Meanwhile, the English had become fed up with James II. William of Orange was invited to bring his army to England and soon afterwards, in December 1688, James gave up his crown. On February 13, 1689, the Parliament passed the Declaration of Right, confirming that James was no longer king and offering the throne to William and Mary.<\/p>\n

The coronation of William and Mary took place on April 11, 1689. On the very same date, the Council of Proprietors sent another letter to Gov. Coxe in England asking that \u201a\u00c4\u00faAuthenticks\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 of Coxe\u201a\u00c4\u00f4s \u201a\u00c4\u00faRe-establishment\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 as governor be sent to them so that they might proclaim him governor \u201a\u00c4\u00falegally,\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 thereby overriding Andros\u201a\u00c4\u00f4 pretensions to the government. Apparently some had criticized the proprietors for recognizing Daniel Coxe with \u201a\u00c4\u00faprecipitant madness\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 back in September 1687 when Coxe announced by letter that he had purchased all of Byllinge\u201a\u00c4\u00f4s shares and had thus become governor.<\/p>\n

Coxe would have to provide something compelling because it was unlikely, they wrote, that Andros would \u201a\u00c4\u00faresigne or part with any portion of his Government til Commanded by an Authority as great and Awful [that is, inspiring awe] as that which gave it him.\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 This makes it clear that the Proprietors did not yet know that the Dominion of New England was dissolved. Unfortunately, there is nothing in the Minutes of the West Jersey Proprietors to indicate when they learned of it.<\/p>\n

Pomfret wrote that the proprietors had agreed to hand over the records to John Skene \u201a\u00c4\u00faon condition that they remain in the province.\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 He doesn\u201a\u00c4\u00f4t say when that decision was made, but it took place before October 26, 1688, for on that date, Skene wrote to John Randolph reporting that Thomas Revel had handed over bundles of records, and that \u201a\u00c4\u00fahe [Skene] hath saved the old minuts of the Assembly which are but in Loos peapers too & the Law Book which yie [I?] sealed up.\u201a\u00c4\u00f9<\/p>\n

I wonder what governmental records did the proprietors hand over to him. Perhaps when the Assembly decided that the job of managing land surveys should be handled by a separate body it did not carefully oversee the separation of land records from governmental ones. This is understandable because both legislative and proprietary matters were originally recorded in the same books. Separating the records would require copying minutes and surveys into separate books, which would take much time and effort, a dilemma for both the Proprietors and for John Skene.<\/p>\n

In March 1689, the Proprietors demanded that the records held by Skene be returned to them, but Skene refused. As mentioned in the previous post, Skene wanted approval from Benjamin Bartlett before returning the records. Pomfret wrote that Skene \u201a\u00c4\u00farefused to act without an order from Benjamin Bartlet, Byllynge\u201a\u00c4\u00f4s heir!\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 What Pomfret meant by the exclamation point (other than astonishment) is hard to say. It was as if Skene was reverting to the time prior to Coxe\u201a\u00c4\u00f4s governorship\u201a\u00c4\u00eeas if Skene thought that the change in government in England meant that Coxe no longer had any authority, and the governorship had reverted back to Byllinge. Pomfret surmises that Skene eventually complied with the Proprietors\u201a\u00c4\u00f4 demands for the records, for the simple reason that \u201a\u00c4\u00fanothing more is heard of the controversy.\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 But I think records must have been lost in the process.<\/p>\n