The Coopers of Long Hill

Document I.105 · Published Genealogies and County Histories · transcription: verbatim

Morris County NJ Court of Common Pleas Minute Book Vol 2-3 (1754-1766) (FamilySearch DGS 7903193), images 212 + 229, December Term 1763 + March Term 1764 — TWO image-verified Benjamin Cooper plaintiff cases against Hathaway-family defendants: (1) Img212 Dec 1763 'Benjamin Cooper v Benjamin Hathaway — In Debt. Sheriff seized 40 shillings of Hathaway's goods; Court orders Vend Exponas writ', and (2) Img229 Mar 1764 'Benjamin Cooper v James Hathaway — In Debt — Casa Comm Entred (default judgment entered)'. = EARLIEST image-verified primary-source court appearances of Benjamin Cooper in the catalog, ages 22-23, 5+ years before [I.103](I.103.yaml) (1768) joint surety with father and 10 years before 1773 counterfeiting trial. Benjamin as PLAINTIFF/CREDITOR in BOTH cases — pursuing two different Hathaway-family debtors in successive 3-month interval. Documents Benjamin's active creditor-side financial network with the Hathaway family at ages 22-23.

Transcription and notes

Earliest catalog primary-source-images of Benjamin Cooper, as plaintiff suing for debt at ages 22-23

This entry catalogs Morris CCP Vol 2-3 image 212 = printed pp. 85-86 = December Term 1763 session. The case caption (right page) reads:

"Benjamin Cooper v Benjamin Hathaway — December Term 1763

In Debt. The Sheriff Returns that he has [seized?] on Divers Goods & Chattels to the value of forty Shillings proclamation money which Goods and Chattels Remain in his hands for want of [Buyers]. On Mo[tio]n of [Aaron Lord/Pond] for the [Plff] the Court orders [a Vend Exponas?] to issue & as for the Remainder..."

Catalog significance:

  1. Earliest image-verified primary-source court appearance of Benjamin Cooper in the catalog. Predates I.103 (5 July 1768 joint surety with father) by 5 years and 1773 counterfeiting trial by 10 years.

  2. Benjamin as CREDITOR/Plaintiff — not as defendant or surety. Reframes his early-life catalog from "Cooper-family-network participant" to "active creditor pursuing his own legal-financial interests" at age 22.

  3. 40 shilling debt = £2 proclamation money. Modest amount = personal loan, small commercial transaction, or unpaid wages. Documents Benjamin had economic dealings sufficient to generate creditor-position by 1763.

  4. Sheriff Daniel Cooper Jr serving the writ in his brother's case. Documents brother-brother professional collaboration before the more dramatic I.104 Dec 1768 "Daniel Jr in court for Brother Benjamin" appearance.

Sources

Img212 — Dec Term 1763 (Benjamin Cooper v Benjamin Hathaway): - File: (image held in the family archive) - DGS 7903193 image 212 of 410; FamilySearch ark: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-CSHM-P98W-1?view=fullText - Date: December Term 1763; printed pp. 85-86 - Source tier: Primary-source manuscript minute book (1763 clerk hand)

Img229 — Mar Term 1764 (Benjamin Cooper v James Hathaway): - File: (image held in the family archive) - DGS 7903193 image 229 of 410; same volume as Img212 - Date: March Term 1764; ~3 months after Img212 case - Source tier: Primary-source manuscript minute book (1764 clerk hand) - Image-verified 2026-05-19 late evening

Discovery context: 2026-05-19 evening reclassification per maintainer info that the FamilySearch quoted "Benjamin Cooper" search returns Img212 + Img229 in Vol 2-3 (1754-1766) — previously the Img212 image was tagged "low-OCR Daniel Cooper" but is actually a Benjamin Cooper hit. Img229 added 2026-05-19 late evening after image-verification confirmed James Hathaway defendant (NOT Benjamin Hathaway — different Hathaway-family debtor).

What this source establishes

1. Benjamin Cooper as active creditor at age 22

Benjamin had progressed his case against Benjamin Hathaway through: 1. Initial Debt complaint filed 2. Default or judgment entered by court 3. Sheriff issued writ of Fieri Facias to execute on Hathaway's goods 4. Sheriff returned the writ "Levied to value of forty shillings, remaining in hands for want of Buyers" 5. Plaintiff moves for Vend Exponas (= writ to compel public sale of seized goods, with statutory minimum bid)

This is a mature legal proceeding — Benjamin must have had a documented debt (bond, note, account) that supported obtaining judgment, then had patience to pursue execution. Not a novice creditor.

2. Reframes Benjamin's pre-counterfeiting catalog narrative

Before this entry, the catalog framed Benjamin's pre-counterfeiting period as: - 1762-1763: First marriage to Charity Hoff, infant son dies 1763 - 1768: First catalog primary-source court appearance (per old I.103 framing) - 1768-1769: Perth Amboy Treasury robbery period

The Dec 1763 Benjamin v Hathaway entry pushes his first documented court activity to coincide with the death of his infant son + Charity's death (1763). May be related to settling small estate matters, or unrelated personal-debt collection. Either way, Benjamin was financially active and litigious from age 22.

3. Daniel Cooper Jr as Sheriff serving brother's writ

Daniel Jr (commissioned Sheriff 4 July 1758 per I.100) was the Morris Co. Sheriff who executed the writ against Hathaway's goods. This creates a brother-brother professional relationship at the institutional level — Daniel Jr in his official capacity serving Benjamin's interests. Documents the Cooper-family-network operating through the Morris Co. court system.

4. Adjacent case context (Dec 1763 session)

The same Dec 1763 session shows standard Morris Co. debt-case docket: multiple In Debt + In Case actions, Sheriff returns, Vend Exponas issuances. Benjamin's case is typical for the era — small-amount unsecured-debt collection. Pattern matches with other small-Plaintiff cases on the same page.

5. Img229 (March Term 1764) — Benjamin Cooper v James Hathaway

Image-verified 2026-05-19 late evening. The case caption (near bottom of left page) reads:

"Benjamin Cooper [v] James Hathaway — In Debt — Casa: Comm Entred [Dow/Down = default judgment entered]"

Catalog significance:

  1. Different Hathaway defendant — James Hathaway, not Benjamin Hathaway (the Dec 1763 Img212 defendant). Benjamin Cooper was pursuing MULTIPLE Hathaway-family debt cases across the 3-month interval Dec 1763 → Mar 1764 at ages 22-23.
  2. Default judgment ("Casa Comm Entred") — suggests James Hathaway failed to appear or contest; Benjamin obtained the judgment uncontested.
  3. Cooper-Hathaway business/financial network — two separate Hathaway-family defendants in successive sessions implies broader Cooper-Hathaway dealings, possibly multiple loans, joint commercial transactions, or single underlying business relationship being unwound through serial litigation.
  4. Confirms Benjamin-as-creditor early pattern — Img212 alone could have been a single-instance creditor episode; Img229 makes the pattern systematic.

6. Hathaway-family identification (open)

Both defendants (Benjamin Hathaway in Img212 + James Hathaway in Img229) are unidentified Morris Co. residents. Cross-reference candidates: - I.95 1739 Morris Co. commission: "Benj Hathaway" as Justice of the Peace - I.97 1741: "Benjamin Hathaway" as Morris Twp Overseer of Poor

The Img212 Benjamin Hathaway may be a son/descendant of these earlier-generation Hathaways. James Hathaway is a separate identification problem.

Cross-references

Open questions / follow-up