The Council of Proprietors\u201a\u00c4\u00f4 Other Business<\/span><\/h3>\n

During their meetings held in 1688 and 1689, the Council of Proprietors was setting up rules for how surveys would be obtained, and naming registrars for Burlington and Gloucester counties, who were Samuel Jennings and John Reading, respectively. They did not act for Salem County because it was still under John Fenwick\u201a\u00c4\u00f4s control. But there were other matters to attend to.<\/span><\/p>\n

For instance, at the meeting held September 18, 1688, the Proprietors named Rangers to collect any horses or hogs running loose that were not marked and to dispose of them by auction. The rangers were \u201a\u00c4\u00faMahlong\u201a\u00c4\u00fa Stacy, John Day, William Wood and John Hollingswood for Burlington \u201a\u00c4\u00faand upwards,\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 meaning, I suppose, areas north of the Falls of the Delaware, and John Kay, Thomas Sharp and Israel Holme for Gloucester. This seems to be the job of the county courts, not an organization focused on the orderly conversion of proprietary shares into tracts of surveyed land. But the Proprietors were acting as landlords of the properties that had been purchased for them from the Indians. Until the lands were surveyed to individual proprietors, the Council had to take responsibility.<\/p>\n

They also dealt with a problem caused by what must have been a violent nor\u201a\u00c4\u00f4easter in February 1689 that felled a large number of trees in Gloucester County. John Reading asked permission to harvest the fallen trees. He was allowed to sell any tree of 12\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 diameter or larger for 12 pence, and anything smaller could be had without charge, which suggests the abundant quantity of trees there were. The proceeds were \u201a\u00c4\u00fato goe towards ye Defraying of ye publick Charge of ye Councell.\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 For some reason this did not sit well with Thomas Thackwra, who complained to the Council at their meeting of July 25, 1689. The minutes (which were kept by John Reading) did not give the nature of his complaint.<\/p>\n

Another complaint was received at this meeting\u201a\u00c4\u00eethis time from Mahlon Stacy, who presented a paper \u201a\u00c4\u00fawherein he seemed concerned [about] several bad things of ye Councell and Chargeing ye Councell to have done things Burdensome and Injurious to ye proprietors.\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 Once again, the specifics are left out of the minutes. After \u201a\u00c4\u00fabeing Interrogated and Discoursed Concerning ye severall parts thereof, [Stacy] said he did not Charge ye Councell with any thing.\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 Which leaves us to wonder what had angered Stacy in the first place, and how he was mollified.<\/p>\n

Relations with Daniel Coxe<\/span><\/h4>\n

One of the actions taken by the Proprietors at their meeting of September 18, 1688, was to rule that \u201a\u00c4\u00fanoe persons or persons whatsoever shall presume to buy or purchase any Land from ye Indians without the Consent of this Councill first obtained otherwayes to be prosecuted as our Common Enemy.\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 This may have been directed at Daniel Coxe and his agent, although there were others who had taken this liberty.<\/p>\n

The Council of Proprietors, perhaps influenced by John Tatham, who was now Coxe\u201a\u00c4\u00f4s agent, seems to have decided that it was better to deal with Coxe than to try to freeze him out. In their offer to recognize Coxe as governor, they took the trouble to present themselves in the best possible light, by describing their own judicious conduct while the Dominion of New England was in effect. In particular, they said they had voluntarily restrained themselves from increasing their land holdings. I wonder how much weight that would carry with a man who knew nothing about restraint when it came to acquiring real estate.<\/p>\n

Clark L. Beck Jr. wrote^{1<\/a><\/sup> that while the proprietors were restraining themselves from making large land purchases, Daniel Coxe was \u201a\u00c4\u00fasystematically and covertly\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 increasing his own holdings. I am not sure how Beck knew that Coxe was being covert; perhaps Coxe was not recording his acquisitions with the Council of Proprietors. But his agent John Tatham was a member of the Council, so that seems unlikely. Perhaps Beck is referring to the large Indian purchase made by Adlord Bowde.<\/p>\n}

Byllingesport<\/span><\/h4>\n

<\/a>