It would appear that he was happily constituted for the times in which he lived, and the sphere of his labours. He was sprightly and engaging as a companion, as a friend and neighbour kind and liberal, and hís public ministrations were marked by great solemnity and tenderness, especially the administration of the holy Supper. At the time of the settlement of these two patriarchs, their two congregations were the only ones in the town, and the Episcopal congregation had just been gathered, including but a very few families. At the time of their decease, Presbyterian congregations had been gathered and ministers settled over them, at Westfield, at Connecticut Farms, at Turkey or New Providence, at Rahway, at Basking Ridge, at Rocsiticus [Mendham], at West Hanover [Morristown], and at Springfield,—all of which were included within the original township of Elizabeth. CHAPTER XVII. A. D. 1740-1764. Negro Plot-Land Conflicts-Appeal to the Crown-Tumults-Secret Meetings-E. T. Bill in Chancery - Answer-Death of Gov. Morris-Jonathan Belcher, Gov.-Issue of the long Conflict with the Proprietors - Death of Mayor Bonnel-Lottery Mania-Two Lottery Schemes -- Prof. Kalm's Notices of the Town - Col. Rickett's Affair in N. Y. Harbor- Notices of Gov. Belcher - Removes to E. T.-His Hospitality and Piety-Befriends the College-Gives it a new Charter-Incorporates the Presbyterian Chh. - Makes E. T. the Seat of Government-His Death and Character-Judge RossAddresses of the Corporation-Town Officers-Newspaper Notices - The Barracks - First Centenary Celebration. THE Incorporation of the Borough, Feb. 8, 17%, was followed, the same year, by the scenes and excitements of "the Great Revival," absorbing the attention and interest of nearly the whole community. The year following, 1741, witnessed one of those remarkable panics to which a slaveholding community are ever liable. The city of New York, in the spring and summer of that year, was terribly agitated by the report of a Negro Conspiracy to burn the city and murder the white population, the particulars of which, by Recorder Horsmanden, have been so minutely and faithfully described in his "History of the Negro Plot." To the disgrace of humanity, During the progress of this affair, one hundred and fifty four negroes were committed to prison; of whom fourteen were burnt at the stake; eighteen hanged; seventy one transported, and the rest pardoned or discharged for want of proof. Twenty white persons were committed, of whom four were executed.* Two were burned on the 3d of May, and the remaining Valentine's N. York, p. 275. twelve in June following. Horrible as these transactions. were, they were not confined to New York. The panic extended to this neighborhood, whither some of the suspected blacks had fled for safety. Two at least of the poor creatures were arrested, within the County of Essex, tried, found guilty, and condemned to the same inhuman fate. The Account Book of the Justices and Freeholders of the county contains the following records: June 4, 1741. Daniel Harrison Sent in his account of wood Carted for Burning two Negros allow Cury. 0. 11. 0. February 25, 1744. Joseph Heden acct for Wood to Burn the Negros Mr Farrand paid allowed. . 0. 7. 0. Allowed to Isaac Lyon 4/ Curry for a load of Wood to burn the first Negro.. 0. 4. 0. At the latter meeting were present, "Matthias Hatfield Justice for Elizth town, John Halsted freeholder for Elizth town." At the former, "John Ogden, Justice, John Halsted and John Stiles freeholders for Elizebethtown." Zophar Beech was allowed 78. for "Irons for y Negro that was Burnt." The latter seems to have been allowed, Feb. 27, 17%, and probably refers to a prior event. Possibly, there were three burned at the stake. The Sheriff on whom it devolved to to execute the judgments of the Court, at this period, was William Chetwood of this town. Whether these executions had any connection with the so-called "Negro Conspiracy" at New York, or not, they show a feature of the times not to be overlooked by the faithful historian. The troubles with the "Proprietors" were perpetuated, and soon after the occurrences just mentioned greatly increased. In 1740, the Town Committee consisted of John Crane, Jonathan Dayton, John Megie, Thomas Clarke, Andrew Joline, Joseph Man, and Andrew Craige. Robert Ogden, (the second of the name) a young lawyer, 24 years old, was chosen, Oct. 2, 1740, "Town Clark." He became, subsequently, one of the most influential men in the town.* The two Actions of Ejectment, brought by the Penn E. Town Book, B. 21, 2. brothers, against Chambers and Alcorn, in 1735, (as already noticed), came on for trial, at Amboy, Aug. 14, 1741; resulting, on the 16th; in a general verdict for the plaintiffs, on the ground that the lands in question were not included in the E. Town Purchase. To meet the expenses of this suit, it was resolved at a town meeting, Dec. 15, 1741, That the Committee of said Town should have full Power and Athority Given To them By Us To Sell and Dispose of all that three Hundred Acres of Upland Lying near Ash Swamp which was Layed Out in the Year One thousand Six Hundred and Ninety Nine (Alias) Seven Hundred for the Town Aforesaid: in Order to Defray the Cost and Charge of the Sute Between William Pen Thomas Pen and Others: and the Said Town.* An Action of Ejectment had, also, been brought, August, 1737, in the name of James Jackson, on the right of Joseph Halsey, one of the Associates, against John Vail, holding by a Proprietary right, which came to trial, March 17, 1741, resulting, on the 19th, in a general verdict for the plaintiff; which was carried, by appeal, before the Governor and Council.+ The case of Cooper vs. Moss and others, also, came to trial in August 1742, resulting in a verdict, by a Morris County Jury, for the plaintiff. Other Actions were brought, of a similar character, some of which were, by compromise, withdrawn; and others went to trial with like results. "To enumerate all the Actions of Trespass, and Trespass and Ejectment, which have been occasioned by the different claims of the People of Elizabeth-Town and the Proprietors," would occupy too much space in this Memoir. It was alleged, that the County of Morris had been so formed, March 15, 1738, and the County of Somerset had been so altered, Nov. 4, 1741, as to bring much of the land in question into those counties, so that these cases might be tried before Somerset or Morris Co. jurors, known to be inimical to the claims of the E. T. Associates. So, also, it was alleged, that the Judges were mostly in the interest of their persecutors.‡ *E. T. Bill, p. 48. Ans. to Do., p. 84. E. T. Book, B. 23. Ans. to E. T. Bill, pp. 85, 6. In these circumstances, it was determined to carry the matter directly to the King's Most Excellent Majesty. Solomon Boyle, of Morris Co., writes, Nov. 10, 1743, to James Alexander, (both of them in the interest of the Proprietary party), that he Had been to Elizabethtown the week before, and been informed that the people of that place and the people of Newark had come to a written agreement relative to their boundary-the Newarkers to join in sending home against the Proprietors, but Col. Ogden said it was not finished, and that none of the Ogdens would agree to it. David Ogden, also, of Newark, one of the counsel of the Proprietors, writes, Dec. 12, 1743, to James Alexander, his fellow counselor, confirming what Boyle had written, with additional information about the proposed agreement between the two towns, and stating further, that Mr. Fitch, from Norwalk, had met the Elizabeth Town Committee, and left with them a petition to the King for relief against the Proprietors, with which they were much pleased; that Matthias Hetfield and Stephen Crane had been chosen by them to go to England during the winter, and lay it before the King.* It is somewhat strange that the Associates should have employed a lawyer of Norwalk, (afterwards Governor of Ct.) to draw their petition, as it is not known, that he had any interests or connections here. They had no reason, however, to regret it, as the work was well done. It recites very clearly and fully the matters in controversy; narrates succinctly the history of the Indian Purchase and of the opposing claims; refers to the litigations determined, and others not yet issued; shows the difficulty of obtaining an impartial hearing, as the courts and the country are constituted; and appeals to his Majesty for relief and redress.† This Appeal was signed by 304 persons, purporting to be "the Proprietors, Freeholders and Inhabitants of a Tract of Land now called Elizabeth-Town, whose Names are hereunto subscribed, in Behalf of themselves and others their Associates, Proprietors, Freeholders, and Inhabitants of said Analytical Index, pp. 188, 9. E. T. Bill, pp. 121, 2. |