Samuel Wright's Loyalist Association < Back August 1776 Previous Next

Heading 4 < Back About the Recipe Previous Next

Sandy Hook Becomes Haven for Loyalists < Back May 1776 Previous Next

Turning Away the Tea Ship, Nancy < Back April 1774 On April 19, 1774, a British merchant ship landed at Sandy Hook with a provocative cargo. Five months earlier, Bostonians staged the so-called Boston Tea Party—throwing the East India Tea Company’s tea into Boston Harbor. In response, the Royal Government passed the “Intolerable Acts” to punish the people of Boston and better enforce the tea tax. Colonists throughout the Thirteen Colonies retaliated by boycotting tea and other British goods. Now, the ship, Nancy , hoped to land its cargo of tea in New York City in an effort to breach the boycott. It had been a difficult voyage for the Nancy . A newspaper account noted that the ship was “without her mizen mast and one of her anchors, which were lost in a gale of wind.” In this time period, ocean-going ships bound for New York commonly stopped at Sandy Hook, which separates the open ocean from the sheltered waters of lower New York Harbor. Here, ships received fresh water after long ocean voyage and secured a pilot to guide the ship around lower New York Harbor’s shallows and into the city’s piers. Captain Lockyer of the Nancy summoned the resident pilot at Sandy Hook, William Dobbs, to board the ship and guide it to New York. Dobbs, an employee of the City of New York, refused to cooperate. He gave Lockyer a letter “from sundry gentlemen of this city, informing him of the determined resolution of the citizens not to suffer tea on board of his ship to be landed.” Lockyer responded by requesting a personal passage to New York “to procure the necessaries [for his crew] and make a protest.” Dobbs was unmoved. The newspaper report further noted that “the pilot would not bring up the Captain [to New York].” The Nancy sat at Sandy Hook without fresh provisions or a pilot to navigate the shallows of New York’s lower harbor. A few days later, a sloop “with a committee of citizens” came to the Nancy . It is impossible to know exactly what transpired between this committee and Captain Lockyer, but the committeemen declined to help the Nancy . Further, at least some these committeemen remained after the meeting: “a committee of observation was immediately appointed to… remain there near the tea ship till it departs for London.” After five days at Sandy Hook without any assistance, the Nancy pulled up its anchor and limped away. The senior-most British official in New York, Lt. Governor Colden, complained that he did not know the ship was at Sandy Hook. He blamed Lockyer for not requesting his help. But only cooperative locals could bring the ship or its captain to New York. While surviving documents discuss the Nancy ’s difficult time at Sandy Hook from a New Yorker’s perspective, it is important to remember that dozens of Monmouth Countians regularly sailed the waters around Sandy Hook. Each day, they ferried goods from Monmouth farms to New York in barges and sloops; they fished the banks off Sandy Hook and sold their catch in New York. These Monmouth Countians would have seen the Nancy . Further, Monmouth Countians were likely in the committee that visited Captain Lockyer and the subsequent Committee of Observation. They had it within their power to assist the Nancy and chose not to do so. Many later accounts of this event liken the boycott of the Nancy to the Boston Tea Party. Some narratives suggest that the Committee detained Lockyer and took control of the ship. Original sources do not support these details. The stiff-arm given to the Nancy was not a second Boston Tea Party. No tea chests were thrown overboard; no private property was destroyed. Nonetheless, the decision to turn away a British ship in need of help (and with a cargo of beloved tea) was an act of defiance and a strong expression of colonial solidarity. It also appears to be the first instance of Monmouth Countians participating in the anti-British agitation that immediately preceded the American Revolution. Sources : The Parliamentary Register Or, History of the Proceedings and Debates of the House of Commons (London: J. Debrit, 1775) vol. 1, p70; Pennsylvania Packet , April 25, 1774; Peter Force, American Archives , (Force and Clarke: Washington, DC, 1837) Series 4, vol., 1, p247; New Jersey Archives, 1st Series, Documents Relating to the Colonial, Revolutionary and Post-Revolutionary History of the State of New Jersey , vol. 29, pp. 348-50; New York Almanak , https://www.newyorkalmanack.com/2018/06/1774-patriots-new-yorks-tea-party/ Related Historical Sites : Sandy Hook Lighthouse Related Articles : #7 ; #10; #12; #14 More on People in this Article : William Dobbs - #14, #115, #145, #185, #216 Previous Next

New York Tories Hide in Shrewsbury < Back July 1776 Previous Next

The First Loyalist Raids Against Monmouth County < Back March 1777 Previous Next

Heading 4 < Back About the Recipe Previous Next

Salt Works Begin on the Monmouth Shore < Back May 1776 Previous Next

Daniel Van Mater and Monmouth Refugees in New York < Back February 1777 Previous Next

Shrewsbury Township Resists Continental Movement < Back Shrewsbury Township Resists Continental Movement In most ways, Shrewsbury was Monmouth County’s most important township—the first settled, the most populous, the wealthiest, and the most directly tied into the larger Atlantic trade. It also had the county’s largest Anglican congregation (at Christ Church) and most prominent Loyalist, the Reverend Samuel Cooke of the Christ Church. In 1774, the people of Shrewsbury did not join neighboring townships of Middletown, Freehold and Dover in forming a township committee to lead anti-British dissent—but the pressure to do so would build. On January 2, 1775 an anonymous advertisement went up in Shrewsbury village. It began: "The inhabitants of the town of Shrewsbury are hereby to meet at the house of Josiah Halstead in said Shrewsbury, the 17th of this instant, January, at noon, in order to choose a Committee." The advertisement said that “confirmed slavery or civil war” would result if the people of Shrewsbury did not join the Continental movement. The meeting at Halstead’s tavern (the present-day Allen House) occurred but the attendees chose not to establish a committee. Reverend Cooke recalled that “he prevented any committee from being chosen in Shrewsbury where he lived, by using his influence.” An anonymous account of the meeting further noted: Between thirty and forty of the most respectable freeholders met, and after a few debates on the business of the day, which were carried on with great decency and moderation, it was generally agreed that the appointment of Committees was not only useless, but they would prove disturbing to the peace and quietness which hitherto existed in this township. The decision to not form a committee was noticed in Freehold. On March 6, the Freehold Committee took up the matter and determined to “cut the sacred ties of friendship” with Shrewsbury. The Freehold Committee called for the people of Shrewsbury to vote to form a committee at the town’s annual meeting in May. Shortly after that, a delegation of Freehold citizens went to Shrewsbury, “earnestly requesting they comply with the instructions of the late American Congress in constituting themselves a Committee of Observation.” On March 14, the Freehold Committee formalized the isolation of Shrewsbury from the rest of the county: We esteem to treat them, the said inhabitants of Shrewsbury, as enemies to their King and Country, and deserters from the common cause of true freedom; we will hereafter break off all dealings and communications with them while they continue their opposition . However, the Freehold Committee hoped the isolation would be temporary. “We shall always be pleased to receive them as returning prodigals." The resistance in Shrewsbury soon crumbled. On May 10, a meeting of several township committees in Freehold was also attended by “a number of Gentlemen from the township of Shrewsbury, under the character of Deputies of the Shrewsbury Association, declaring themselves and their constituents desirous of adopting measures of the Continental Congress.” Six days later, this Shrewsbury Association declared: We are desirous to comply with the directions of the County Committee as far the Congress' Association will warrant, and to join the rest of our townships in uniting our force for our just defense and protection, if need be, and it is so required by the Provincial Congress. Finally, on May 27, at the Shrewsbury Township annual meeting (again at Halstead’s tavern), the citizens of Shrewsbury voted to establish a committee “by a great majority.” The Committee would hold its first meeting on June 17. At about this same time, Reverend Samuel Cooke left Shrewsbury. After twenty years as Shrewsbury’s most influential leader, he returned to England. He recorded that “he rec'd several threats before he came away; this hastened his departure.” Sources : Hugh Edward Egerton, The Royal Commission on The Losses And Services Of American Loyalists, 1783-1785 (London: Kessinger, 2010) pp. 35-7. See also Rutgers University Special Collection, Loyalist Compensation of Application of Samuel Cooke, D96, AO 13/108, reel 8; Franklin Ellis, The History of Monmouth County (R.T. Peck: Philadelphia, 1885), p123; Peter Force, American Archives: Consisting of a Collection of Authentick Records, State Papers, Debates, and Letters and Other Notices of Publick Affairs (Washington, DC: U.S. Congress Clerk's Office, 1853), 5th Series, vol. 1, p 1165; Edwin Salter, History of Monmouth and Ocean Counties (Bayonne, NJ: E. Gardner and Sons, 1890) p57; "Proceedings of the Committees of Freehold and Shrewsbury," Proceedings of the New Jersey Historical Society. 1 st Series, vol. 1 , pp. 189; McMurray Hyde, "James Rivington," Spirit of '76, March 1899, vol. 5, n. 7, p 132; Franklin Ellis, The History of Monmouth County (R.T. Peck: Philadelphia, 1885), p123; Gaillard Hunt, Fragments of Revolutionary History (Brooklyn: Historical Publishing Club, 1892) pp. 110-2; Nathaniel Scudder Manuscript, New York Public Library, Myers Collection, #551; New Jersey Historical Society, Holmes Family Papers, box 5, folder 6; Proceedings of the Committees of Freehold and Shrewsbury, Proceedings of the New Jersey Historical Society, First Series, 1846, pp. 190-1; Shrewsbury Township Committee, Monmouth County Historical Association, Collections Alphabetical, Revolution folder 1. Related Historical Sites : Christ Church ; Halstead’s Tavern ( the Allen House ) Related Articles : #2 ; #4; $5, #6; More on People in this Article : Samuel Cooke #5, #249 Previous Next

Monmouth Begins Argument For and Against Independence < Back June 1776 Previous Next

Louis Bestedo Captures Loyalists < Back April 1777 Previous Next