been given to him," and under the former conveyance the rights of government were supposed to be conveyed and had been actually exercised by the Proprietors, with the full concurrence of the Duke himself. But, before his grant to Carteret the Duke had included this very province in a commission of government given to Edmond Andross. In the conduct of the Duke there is exhibited a great degree of duplicity or obtusity, or rather a singular mixture of both.

Philip Carteret, the Governor of New Jersey, whose mission to England has already been noticed, remained in that country during the time of the occupation of his province by the Dutch, and until the consequent proceedings were completed. So soon as the Proprietary authority was again confirmed, Sir George Carteret gave a new commission to his brother as Governor, and the latter soon afterwards returned to the province. He brought a new confirmation by Sir George of the concessions as "explained" by the joint Proprietors, with such other regulations as the altered state of affairs had appeared to demand. 16

Nearly at the same time that Governor Carteret returned to New Jersey, Edmund Andross, who had been appointed as Governor under the Duke of York, arrived in the country, and took possession of his post. It will eventually be seen that the authority held or claimed, by these neighboring officers, brought them into frequent and rude collision.

Governor Carteret met with no opposition from the settlers at his return to the province; there was even an appearance of satisfaction. He published his commission at Bergen on the 6th of November, 1674, in the presence of his Council, and Commissioners from most of the towns, and thus resumed the reins of authority which he had been compelled for a time, to relinquish.

At an early period a General Assembly of the province was summoned, and the session began on the 5th of November, 1675. Eight members of Council including the Governor, were present, and fourteen Representatives appeared from the towns. The members of both bodies took the oath of allegiance to the King

"Grants and Concessions, p. 55.

and fidelity to the Lord Proprietor, except that the oath was refused by one of the Representatives from Shrewsbury. He was dismissed.

Laws were enacted at this session for the defence of the province, against "any enemies or dangers that may accrue," by providing for the establishment and arming of military bodies, and the erection of places of security in the several towns. Provision was also made for the institution of regular courts to go under the denomination of County Courts. Two of these courts were to be held in every year in each one of the counties, adjacent towns forming a county, and a rate of fees for the court officers was also established. Regulations were made for the assessment of taxes throughout the province, and a "Country Treasurer" was appointed. 18 A code of capital laws was also adopted, very similar in its provisions to that which had been passed in 1668.

An act of amnesty concluded the proceedings of the session. By this last mentioned act it was prescribed, that all inhabitants and members of the province should be freely pardoned of all offences, whether capital or other, committed between the year 1670 and the 1st of June 1673, and also that "all reviling speeches practices, or intents" tending in times past, to the disturbance of amity, should be pardoned by the Governor, and be buried in oblivion.

This favorable beginning seemed to give a promise of future harmony and success, a promise however, which was not in the event entirely fulfilled.

But before proceeding to consider the further course of affairs, it may be proper to notice the events which relate to the other portion of the province.

"Previous to this time there had been no other courts than those established by particular corporations.

"Samuel Moore, of Woodbridge, was appointed to this office, who was to have nine pence per pound for his care and pains.

CHAPTER X.

PURCHASE BY FENWICK AND BYLLINGE.-PARTITION BETWEEN FENWICK AND BYLLINGE.-SETTLEMENT OF FENWICK.-QUINTIPARTITE DIVISION.-PROVISIONAL GOVERNMENT.-PROPRIETARY GO

VERNMENT.

IT has been stated that on the 18th of March, 1673, Lord Berkely, one of the original proprietors of New Jersey, disposed of the whole of his right and interest in the province. The purchase was made by John Fenwick and Edward Byllinge.' These persons were members of the Society of Quakers or Friends, a religious people who had experienced much opposition and persecution, and there is reason to believe that a principal object proposed by Fenwick and Byllinge in making their purchase, was to secure a place of retreat for themselves and their religious associates. The Society of Friends had arisen in England at a time when all the elements which go to the constitution of general society, were in motion. It was a period of inquiry and of action. In the temporal affairs of men a most searching disposition had been working; the origin and nature of civil and political rights were inquired into, and the particular circumstances by which these might be endangered, as well as the points at which they had been actually encroached upon, were carefully noted. A spirit not unlike to this had also been in action in those higher investigations which relate to the spiritual concerns of man. The dogma which gave infallibility to one person as the head of the Church had long been utterly rejected, and the decisions of Councils and of Kings were no longer received as the true exponents of Christian doctrine. Man, individual man, claimed the right to know and to judge for himself, concerning the relation in

which he stood to the maker and preserver of all. The Quakers or Friends became somewhat distinguished for the boldness with which they pursued their inquiries, and for the position they assumed in religious concerns. They went further than others in their questionings, and rejected almost every thing belonging to the "accidents or circumstances" of religion. They were resolved to stop

at no shadow, but to reach to the substance. But this independence of thought and of action caused these persons to become objects of suspicion to those who were incapable of comprehending their singleness of purpose. The earthly themselves, formed no conception of the spiritual, except as mingled with the earthly. They were unable to comprehend an aim that was far above every thing connected with mere worldly advantage or aggrandizement. Hence, at the restoration of Monarchy, the Quakers were classed amongst those who were supposed to hold sentiments inimical to the peace and safety of the State, and were visited in consequence, with most rigorous persecution. A Royal proclamation was issued including them with persons known to be disturbers, and forbidding them to meet under the pretence of religious worship, except in the established parochial churches. A law applying particularly to them was also enacted, subjecting them to the severest penalties, and this law was enforced in many instances, in a manner the most unsparing. Under such an enactment too, escape was impossible; it operated not merely in the case of overt acts, but was directed against a name, and a mere negative offence. All Quakers who should refuse to take the oaths of allegiance were subject, and were subjected, to the penalties set forth, and this too, though it was constantly asserted by the sufferers, that their refusal to take the oath proceeded from no want of attachment to the State, but from a regard to the high injunction "swear not at all." Besides the proceedings against the Quakers on the charge of disaffection to the State, they were visited also in the name of the Church. At the restoration, Charles had issued a specious declaration giving a promise of liberty of conscience to his people, but he was wanting either in disposition, or in power, to fulfil his engagement. The English Church had rejected the authority of Rome and asserted the right to freedom of thought, but it resolved that this right should only be enjoyed within its own particular

bounds. It assumed that the true point had been reached, and that all who should advance beyond this limit, were to be regarded and treated as offenders. The Quakers were summoned to the ecclesiastical courts, and prosecuted and condemned upon various pretences; many were buried in prisons, and suffered the loss of their estates, and even of their lives. It is not wonderful, under these circumstances, that the members of this society should have been desirous to discover and secure a place of retreat. In support of their testimonies they shrank not from suffering, and a few it may be, with questionable zeal, were even disposed to invite it. But the soberer views of the body led to the belief, that suffering in itself, was not to be esteemed as a merit, and that to avoid it, without a compromise of their principles and faith, was not to be condemned as a fault. And a place of escape presented. New Jersey had been in the hands of persons who had been possessed of ample authority, and had established a tolerant government. These persons had been disappointed in the expected pecuniary return, but a pecuniary return from the labor of others, was not the object which the Friends proposed, but rather security and peace for themselves. Hence the offer of Lord Berkely to dispose of his interest in the province was readily met and accepted.

The conveyance from Berkely was made to John Fenwick, in trust, for Edward Byllinge. Some difficulty was afterwards experienced in determining the respective interests of these parties in the property they had purchased. The particular nature or cause of the embarrassment, is rather surmised than known, but it was necessary to effect a settlement. For this purpose the intervention of William Penn was requested; his talents in business and elevated character and standing, both within the limits of his own society, and also in the world, pointed him out as a proper arbitrator. His award was acceded to. It gave one-tenth part of the province, with a considerable sum of money, to Fenwick, and the remainder of the territory was adjudged to be the property of Byllinge.

No long time had elapsed before a new difficulty arose. Byllinge was a merchant, and was overtaken by a change of fortune, in consequence of which he was obliged to make a conveyance of his rights and interests in the province, for the use and benefit