenhoven of New York; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - Job Clayton; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, John Clark of PA, www.fold3.com/image/#12752854 ; National Archives, Revolutionary War Veterans' Pension Application, Zachariah Hawkins of NJ, www.fold3.com/image/#22623931 ; National Archives, Revolutionary War veterans Pension Applications, New Jersey - Job Throckmorton; “An Evenly Balanced County: The Scope and Severity of Civil Warfare in Revolutionary Monmouth County New Jersey,” Journal of Military History , 2009; Militia Return, June 1780, Captain James Green, Stryker-Rodda, Harriet, “Militia Women of 1780, Monmouth County, New Jersey,” N.S.D.A.R. Magazine, vol. 113, n. 4, April 1979, pp. 308-12; Library of Congress, Rivington's New York Gazette, October 1779, reel 2906; David Forman to George Washington, Library of Congress, George Washington Papers, Series 4, General Correspondence, September 21, 1782; 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 > Continental Congress Seeks Blankets Via London Trade by Michael Adelberg Richard Peters served on the Board of War of the Continental Congress. He championed an ill-fated, secret plan to buy British blankets for the Army via illegal traders at Manasquan. - January 1780 - While much is written about the Continental Army shivering through a miserable winter at Valley Forge (1778-1779), the winters of 1779-1780 and 1780-1781 at Morristown were colder. Amidst harrowing reports of soldier suffering, the shortage of blankets for the Army tempted the Continental Congress to relieve the shortage with a half-baked scheme. On December 31, 1779, the Continental Congress approved a secret plan developed by its Board of War. The minutes of the Congress did not describe the plan because it could not be entered into the public record, but the minutes do document that this secret plan was approved: [The] plan appears practicable and if carried into execution promises supplies of certain articles immediately wanted for the troops at much less expense, and with greater dispatch than can otherwise be procured. Congress then allocated $500,000 Continental dollars to buy blankets from British-held New York via “London traders ” at Manasquan. Bowman’s Secret Mission is Implemented The Board of War, chaired by Richard Peters of Pennsylvania, wrote George Washington on January 8, 1780, regarding the secret plan. It wrote, "we have employed Maj. [Richard] Howell... to facilitate the measures we have communicated to him. Capt. Nathaniel Bowman of that Regiment may be detached with his entire company of Light Infantry." Bowman was ordered "to proceed with an ammunition wagon to Squan by way of Freehold, where he is to draw two weeks provisions with orders on the Commissary [John Lloyd] there." The Board was clear about the secret nature of the mission: Your Excellency [is] to give these orders to Capt. Bowman alone with direction to keep his route and destination a profound secret & to repair to Squan with all expedition...To ensure their good temper and fidelity, it will be necessary that they be as well equipped as to clothing & supplies as circumstances will admit. The Board also warned Washington "should your Excellency have occasion to detach any other officer into that part of the country, it will be necessary to order him not to interfere with Capt. Bowman's command; tho' we would wish no other officer may, for a time, be sent there." Washington’s aide, Robert Harrison, promptly ordered General William Maxwell, leading the New Jersey Line, to detach Capt. Bowman's company on the secret mission. Bowman was to be provided "an ammunition wagon provided with horses & a driver. There is to be no ammunition in the wagon.” Maxwell was further ordered to make sure Bowman’s company was full: “Whatever men are deficient [in Bowman's company] are to be made up out of the Regiment, and the General desires that those men may be furnished as soon as possible with their clothing in preference to others." Bowman was asked to be ready to march to Freehold in three days. Maxwell was not told of Bowman’s mission. On January 11, Washington wrote directly to Bowman with secret orders: You are to proceed immediately with the men of your company present, and those attached to it by an order yesterday for the purpose of making it complete, to Squan by way of Freehold, taking with you the ammunition wagon for which you obtained an order of General Knox at Freehold; you will draw two weeks provisions for your party, for which purpose you will find an order enclosed for the Commissary of that place... It is the desire of the Board of War that your route and destination be kept a profound secret. No officer may interfere with your command in the course of your march and command. You [will] keep strict discipline and good order. Troubles with Bowman’s Blankets at Manasquan There is no documentation of Bowman’s time at Manasquan until the end of March. On March 30, Abraham Clark, a New Jersey delegate in Congress, wrote to Governor William Livingston. By law, British goods were illegal in New Jersey. Any New Jersey citizen who found British goods in the state could seize them. With the approval of the local magistrate and a verdict from a mini-jury, those goods would be forfeited to the person who seized them. This meant that the blankets at Manasquan were liable to seizure. Clark wrote: There is now stored at Squan a quantity of blankets for the use of the Army… it appears they are of British manufacture and on that account are liable to seizure, it is said that a number of inhabitants, having knowledge of said goods, are determined to avail themselves of the law authorizing seizures in case of their removal. This embarrasses the Board of War. Clark requested that Livingston intervene to allow Bowman to safely bring the blankets out of Manasquan. That same day, Richard Peters wrote Washington that "the great distress of the Army for want of blankets induced the Board to sometime since attempt to import them from New York." He provided an update on Bowman’s mission and made a request: The Board contracted with a Gentleman for 5,000 blankets on terms advantageous to the Public & gave him a permit to go into N. York, where he has been a most unreasonable time. He has at length sent to Squan in N. Jersey upwards of 2,000 blankets and some other goods...a small quantity which has been at rec'd by the Clothier here [Philadelphia]--but the transportation of them through the Jersies and the imprudence of the persons conducting them have created such suspicion and uneasiness among the people as to make the board apprehensive of risking the rest across the Country. Peters asked that Washington give Bowman a pass to carry the blankets across the state. Livingston and Washington exchanged letters about the blankets at Manasquan. Livingston wrote: There is now stored at or near Squan a quantity of blankets designed for use of the Army; these with other articles of clothing are under the direction of the Board of War...How and whence these blankets came to the above place, I am not able to inform your Excellency, but it appears they are of British manufacture and on that account liable to seizure. It is said that a number of inhabitants of New Jersey, having knowledge of the said goods, are determined to avail themselves of the law authorizing seizure. Livingston asked Washington to issue a special pass for the blankets: "Orders to the effect which he [Clark] mentions should doubtless be given without delay, but as this is a matter relating solely to the Army, it seems proper that the passport should come from Your Excellency [Washington]." Washington complied with the requests from Livingston and Peters by sending a pass for Bowman to transport the blankets to the Board of War. He also complained of being pulled into a plot that contradicted New Jersey law: I enclose a permit for the goods in charge of Captain Bowman. This mode of obtaining supplies is certainly justifiable, from the unhappy situation of our affairs and the necessity of having them; but at the same time, for reasons which will steadily occur to the Board, I very much wish the business could have been concluded without any interference on my part. Bowman's pass read: "The goods which Capt. Bowman has in his charge have been procured by the public, and are essential articles of supply for the Army; They are therefore permitted to pass." Livingston promised his support: "I shall cheerfully do everything in my power that may be thought necessary to facilitate the safe transportation of the blankets." It is unclear when Washington’s pass made it to Bowman, but Bowman stayed at Manasquan through April. The delay proved costly. At the end of April, Bowman compiled a troop return: three men deserted on April 18; five more deserted on April 20; five were captured during a Loyalist raid on Manasquan, also on April 20; and four more deserted on the march back to Morristown on April 29. In April alone, Bowman lost seventeen of his 62 men (though two of the deserters eventually returned). It was inevitable that London Traders at Manasquan who regularly conversed with Loyalists at Sandy Hook and New York would inform a Loyalist with military resources. The April 20 raid on Manasquan was reported in the Loyalist New York Gazette . A detachment of New Jersey Volunteers (Loyalist troops) "under the command of Lt. Col. Lawrence [Elisha Lawrence] embarked at Sandy Hook on an expedition against a rebel post at Squan.” The report continued: After being detained for a week at the Light House by contrary winds, Coll. Lawrence landed at midnight and marched immediately for the cantonment of the enemy, which he soon reached, but was mortified in finding the post had been withdrawn to the south. However, the Loyalists did capture a small detachment of Continentals, consisting of a Lieutenant and five men. After this, Lawarence determined that "nothing further to be done, the detachment re-embarked and returned" on April 22. The captured officer was Lt. Benajah Osmun, who had just returned to Manasquan from Philadelphia on April 18 with two privates (he probably had delivered a wagonload of blankets to that city and was returning). After his capture, Osmun was permitted to write Colonel Israel Shreve, his regimental commander. He wrote of the capture of his party while searching local homes (perhaps searching for pilfered blankets): I ordered them [his men] to rest their selves for a little time and then would go search the houses and no doubt should have found them but was disappointed by a party under the command of Col. Lawrence which landed about 1 o'clock and took me and the men, which was brought to New York, and I was sent to Long Island [Brooklyn] on parole where I still remain. Congress’s Board of War had funded Bowman to purchase 5,000 blankets, and, in March, reported that “upwards of 2,000 blankets” were brought from New York to Manasquan. Lt. Osmun apparently brought “a small quantity” of those blankets to Philadelphia, but most of the blankets were likely lost—either to the Loyalist raiders or to local disaffected who pilfered the blankets when Bowman retreated from Manasquan on Lawrence’s landing. After the Collapse Bowman’s Mission In May, an anonymous intelligence report was sent to Congress from Black Point (Rumson). The secret correspondent was probably Major Richard Howell, who had spent five months at Black Point in 1778. He wrote: "I sent you a line the 8th instant from Black Point from which place I intended a secret visit." The writer warned Congress of rumors that "I have been the principal instrument of supplying the Continental Army with blankets and ammunition, but they are false." Even after the failure of Bowman’s mission was known in Congress, discussions continued about acquiring blankets via illegal trade. Indeed, Richard Peters, who had championed the Bowman mission, proposed a similar plan to acquire blankets via West Point, New York. Peters predicted that, this time, there would be "less examination or suspicion, as the transportation [of blankets] is by water, & no risk to be run by the public." General Washington was cool to the idea and there is no evidence that the scheme was implemented. A month later, it was understood that a lot of money was spent on bringing blankets from New York to Manasquan and only a few of the blankets had made it to the Army. On June 7, Congress summoned Bowman to appear before Congress, via a letter to Washington: The Board are desirous of seeing Capt. Bowman of the Jersey Troops on the subject of his command at Squan, during the last winter and spring, & would be much obliged to your Excellency to order him to repair to Philadelphia without delay. Washington complied. He wrote the Board that he was sending Bowman to Philadelphia; he also vouched for Bowman’s good character: "He is said to be a very brave and active officer." On June 14, Congress noted Bowman’s arrival. There is no record of Bowman’s examination before Congress. This is likely because Bowman’s mission was a secret one, albeit a poorly-kept secret, and a decision was made to keep the proceedings out of the public record. The misadventure at Manasquan had one final twist. According to historian John Rees, in December 1780, Major Howell, Bowman’s commanding officer, was arrested for his role in illegally trading for British blankets. “He was forcibly taken from his father's house before a Judge at Burlington.” Howell then “showed his secret orders, which secured his discharge and erasure of the minutes." Rees suggested that Bowman’s mission "seemed fated for failure almost from the outset” because it started too late in the year, was plagued by poor communications, and was dependent on unreliable locals living along the vulnerable Monmouth shore. Rees concluded that, for Congress, "the experience at Squan must have discouraged any further such plans." This may be true, but it certainly did not stop Monmouth Countians from engaging in other convoluted plots to extract valuables from New York. Related Historic Site : Morristown National Historical Park Sources : John Rees, Supply Shortages, Suffering Soldiers and a Secret Mission During the Hard Winter of 1780, Military Collector & Historian, v52, n3, Fall 2000, pp. 100-107; George Washington to Nathaniel Bowman, Library of Congress, George Washington Papers, series 4, reel 63, January 11, 1780; Richard Peters to George Washington in John Rees, Supply Shortages, Suffering Soldiers and a Secret Mission During the Hard Winter of 1780, Military Collector & Historian, v52, n3, Fall 2000, pp. 100-7; Abraham Clark to William Livingston, Paul Smith, et al, Letters of Delegates to Congress, 1774–1789 (Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress, 1970) vol. 15, p 555; William Livingston to George Washington, John Rees, Supply Shortages, Suffering Soldiers and a Secret Mission During the Hard Winter of 1780, Military Collector & Historian, v52, n3, Fall 2000, p100-7; George Washington to Congress, John U. Rees, The Great Distress of the Army for Want of Blankets, p4-10; William Livingston to George Washington, Library of Congress, Early American Newspaper, New Jersey Gazette, reel 1930; Bowman’s Troops Return in John U. Rees, The Great Distress of the Army for Want of Blankets, p4-10; Library of Congress, Rivington's New York Gazette, reel 2906; Anonymous Report, William Clements Library, Henry Clinton Papers, vol. 98; Congress to George Washington in John Rees, Supply Shortages, Suffering Soldiers and a Secret Mission During the Hard Winter of 1780, Military Collector & Historian, v52, n3, Fall 2000, p100-7 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 > Holmes v. Walton as a Constitutional Watershed by Michael Adelberg David Brearly presided over the New Jersey Supreme Court as it moved to be the U.S. first court to hold a law unconstitutional. He delayed the ruling to allow the Legislature to amend the law. - May 1779 - As noted in the prior article , in May 1779, Major Elisha Walton ordered the seizure of a large quantity of silk belonging to John Holmes and Solomon Ketchum. The silk was almost certainly illegally purchased from Loyalists who acted as middlemen between British-held New York and Monmouth County farmers. Over the course of the war, militia parties or privateers seized the goods of dozens of Monmouth Countians who participated in the so-called “London Trade . ” One seizure of grain , in January 1779, deepened the split between the county’s competing factions of Revolutionary leaders. However, it was Walton’s seizure of the silks of Holmes and Walton that would permanently impact American constitutional history. The case of Holmes v. Walton was first decided in 1780, and then reheard through 1783. The 1780 decision was the first known application of judicial review, through which a court determines a law unconstitutional and voids it. In the case of Holmes v Walton, the New Jersey Supreme Court would strike down an October 1778 law that authorized judges or township magistrates to validate the seizure of illegally traded goods with only the affirmation of a six-man mini-jury. Further, the law did not create a way to appeal the magistrate’s ruling. Judge John Anderson of Freehold, with a six-man jury, upheld Walton’s seizure of Holmes’ and Ketchum’s goods. Lacking an appeal in the local courts, Holmes hired an attorney, William Wilcocks (formerly a judge advocate in the Continental Army) and requested a hearing before the New Jersey Supreme Court. Wilcocks never claimed that Holmes was innocent, but instead focused on violations of Holmes’ right to a fair trial. Broadly-speaking, Wilcocks advanced three arguments: Jury Tampering : Wilcocks argued that Walton prejudiced the six-man jury, stating that "Elisha Walton did, at his own expense, and without the consent of said John and Solomon, treat with strong liquor the jury sworn to try this case, after they were unpaneled, but before they gave their verdict in the case." This argument was not persuasive to the Supreme Court. Though it might astound modern readers, attempting to curry favor with jurors and voters with liquor was accepted in the raucous democracy practiced in the 1700s. Weak Evidence : Wilcocks argued for reversal "because there was not any evidence offered at the trial which proved that such wares & merchandize came from the enemy.” He argued that hearsay evidence was used to decide the case, rather than documentary evidence such as British marks on the silks or receipts demonstrating purchases made in New York. These arguments did not persuade the Supreme Court; 18th century cases were frequently decided on hearsay evidence. The Right to a Fair Trial : The strongest of Wilcocks’ arguments concerned Holmes’ right to a jury trial. The New Jersey Constitution of 1776 (co-written by John Covenhoven of Freehold) included this statement: “The inestimable right of trial by jury shall remain confirmed as part of the law of this colony without repeal forever.” Wilcocks argued that the right to a fair trial "could not be warranted by a jury of the six" (when twelve was the long-established number for a jury). Further, Holmes did not have a path for appeal other than the New Jersey Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, by hearing Holmes’ case, implicitly agreed with Holmes’ plea for an appeal. Wilcocks concluded that seizure of Holmes’ silks “was contrary to the Constitution, law and practices of the land." Well before the decision was issued, it was apparently understood that Wilcocks’ arguments were persuasive. In December, Governor William Livingston wrote Nathaniel Scudder, Monmouth County’s most prominent political leader, that: The cause between Walton and Holmes is of the greatest moment and I hope none of the judges have given their opinion, I should be sorry that the supposed event of the controversy should give the Tories any cause of triumph; but the judges, you know, are bound to determine the law in whosoever favor that may appear to be, let the consequences be what they may. Holmes v. Walton was decided by the New Jersey Supreme Court on September 7, 1780—almost a year after it was first argued. With Chief Justice David Brearly of Upper Freehold presiding, it ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, Holmes and Ketcham. The ruling argued that the New Jersey Constitution and English common law required a twelve-man jury and that legal decisions were subject to appeal. The legislature exceeded its constitutional authority by interfering with these rights. The court also ruled that the "said plaintiffs be restored of all things." The New Jersey legislature implicitly agreed with the ruling by passing a new law that required the magistrate or judge to convene a jury of twelve, when requested, to decide on the legality of the seizure. Legal historian, Philip Hamburger, who wrote the defining legal work on Holmes v Walton, argued that the Supreme Court delayed its decision in order to give the legislature time to revise its unconstitutional law: “There was real danger that a judicial reversal would become a political and military reversal and although the judges would alter their decision, they were willing to defer their decision until the government prepared itself for the judgment.” Additional Legal Moves Prior to the Supreme Court issuing its decision, Walton moved to rehear the seizure of silks in a court of law. In July 1780, the Monmouth County Court of Common Pleas heard a complaint from Elisha Walton. His attorney claimed that the Supreme Court "reversed the judgment given by John Anderson, Esq." (the official decision would not be issued until September) and asked the court to "correct errors in the record and process" by rehearing and upholding the seizure. Walton argued that the court had not found Holmes and Ketchum innocent, but only took issue with the process by which they were tried. A proper trial could correct the matter. The Monmouth Court of Common Pleas did not immediately hear the case. It was not until July 1781 (nine months after the Supreme Court decision), that the county court moved to re-hear the case. A full jury was empaneled and several witnesses were called: Andrew Bowne, Elias Covenhoven, William Hilsey, John James, Daniel Ketchum, Thomas Henderson, and Phoebe Ketchum. The result of this trial is not documented, but the decision likely was against Walton. The New Jersey Supreme Court agreed it would hear an appeal in late 1781. In May 1782, the New Jersey Supreme Court re-heard Holmes v Walton, but this time the decision of the Court of Common Pleas was on trial. John Craig, Monmouth County's Commissioner of Bails and Affidavits, forwarded several papers to the Supreme Court, including: 1. Andrew Bowne's testimony in favor of Walton, claiming that he heard from Holmes that the wagon carrying the silks was on its way to Daniel Ketchum's house (to elude capture by the militia) when it was seized; 2. Depositions from Moses Mount, Daniel Herbert, William Thomson, and Aaron Davis that, at the July 1781 retrial in Freehold, one of the witnesses, Widow Holmes, "should have said something about the wagon & goods going to Daniel Ketchum's but it being objected against as illegal, as hearsay" by Wilcocks, the important testimony never offered; 3. Statements from William Morison and Jonathan Forman complaining that William Wilcocks’ frequent objections and numerous invoking of "bills of exception" prevented a full disclosure of evidence; 4. A statement from Andrew Bowne that his previous testimony was cut short by Wilcock's frequent objections and bills of exception, obstructing the proceeding. The Supreme Court apparently did not issue a decision in 1782, because it heard from seven witnesses a year later in May 1783. At this time: 1. Andrew Bowne testified that "in May 1779, lived at Middletown near the lines" when he carried the silks to Holmes & Ketchum. "He had never of John Holmes purchasing the goods from Boston" as Holmes claimed and "Holmes was not a merchant"; 2. John James testified, he "lived at Daniel Ketchum's” and witnessed Ketchum loading the silks onto a wagon and taking the back road in an apparent attempt to avoid capture; 3. Elias Covenhoven testified in support of Holmes, stating that Holmes never indicated "the goods were carried from N. York"; 4. Phoebe Ketchum testified that she "rode in the wagon with her brother [Daniel]” and recalled Solomon Ketchum and Obadiah Bowne driving the wagon "along the back road" to escape seizure. When stopped, they lied about the contents in the wagon; 5. Thomas Henderson testified that he examined the goods and "they appeared to be such as are usually imported from Great Britain... and the quantity was greater than ever this deponent had seen in any country store." He further stated that the £20,000 valuation of the silks was "extraordinary" because "goods of this were exceedingly scarce." And he stated that Ketchum picked a road that "went unused" though he was "well acquainted with both roads"; 6. Daniel Ketchum testified that he was moving the goods to a house in Freehold because of "an alarm at Middletown" and that the goods were purchased "honestly and righteously"; 7. William Hilsey testified that the goods "appeared imported and were of the first quality." It is not known if the Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Monmouth Court of Common Pleas. Beyond New Jersey, Holmes v. Walton, according to legal historian Hamburger, is the “earliest precedent for judicial review” in the United States. It created a blueprint for judicial review by which a court can determine a law unconstitutional. A generation later, in Marbury v. Madison, the United States Supreme Court asserted judicial review as its power. It is remarkable that a London trading incident in Monmouth County played such an important role in U.S. constitutional history. Related Historic Site : The Supreme Court of the United States (Washington, DC) Sources : Philip Hamburger, Law and Judicial Duty (Cambridge: Harvard UP, 2008) p 407-20; Supreme Court Records, New Jersey State Archives, #18354; William Livingston to Nathaniel Scudder, Carl Prince, Papers of William Livingston (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987) vol. 3, pp. 279-80, 281 note; The Library Company, New Jersey Votes of the Assembly, May 13 and May 20, 1780, p 187-195; Monmouth County Common Pleas Minutes, July 1780, Monmouth County Archives; Austin Scott, "Holmes v. Walton: The New Jersey Precedent", American Historical Review, 1899, vol. 4, pp 7-8; The Library Company, New Jersey Votes of the Assembly, December 8, 1780, p 52; Supreme Court Records, New Jersey State Archives, #44928. Previous Next