Stockton & Anderson, continued

County House series, Part Seven

Part Six ended with an Epilogue describing the last years of people involved in the election of Jacob Anderson as Hunterdon County Sheriff in 1794 and his legal troubles in 1795: John Anderson and William Lowrey; also Anderson’s successor as sheriff, Elias Phillips.

The Epilogue did not include the two most important people in that story, Lucius W. Stockton and Jacob Anderson himself. Part Seven is reserved for them.

1796 Presidential Campaign

To understand the subsequent history of these two men, we must visit the presidential campaign of 1796. That year, George Washington declined to accept a third term as president, which meant that 1796 was the first year that voters chose a president from candidates of opposing political parties. The candidates were Vice President John Adams, a Federalist, and Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, who supported the emerging Democratic-Republican party.

Federalists dominated all of New England, while the Democratic-Republicans, who I will hereafter refer to as Republicans, dominated the south. Much of the Mid-Atlantic could go either way, but in 1796, thanks to the influence of Alexander Hamilton, New Jersey’s legislature was dominated by Federalists, and it was the legislature that chose New Jersey’s seven presidential electors. In addition, all five of the state’s Congressional at-large districts were won by Federalists.

However, by 1800 the balance of political power had begun to shift from the Federalists to the Republicans, allowing Thomas Jefferson to win the election for president that year. The Federalist Party was losing its grip on New Jersey.

Lucius W. Stockton, Esq.

Following the confrontation with Jacob Anderson at the Hunterdon jail in 1795, Lucius W. Stockton carried on his law practice as well as his duties as County Clerk.

The dominance of the Federalist party in New Jersey explains a lot about the behavior of Lucius W. Stockton in his opposition to Jacob Anderson, who was supported by the Republicans. Stockton belonged to a family strongly committed to the Federalist cause, as well as the Federalist outlook, which considered the elites more qualified to govern than common laborers, small merchants and farmers. (I have written about this before in Aristocratical Stocktons.)

And likewise, Republicans despised the Federalists for their sense of superiority and their grip on power, a grip that was shared with family members as well as wealthy supporters.

1803, The Middlesex Farmer

This attitude was demonstrated by a letter written to The True American, a Republican newspaper, published on March 7, 1803, by a man calling himself “A Middlesex Farmer.” He attacked members of “the aristocratical gentry,” describing a “train of elections and appointments” that showed how they managed to “aggrandize themselves.”¹ He seemed particularly offended by members of the Stockton and Boudinot families.

1^st. Elias Boudinot, who was always odious to the People of New-Jersey, was twice or thrice forced into the House of Representatives by Richard Stockton and his associates.

2^nd. Elisha Boudinot, a wonderful wonder of wonders, was appointed a Judge of the Supreme Court.

3d. Samuel Witham Stockton, who fled to Britain at the beginning of our Revolutionary war, was appointed, first, Clerk of Hunterdon, and then Secretary of State.

4^th. Lucius Horatio Stockton, of the truth of whose oath God will judge, District Attorney, and afterwards, wonderful to tell, nominated as Secretary of War.

5^th. Lucius Witham Stockton, the emptiest thing in the whole creation, first Clerk of Hunterdon in the place of Uncle Sam, and then Captain of Horse.

6^th. William Griffith, who married a cousin [wife Abigail Hatfield was d/o Mary Boudinot, granddaughter of Elias] and, by the bye, a Tory from his mother’s breast, first, Surrogate of Burlington, where he was a total stranger, then Elector of President, an appointment highly honorary and important, then, in preference to General Frelinghuysen, whose name was mentioned to the President, a Judge of the Circuit Court of the United States.

7^th. Richard Stockton, the Duke himself, once Senator, twice or thrice Elector of President, and at last condescended to be—GOVERNOR!

“Uncle Sam” was not the tall thin man with the top hat who symbolizes the United States, but Samuel W. Stockton, who was Lucius W. Stockton’s uncle.

Samuel W. Stockton (1751-1795) was the son of John Witham Stockton and Abigail Phillips, and brother of Lucius’ father Philip Stockton. During the Revolution, Stockton served as commissioner to the Courts of Austria and Prussia, where he negotiated a treaty with Holland. In 1785 he married Catharine Cox, daughter of Col. John Cox and Esther Bowes. He served as Hunterdon’s Clerk from 1781 to 1794, and in 1787 he was secretary to the New Jersey Convention to ratify the new U.S. Constitution. He was named New Jersey’s Secretary of State in 1795. (New Jersey’s Secretary of State is not concerned with foreign affairs, but rather manages elections and the preservation of government and vital records in the Department of Archives and Records Management.) Stockton died in office on June 27, 1795 at the age of 44, after being thrown from his carriage in Trenton.

Probably because his death was so unexpected, the Freeholders decided to appoint Samuel’s nephew as his replacement. Lucius W. Stockton served as county clerk through 1804. (He was followed by Ralph Hunt 1805-1809.)

Lucius W. Stockton’s first cousin, Lucius Horatio Stockton, replied to “the malicious publication of the pretended Middlesex Farmer” in The Trenton Federalist.² It is a very long letter, filling three columns. L. H. Stockton was a regular columnist on this newspaper, so his letters were given a lot of space.

He spent a lot of time defending himself in only the most general ways, which is overkill considering that Mr. ‘Farmer’ had only called into question Stockton’s oath of office. He also went to great length to defend his “deceased and much-loved uncle, Samuel W. Stockton,” describing his time in Europe during the Revolution.

That the said Samuel Witham Stockton was received, on his return, with open arms, by the patriots of New-Jersey; that he was recognized as an ardent whig, and an influential votary to the liberties of his country. In proof of which I shall offer among other things, his election to the office of clerk of the important county of Hunterdon by the revolutionary Legislature, elected October 1780.

Stockton Departs

After Stockton’s term as County Clerk ended in 1804, Lucius and Elizabeth Stockton sold their Flemington properties, on February 6, 1805, back to Lucius’ uncle, John N. Cumming, who had conveyed it to the Stocktons in 1801.³ This included the ten acres on Main Street where they lived.

John Noble Cumming (1752-1821) was the brother of Lucius W. Stockton’s mother Catharine.  In August 1805, Cumming sold the three properties in Flemington to Jeremiah King. ⁴

The deed to Cumming identified the Stocktons as “of Flemington,” but they soon afterwards moved to Sussex County. I have wondered if they left Flemington because Federalist influence in Hunterdon County had by that time been considerably diminished.

Evidence that Stockton was practicing law while living in Sussex County comes from an item in the Trenton Federalist of August 8, 1808 regarding the suit of Samuel Mitchel v. John Mitchel of Sussex Co. in which Stockton was the attorney.⁵

In 1811, Stockton was in Philadelphia when he contracted typhus and died in a hospital there on August 30^th, when he was only 40 years old. He was buried in the Old Pine Street, Presbyterian Cemetery in Philadelphia, probably out of fear that transferring his body to Sussex County would spread his disease to others.⁶

Administration of Stockton’s estate was granted to the Sussex County Clerk, John Johnson, rather than to his wife Elizabeth.⁷ Inventory of the estate was taken on October 26, 1811 in Sussex County and amounted to only $26.50. It was sworn to by John Johnson, administrator.

The record says nothing about Stockton’s wife or children. However, I got a clue about where Elizabeth Coxe Stockton went to live after her husband’s death. On November 24, 1820, Elizabeth C. Stockton of Kingwood Township mortgaged her share of the real estate she  inherited from her father Charles Coxe, being 153.5 acres in the neighborhood of Sidney, Franklin Township, to one Isaac Branson of New York City.⁸ This strongly suggests that Elizabeth had gone to live with her brother Charles and sister-in-law, Fortunata Coxe, who were living on the Sidney estate.

When Elizabeth became a widow in 1811, her children were ages 14, 12, 11 and 9. In 1820 when she mortgaged her property, her son, Lucius W. Stockton, Jr., was 21 and probably still living in Kingwood Twp. on the Sidney farm. Four years later, on Nov 24, 1824, Lucius W. Stockton married Rebecca M. Moore of Pennsylvania, suggesting to me that he had left home by then.

On Feb 11, 1833, when he was living in “Union Town in the County of Fayette” Pennsylvania, Lucius Jr. sued his siblings in the Court of Chancery in New Jersey, claiming that they owed him $1,926.09. This was because Isaac Branson had assigned to him the mortgage from Elizabeth Coxe Stockton. This makes me think that Elizabeth died in late 1832. She would have been about 63 years old. Sheriff Wilson Bray was given a writ of fieri facias to seize the property, which he did, offering it for sale to the public. Lucius W. Stockton Jr. purchased it on May 25, 1833 for $2,000.⁹

I was surprised that there is no record of where Eliza Coxe Stockton was buried. It was most likely in the Old Bethlehem Presbyterian Cemetery in Grandin where her parents were buried. But that has not established.

As for Lucius W. Stockton, Jr., he remained in Pennsylvania but kept ownership of the Sidney property for the rest of his life. In 1837, his uncle’s wife, Fortunata Coxe, conveyed 114 acres to him which had belonged to her late husband, Charles D. Coxe.¹⁰ After the death of Lucius W. Stockton, Jr. in 1844, the property was sold to Jacob M. Kline, Jr. and to Mahlon Hulsizer.¹¹

Jacob Anderson, Esq.

After retiring from his position as sheriff in 1795, Jacob Anderson returned to his family and his farm in Bethlehem Township. He stayed out of the public eye for at least four years.

The first item I found for him after 1795 was on December 24, 1800, when Anderson was named by his friend Samuel R. Stewart to be executor of his estate, along with Samuel Leake and George C. Maxwell. This was the same Stewart who acted as attorney for Susanna Smith in 1791. (See The Freeholders’ Surprise.) Stewart, being the son of Charles Stewart Esq., was most likely to have been a Federalist. The same can be said for the large property owners Leake & Maxwell.

On April 19, 1802, Samuel R. Stewart and the other heirs of Charles Stewart Esq., dec’d, conveyed to Jacob Anderson, for $104.18, a 5-acre woodlot near his home in Bethlehem Township bordering the Allen & Turner tract.¹² In 1802 and 1804, Anderson acquired other properties in Bethlehem from Benjamin Chew and William Allen.

Anderson Returns to Politics

When Jacob Anderson retired as sheriff, Federalists were still the dominant party in New Jersey. During the campaign of 1800, they painted the Republican candidate, Thomas Jefferson, in the darkest colors. This may explain why Jacob Anderson drifted away from the Republicans toward the Federalist party.

But Republicans were gaining in New Jersey. In 1798 the state changed from having five at-large Congressional Districts, all of them won by Federalists, to districts based on geographical location. That year two of the districts were won by Federalists and three by Republicans. From 1801 on, the districts were all won Republicans, up until 1813.

The 1802 Campaign for State Council

One might think that after the treatment Jacob Anderson received from the Lowrey-Stockton group, and his decision not to run for re-election in 1795, that he would be fed up with politics, especially with the Federalist party whose members had attacked him. But by 1802, Anderson was once again a candidate for office.

Sen. John Lambert, Esq.

Which brings me to Sen. John Lambert, one of the few Jeffersonian Republicans to succeed in Hunterdon County politics in the late 18^th century, before his party became the dominant one. (See Bucking the Party Line. Lambert’s portrait was made in 1803.)

John Lambert, previously a member of the State Assembly, was elected to the State Council (today’s State Senate) in 1791, the year that Flemington became the county seat of Hunterdon. In 1802, when Lambert had been in the Council for over ten years, Lambert was up for re-election. The Federalists chose Jacob Anderson to run against him, which makes me wonder if perhaps instead of choosing a prominent Federalist, they went with someone who was not expected to win.

One reason Lambert was so favored, in addition to his own popularity, was that right after Thomas Jefferson won the presidential election in 1800, the Jeffersonian Republicans took control of the New Jersey Legislature from the Federalists, who had governed ever since George Washington became president in 1789.

Here is a record of votes cast in Amwell Township in 1802.¹³ Anderson lost to Lambert, by more than 2 to 1. In fact, all the Federalist candidates lost by that margin.

In 1802, Richard Stockton, Esq. of Princeton was the Federalist candidate for Governor of NJ (for a term that would begin in 1803), opposing then current governor, Republican Joseph Bloomfield. 1802 was a mid-term election year and the Federalists regained some seats in the New Jersey State Council, but not enough to elect Stockton. The Council was deadlocked, 26 to 26. So John Lambert, who was president of the Council, was given the position of Acting Governor, which he held until the next election in October 1803, when Joseph Bloomfield won the Governorship again.¹⁴

Soliciting Votes

Attacks against political opponents usually take place during an election. In 1802, Anderson got attacked shortly after it.

On October 25, 1802, a letter from “A Citizen of Trenton” was published in The True American, a Republican newspaper, regarding “the late election” and the way it was conducted.¹⁵ The writer claimed that many people were allowed to vote who should not have, including

“Persons under age, persons not worth the sum specified by the Constitution; and some who are actually maintained by private charity and public contribution; Persons who have not resided in the County the time prescribed by law; And Blacks who are actual slaves.”

He also accused Jacob Anderson, “the unsuccessful Candidate for Council in this County,” of soliciting votes “in direct contradiction to the express declaration of the law.”

The writer was not making this up. There actually was such a law. It was enacted on February 22, 1797: “An ACT to regulate the election of members of the legislative council and general assembly, sheriffs and coroners, in this State.”¹⁶

 

In 1797, the State Legislature was controlled by the Federalists. I suspect the section on soliciting for votes was designed to suppress the aggressive campaign techniques used by Republicans. ¹⁷

The law described all the measures to be taken to have a proper election in significant detail, as well as prohibited actions by the candidates and their supporters.

XII. AND BE IT ENACTED, That if any candidate shall, at any such election, or previous thereto, solicit any voter or voters, either personally or by letter, message, advertisement or otherwise, to nominate him, or to vote for him, or if any person whatsoever shall at any such election, give, offer or promise any fee or reward, victuals, drink or other consideration to or for the use of any person or persons, or to or for the use of any county, city, township, precinct, or body politic or corporate, or by bribery or corruption, endeavor to prevail on any person to nominate him, or to vote for him, or to nominate or vote for any other person,

or shall appear at such election with any weapons of war, or staves, or bludgeons, or use any threats, that may tend to put any of the candidates or voters in fear of personal danger, or shall by any other way endeavor to intimidate, or by indirect means persuade any voter to give, or to dissuade any voter from giving his vote for the choice of any candidate,

or shall make any false assertion or propagate any false report concerning any candidate, with a view to prevent his being elected, or that shall have any evident tendency thereto, or shall summon or request any party of militia to attend at the time and place of election,

every such person shall, for every such offence, forfeit and pay the sum of thirty dollars, to be recovered, with costs of suit, by any person that will sue for the same, in any court having cognizance thereof, one half to the use of the prosecutor, and the other half to be paid to the collector of the county, wherein such offence was committed, for the use of the county; and such offender shall be further liable to a private action at the suit of the party injured.

The ‘Citizen of Trenton’ continued:

“By the 12th section of the law above alluded to, a fine of 30 dollars is imposed upon any Candidate who shall solicit any voter or voters, either personally or by letter, message, advertisement, or otherwise, to nominate or vote for him.

“This section of the law has not escaped violation.

“—From the nature of the case, it is difficult to discover or prove how often it has been violated.—But this much is known and can be proved, that Jacob Anderson, the unsuccessful Candidate for Council in this County, did personally solicit several voters for their suffrages, in direct contradiction to the express declaration of the law, and in contempt and violation thereof.”

Anderson most likely did solicit votes. He was unusual that way, having announced his own candidacy for sheriff back in 1794, a practice that was frowned on then and made illegal in 1797. Imagine campaigning without soliciting votes!

Despite the accusation, it appears that nothing came of it.

The 1803 Campaign

On Sept. 26, 1803. The Trenton Federalist published the list of candidates, titling it “Washington Nomination List.” Jacob Anderson was once again the candidate for Council, apparently not discouraged by his loss to John Lambert the previous year. Federalist candidates for Assembly were Benjamin Van Cleve, Simon Wyckoff, Stephen Burrowes, Jacob Schenck; Sheriff Dennis Wyckoff.”¹⁸

On the same day The True American published names of the Republican candidates: Hunterdon County Republican Ticket. Council John Lambert, Peter Gordon. Assembly Nathan Stockton, Joseph Hankinson, John Hass. Sheriff, Aaron Vansyckel.¹⁹:

In the same edition, this appeared:

Questions addressed to Jacob Anderson, we decline inserting. —We wish Mr. Anderson a fair start in the approaching race, without carrying any weight, or he will be distanced in spite of the whipping and spurring, jostling and cheating of his jockeying rider, Aristocracy.

The person identified here as ‘Aristocracy’ was Richard Stockton, Esq. It seems likely that it was Stockton who talked Jacob Anderson into opposing John Lambert.

SIDENOTE: Hon. Richard Stockton (1764-1828), s/o Richard Stockton, Esq. and Annis Boudinot, married c.1788 Mary Field (1766-1837), d/o Robert Field and Mary Peale. Richard Stockton had been New Jersey’s U.S. Senator from 1796-1799. Later he served in the U.S. Congress from 1813-1815.

Answering the “Middlesex Farmer”

‘Federalists were not Tories’

The same date that the True American suggested that Anderson was being ridden by Aristocracy, a very long and heated article was published in The Trenton Federalist,²⁰ titled “Seventy-Six Men,” responding to the claim that all Federalists were Tories during the Revolution. Listed among those Federalists who fought as Patriots were:

Gen. John Beatty, Joseph Beavers, Stephen Burrowes, General Philemon Dickeson, David Frazer, William Haslett, George Holcomb, Esqrs., John P. Hunt, Andrew Hunter, James B. Machett, Major John Philips, Andrew Reeeder, Col. Jonathan Rhea, Jacob Schenck, Amos Scudder, Isaac Smith, Esq., Timothy Titus, Benjamin Van Cleve, Simon Whickoff, Isaac Wuynkook, Dennis Wyckoff.

The writer, “A Citizen of Trenton,” then described Jacob Anderson’s bravery during the battle of Long Island, and by contrast how John Lambert had declined to fight and even urged several people not to join the fighting. I found the letter too fascinating not to share at least some of it here.

“As to Council, Jacob Anderson is the candidate in that interest. Was he a tory? Me thinks I see the blush of indignation suffusing [?] the cheek of every honest whig at the infamous aspersion. No fellow-citizens! brave and virtuous—you who fought your country’s battles in the hours of peril, full well you know that he was no tory. . .

In that dreadful battle, fought on Long Island, on the ever memorable 26th of August A.D. 1776, did this brave and enterprizing man, encounter danger in its most awful and threatening forms. The writer knows that JACOB ANDERSON, in union with Captain Joseph Clunn, placed themselves at the head of a small detachment of our militia, and when the whole of our forces were retreating from a superior and triumphant enemy, by the most desperate valour, defended an advantageous piece of ground against a vastly superior British force, so long as effectually to cover the retreat of our troops, by which a very considerable part of the American army was saved from destruction. To the last of the war, did he maintain a consistent character, terrible to the enemies of his country—yet gentle, amiable and peaceful in private life. Of plain manners, as becomes an honest and independent farmer, he is no vain boaster, whose patriotism is proved only by vain and windy pretensions. . .

“Did not John Lambert, in the year 1776, publicly attempt to dissuade a number of the Hunterdon county militia from turning out to oppose the British forces—telling them that they were only exposing themselves and their families to certain destruction, by fighting in behalf of a counquered [sic] country? Was he not, for such conversation, taken into custody of a file of men, and brought a prisoner before the committee of Hunterdon county, to answer therefor? Did not this famous commander in chief of the militia then escape punishment, by whining concessions, in which he humbly pleaded to that committee, that tho’ his intentions were good, he had been led into his errors through the weakness of his nerves? Was he not on the public election ground, in the township of Amwell, last fall, repeatedly charged with this conduct by a respectable citizen, who told the name of the captain (now living) who commanded the file of men who had Lambert in custody? Did not this citizen publicly and repeatedly declare in the hearing of John Lambert, that if he dared to deny his conduct in the year 1776, as above mentioned, that he had witnesses of it yet surviving, who were ready to prove it to his face; and did not the famous would-be governour leave the election ground, and decline making any answer, except by saying, that his accuser “was a very contentious man?” —If John Lambert, or any of the Hunterdon democrats, can satisfactorily answer these questions, they may talk about Quakers and tories with less awkwardness than they can now do.”  . . . etc.

Was this true? If it was, the Republicans did not hold it against Lambert, as they repeatedly re-elected to high office.

The 1808 Campaign

Anderson was not done with politics yet. In 1808 he ran for the State Assembly as a Federalist, along with Dennis Wyckoff, John Coryell and Stephen Burrows, while Col. David Bishop ran for Council. But by 1808, the Federalist cause in New Jersey was pretty hopeless. The Federalist candidates got half the votes of the Republicans.

Despite the damning article written by the ‘Citizen of Trenton’ in 1803, people continued to associate Federalists with Tories. Once again, this idea was strongly opposed in an article published during the 1808 campaign, in The Trenton Federalist on Oct 3, 1808.

Again, Federalists Were Not Tories

“TORIES! The democratic papers has undertaken to propagate afresh its accustomed falsehoods against the adherents of Washington, on the score of revolutionary merit. He hopes by bold assertions in the face of truth to make the ignorant believe that all federalists were tories during the revolution war—that all democrats were whigs. . . . we shall just enumerate a few of the leading characters of the federal party, well known to the people of New-Jersey for their whiggism and services in the revolution war. . . .

James Schureman Esq., Col. David Bishop, Jacob Anderson [my emphasis], Stephen Burrowes, Dennis Wyckoff, Ebenezer Mayhew, Anthony Kea_by, John Doughty, William Loyd, David Gordon, James Voorhees, were active whigs, and distinguished by their services in the militia, and in various stations assigned them by their country during the revolutionary war. . . these are the men whom gos_in [gossiping?] upstarts are now decrying as old tories . . .

And once again Anderson lost the election. The winners were John Haas, the Republican candidate for Council, and the Republican Assembly candidates, Joseph Hankinson, Aaron Vansyckel, Joshua Wright, and Moses Stout.

The 1813 Campaign

Things turned around for the Federalists by the time the War of 1812 had commenced. They were strongly opposed to the war and called themselves “The Friends of Peace.” They gathered at the Flemington Courthouse on September 6, 1813 to nominate candidates. Col. David Bishop chaired the meeting; Benjamin Smith was secretary.

Ralph Hunt was nominated for Council and Benjamin Wright, David Manners, William Potts and William Demun were nominated for Assembly. In the “cases of death or disability,” James Stevenson and Jacob Anderson were designated as replacements for the Assembly candidates.²¹

At the meeting, Lucius Horatio Stockton made an address to the assembly on “the evils of a ruinous war, now experienced by our once happy land.” On motion of Garret D. Wall, Esq., the following resolution was read:

Resolved, That this meeting feel it a duty to express their decided approbation of the independent conduct of the Honorable John Lambert, one of the Senators from this state in the Congress of the United States, in opposing the declaration of the present ruinous war, and their admiration of his firm and consistent conduct in discouraging by his vote all the measures for its support—and that in the judgment of this meeting he thereby deserves the gratitude and thanks of his country. Voted unanimously that this meeting do approve the same.”

Up until then, John Lambert had managed to gain the support of both Federalists and Republicans. But his vote against going to war in 1812 lost him his Republican friends. His political career ended in 1814 when Republicans failed to nominate him for a second term as Senator. (See Bucking the Party Line in 1812.)

Anderson’s Property

The same year (1802) that Anderson purchased a small lot in Bethlehem Twp. from the heirs of Charles Stewart Esq., he also bought a large tract of land in the Joseph Turner tract in Bethlehem Township from Benjamin Chew & wife Katherine of Philadelphia.²²

In 1811, Jacob Anderson was identified as a merchant, when he and wife Catharine sold a small lot in Bethlehem Township to James Pollock.²³ I have not found information on what kind of merchant he was, and this was the only deed in which he identified himself that way. (Not to be confused with John H. Anderson, who was an active merchant, frequently publishing notices in the Hunterdon Gazette in 1825-26.)

Despite already possessing a large tract of land in Bethlehem Township, on April 13, 1814, Anderson bought 100.88 acres, part of the Allen & Turner tract in Bethlehem, from Robert Taylor of Lebanon Twp. for $2,017.60.²⁴ In 1819, Jacob and Rebecca Anderson sold part of the land purchased from Robert Taylor to their son Daniel H. Anderson (1787-1861) for $1,432.²⁵ In 1823, Daniel H. Anderson sold that property back to his parents after moving to Mansfield in Sussex County.²⁶

On November 29, 1822, the Andersons sold to John Allen Taylor of Lebanon Township a tract of 96.24 acres in Bethlehem Township, on the great road from New Hampton to Clement Bonnell’s tavern, bordering the Union farm, Hugh Exton, Anderson’s other land, Baltus Stiger, Benjamin Chew, and the road from Aaron Vansyckle’s tavern, for $4,812.²⁷ In 1825 the Andersons sold another tract of land to John Allen Taylor, this time a small lot as “satisfaction for a deficiency of 3.05 acres in a conveyance made by sd Andersons in 1822.”²⁸

That same year, the Andersons sold more of their real estate, being 188 acres in Bethlehem, to their son Daniel, who had moved back to Bethlehem Township.²⁹

In 1825, Jacob Anderson was 71 years old; his second wife Rebecca was 47, only about ten years older than Jacob’s son Daniel. Daniel’s first wife was Anna M. Reading whom he married in 1811. She had five children and died in 1821. Daniel married his second wife, Delia Cox (1802-1893), in 1823. She had six children, making for a very large family.

Jacob Anderson’s last real estate transaction took place on Oct 22, 1826, when he and wife Rebecca sold to Clement Bonnell, tavernkeeper of Bethlehem, the property Jacob had purchased from Benjamin Chew Jr. back in 1802.³⁰

The Jubilee

Two hundred years ago, the country celebrated the same event that we are celebrating this year—the Declaration of Independence. On July 12, 1826, the Hunterdon Gazette reported on the celebration held at Flemington. (See The Jubilee of 1826.) The paper listed the 43 surviving Revolutionary War soldiers, in alphabetical order, with John Anderson first on the list. The veterans and the committee gathered at the House of Peter Smick where “The banner ‘1776’ was assigned to Jacob Anderson, Esq. of Bethlehem.”

A procession was formed at the house of N. [Nathan] Price which proceeded to the courthouse where “a space was immediately opened between the military and civil procession to make room for the venerable survivors of ’76.” Those survivors were not all that old by today’s standards, most of them in their 70s (Anderson was 72), but they were described in the Gazette as

“hoary veterans, whose trembling limbs and agitated frames seemed to call out for the repose of the tomb, . . .”

The procession continued on to “the church,” where ceremonies would take place. The church was not identified in the article. It was most likely the old Presbyterian Church on North Main Street. A prayer was given by Rev. John F. Clark and then Alexander Wurts read the Declaration of Independence. Speeches, songs and benedictions followed. The crowd then moved back to Peter Smick’s hotel for dinner at 3 p.m.

More formalities:

Jacob Anderson, Esq. one of the surviving soldiers who bore the banner of 1776, was appointed President of the table, and George Maxwell, Esq. V. President.

Following the meal, toasts were given, beginning with Jacob Anderson:

By the president [Jacob Anderson]. My brother soldiers – ‘If I forget thee, let my right hand forget her cunning.’ The president having retired, Geo. C. Maxwell took over.

I cannot say what Anderson meant by his right hand’s cunning. Suggestions are welcome.

The honor given to Anderson this day tells us much about the service he performed during the Revolution and the high opinion in which he was held so many years later.

Anderson’s Obituary

Jacob Anderson’s obituary was published in The New Jersey State Gazette of Trenton on June 9, 1837:

“DIED At his residence near Clinton, H.C. in this state, on the 11th ult. [May] Capt. Jacob Anderson, aged 84. He left to his children the honorable legacy of being descended from one of the most active men in the struggle for our independence. He enjoyed in the latter part of his life a captain’s pension, which was sufficient to render him and his family comfortable in the declining part of a life spent in doing good to his country and neighbor.”³¹

Long after Anderson’s death his widow claimed her widow’s benefit on April 2, 1853. In her petition, Rebecca Lanning Anderson stated that she was born in 1779; was married by Rev. Holloway Hunt to Jacob Anderson on October 20, 1817; and that Jacob died on May 11, 1837.³²

Both Jacob Anderson and Rebecca Lanning Anderson were buried in the Presbyterian Cemetery at Grandin, Union Township, the same cemetery where the Coxe family was buried. Also buried there was Anderson’s first wife, Catharine Vanlieu Anderson (1757-1817). I think it is safe to say that her three infant children and daughter Sarah Ann who died at the age of 16 were also buried there. Presumably their stones have not survived. Find-a-Grave only lists son Daniel H. Anderson as a child of Jacob and Catherine. He was also buried there, along with second wife Delilah Cox. There was no information on Daniel’s first wife Anna M. Reading, who died in 1821.

And so concludes the eventful lives of Lucius W. Stockton and Jacob Anderson.

End of Part Seven

The next article in my series on the County House returns to that old tavern on Flemington’s Main Street, and its new owner, Alexander Bonnell. I will look at the lot’s surprising boundaries as well as the three different routes of the road through Flemington to Howell’s Ferry, including the one bordering the old tavern house lot and the one that ran around the courthouse lot.

Footnotes