Page:Cambridge Modern History Volume 7.djvu/78

46 Early History of New Jersey. [1673-4 NEW JERSEY. We have already traced the beginnings of the colony granted by the Duke of York to Carteret, and by him called New Jersey. The process by which it came into being was not unlike that followed in the case of New Hampshire. A number of independent townships were consolidated into a single community. But in New Jersey there was an element of difficulty which did not exist in New Hampshire. When the settlements of New Hampshire united, the Proprietor, Mason, was dead; his heirs took no interest in the province, and suffered it to work out its destiny in its own fashion. The settlers in New Jersey knew that the Proprietors might at any moment interpose their authority. Nor was there anything in the character of that authority to reconcile the settlers to its exercise. The Proprietors were not in any sense partners with the settlers in a costly and troublesome undertaking. They did not, in modern language, "finance" the colony in its early days as did Baltimore or the Proprietors of Carolina and thus establish a claim to some future benefit; they were simply beneficiaries. The system of "unearned incre- ment" was presented to the settlers in a singularly unqualified and re- pellent form. Not only were the Proprietors absentee landlords, but the settlers had actually already obtained titles for their land by purchase from the natives. For three years after he landed Philip Carteret made no attempt to call an assembly of the whole province; and the various townships remained virtually self-governing. When an assembly was summoned, the settlers reckoned the burden of attendance greater than the gain. The representatives of two townships refused to attend, and were followed by the rest. As was natural, the question of land-tenure soon gave rise to trouble. The Proprietors had liberated the colony from quit-rents for five years ; but they required all settlers to obtain from them patents of land. One of the townships claimed the right to grant land irrespec- tive of the Proprietors. Thereupon the settlers at once did, for the purpose of resistance, what they had refused to do for the purpose of co-operation with the Proprietors. They held a joint assembly of representatives of the towns, deposed Philip Carteret, and substituted another member of the family. The Proprietors at once put down the rebellion, and, acting on the assumption that the settlers had forfeited the privileges conceded to them, drew up a constitution in which the rights originally granted to the colony were considerably restricted. New Jersey, like New York, was reconquered by the Dutch in 1673, and again ceded to the English in 1674. The history of New Jersey now becomes extremely complex, owing to the number of distinct proprietary rights which were created, each in some measure calling into existence an independent community. The Duke of York held that the conquest annulled all previous titles, his own as well as those granted by