dezier to set doune there to make a plantasion under his gouerment and that you would be pleased hauing so done to return an answer by the first which we shall weight for, and hauing incoragement we shall forthwith order ourselues to treate further with him aboute the matter thus not doubting of your faithfulness herein. I take leaue and rest yours to Comande From Huntington February 15, 1650 John Sticklen" (Strickland) "lette me inticate you to send the answer to Sarnawell Mathies at Riesdorpe that it may be conveied to me in safety; and that you would be pleased that it may be kept secret houeuer it goe. Sr. if you can with convenience I would intreate you to send me an answer by ye bearer of this, all convenient speede being requirit." This was followed by others, but is a specimen of the best that passed between the parties.

There had been considerable attrition between the English colonies of New England and the Dutch in America, long before the restoration of the Stuarts and almost since the Dutch had had possession of New Netherlands. They clashed in their claims to the country; they interfered with each other's trade with the Indians and there were constant complaints and bickerings. The English made many representations of their grievances to Charles after his restoration, but apparently without success. Charles, if he did not like his Puritan subjects in New England, hated the Dutch more and was only too glad of an opportunity to strike them a blow. He was at last roused from his indolence and debauchery and undertook, as has already been related, the conquest of New Netherlands. He had, however, received another incentive to drive him to action, and this only gave evidence of the wickedness of his nature. A company had been formed in London called "The Company of Royal Adventurers of England trading with Africa." It was nothing more or less than an association of slave traders. James, the Duke of York, the brother and successor of Charles, was the president of this company. In the pursuit of their abominable trade they had been seriously crippled by the operations of the Dutch West India Company, which was largely interested in the new colony of the New Netherlands. So, Charles in striking at that colony would not only gratify his own revenge, but would satisfy that of his brother, the royal trafficker in slaves.

Reference has been made to the conquest of New Amsterdam by Colonel Nicholls and Sir Robert Carre, and to the fact that Nicholls, despite the conveyance by his master to Berkeley and Carteret, of New

Jersey, had made a grant to settlers of land in that province. When Philip Carteret reached Elizabeth Town with his little band of immigrants he found, already established there, at least, the four families who came from Jamaica under this grant from Nicholls. Governor Carteret reached Elizabeth Town in the month of August, 1665, and with him came eighteen laborers, some women, and Robert Vauquellin, a Frenchman and a practical surveyor, who was accompanied by his wife, in all, thirty persons. Before Carteret landed at Elizabeth Town he had visited Nicholls at New York, as New Amsterdam had been called since its conquest by the English. It was on this occasion, in all probability, that Nicholls learned for the first time of the grant of New Jersey by the Duke, to Berkeley and Carteret, which so disturbed his equanimity. When Carteret landed from his vessel on the main land, near the settlement of the four families from Jamaica and their associates, he was met by the settlers who had established themselves some distance further inland. That settlement was on the stream since then, and now, called Elizabeth Town Creek, on both sides of which the home lots of the settlers had been set off to them. Carteret marched with a hoe on his shoulder at the head of his own followers and the town's people from the shore, up to the village which must then have been built. By this act the governor doubtless intended to give notice that, in his opinion, agriculture was the true basis and foundation of the best interests of the colony and that he purposed to introduce the arts of husbandry for its growth and prosperity.

In the interview with Nicholls at New York, he must have been told of the fact that the four families from Jamaica and their associates were already settled at Elizabeth Town; how they came to be there and the circumstances connected with the Indian deed and its confirmation by Nicholls and the rights of these settlers must have been discussed and determined. On the other hand Carteret must have disclosed to Nicholls all the circumstances connected with the grant made by York to Berkeley and Carteret; and the commission to him, as governor, from the Duke's grantees undoubtedly was exhibited to Colonel Nicholls. When Governor Carteret reached Elizabeth Town there was no difficulty between him and the settlers; they remained in full possession of their houses and the lots which had been set off to them in the division of the land bought from the Indians.

That these four families from Jamaica and their associates were the first European settlers at Elizabeth Town is undoubted; the date of

their settlement there can be approximated with some definite certainty. It must, however, be established, if established at all, by circumstantial evidence. It is probable, nay, almost certain, that town records were kept by the first inhabitants; they were, it is true, few in number, but they were of the same stock as those who, very soon afterwards, settled Newark. The settlers at "our Town on the Passaic" were very careful in keeping exact accounts of their municipal transactions and their relatives and friends at Elizabeth had been taught order and law in the same schools. If any such records were kept at Elizabeth Town, they have been lost; if they were in existence their testimony would be invaluable. Resort must therefore be had to other circumstances to settle the date now under discussion.

On the 26th day of September, 1664, the men of Jamaica made their application to Governor Nicholls for the grant of lands in New Jersey. Nicholls promptly granted the petition on the 30th of the same September; the Indian deed to these Long Island people is dated the 30th of October following and that Indian deed was confirmed by Governor Nicholls on the 1st day of December of the same year. By the terms of this conveyance, four hundred fathoms of white wampum were to be delivered to the grantors after a year's expiration from the day of the "entery" by the grantors upon "ye said lands." On the 18th day of August, 1665, a receipt is appended to the deed of one hundred of the four hundred fathoms of white wampum which, according to the deed, were to be paid in one year's time after entry made on the land and by another receipt indorsed on the deed November 21, 1665, an acknowledgment was made that certain articles therein specified had been received "in full payment of this obligation." The conclusion therefore is logical and inevitable that if the four hundred fathoms of white wampum were delivered in November, 1665, and if that payment were promptly made within one year after entry on the land then the first settlement at Elizabeth Town must have been made some time in the autumn of 1664 and by the four families from Jamaica and their associates. This view is strengthened by reference to the dates of the several documents preceding the execution of the deed by the sachems. It is to be noticed also that in the petition to Governor Nicholls it is stated that some of the petitioners were "destitute of habitations"; and the governor's answer was therefore craved "with as much expedition as may be." To any argument drawn from this circumstance it may be objected that it was at a season of the year when it was very improbable that so serious

and dangerous a movement would be made as the removal of women and children to an unknown country and subjecting them to the rigorous severity of winter. But, it must be remembered, that the necessity of providing habitations for themselves was fully set forth by the petitioners and no other inference can be made from this fact than that their need in that respect was immediate and imperative, and it is altogether probable that on receiving the favorable answer of Governor Nicholls instant measures were taken for proceeding to their new home. The women and children of those times were inured to hardship and the transfer from their Long Island home to New Jersey was not a very difficult task.

A controversy between the citizens of Elizabeth Town and the Lords Proprietors originated after this time, but about the period of the occurrences just narrated, Governor Carteret put himself on the record under such circumstances that it would seem that he precluded himself, and, so far as his action could do so, estopped his principals from making any objections to the Indian deed and to its confirmation by Governor Nicholls. The Indian deed and the grant by Nicholls were both made to individuals who were named in the deed and grants, "and their associates," who were not named. On the 8th of September, 1665, John Baylis, one of the original grantees of the Indian deed, conveyed to Governor Philip Carteret his part of the property belonging to him, as one of the associates. In this deed Baylis thus described the premises he intended to convey: "all and every my lott or lotts part or parts of a certain piece of land scituate lying and being on the maine Continent of America commonly called or known by the name of Arthur Cull or Emboyle, or whatever name or names soever it had been or now is called by which said parcel of land he the said John Baylis with several others did lawfully purchase from the natives or Indians as by his said Bill of Sayle from the Indians, bearing date the 28th of October, 1664, will more at large appear, which was confirmed by his Royal Highness Territorys in America, his grant bearing date the first day of December, 1664." This was not the only transaction of the kind in which Governor Carteret was engaged about that time. He purchased other property from other associates, notably one from Capt. Robert Sealey, and he also became enrolled as one of the associates and called himself an associate. It would seem therefore that Governor Carteret was most effectually estopped from denying the title made by the deed executed by the sachems and confirmed by Gover

nor Nicholls.

He received a deed for land which declared that it was

lawfully conveyed by the Indians and confirmed by Nicholls. It must be evident that, at that time, he did not expect ever to raise any objection as to the validity of that Indian deed, nor to the legality of its confirmation by the governor.

The historians who have written of New Jersey, with perhaps barely one exception, have either boldly stated, or, at least, intimated in strong terms that Governor Carteret and his thirty immigrants were the first settlers of Elizabeth Town. They do not seem to discriminate between the four grantees of the Indian deed and their associates, and Carteret and his motley band of immigrants. These were mostly servants, eighteen of them certainly were, and they were all, or very nearly all, Frenchmen, or persons bearing French names. They were possibly English subjects, born on the island of Jersey, but of French blood, and some of the thirty immigrants were women. There were only two gentlemen, or persons recognized as such, according to the notions of those times, besides the governor, among them, and they were Capt. James Bollen and Robert Vauquellin, a Frenchman, a surveyor, who afterwards became surveyor-general of the province. Bollen was an assured follower and devoted friend of the governor, whose cause he espoused with unswerving fidelity and unquestioning adherence, during all the future troubles between him and the people. He was clerk of the town and afterwards secretary of the Council. Carteret and his immigrants, it must be remembered, arrived at Elizabeth Town in August, 1665. On the 19th of February, 1665, six months before they landed, sixty-five inhabitants at Elizabeth Town took the oath of allegiance. This was at a town meeting of the voters of the settlement held on the day when the land was divided into town lots and allotted to the colonists. All the males of the colony were obliged to attend that meeting, to take this oath. The names of those who subscribed the oath are given, but that of John Baylis does not appear among them; he was away on business for the governor in pursuance of directions received from London. If he had been at home he would undoubtedly have signed. The names of those who took that oath on that wintry day are perpetuated by some of the most worthy and respectable. families of the city of Elizabeth to-day; Woodruff, Ogden, Crane, Carter, Moore, Marsh, Oliver, Tucker, Price, Bond, Whitehead, Meeker, Bonnell, Hatfield, Headley, Parker, Barber and others.

Mention has been made of the associates of the four grantees of the