William A. Duer, The Life of William Alexander, Earl of Stirling (New York: Wiley & Putnam for the New Jersey Historical Society, 1847), pp. 24-25, 27, 35, 97-104

Transcription and notes

Transcription

p. 24 (from a letter to Alexander reporting his service in Scotland; the writer is not named on this page)

"... These greatly facilitated the service; and the jury were unanimous in finding you the nearest male-heir to the last Earl of Stirling.

"Your relation to the Earl of Stirling being now established, the next thing to be considered, is, how far it entitles you to the peerage? ..."

Duer's footnote, p. 24:

* It had appeared from the proofs before the jury of service, that Mr. Alexander was lineally descended from an uncle of the first Earl of Stirling. The direct male line of the latter had failed upon the death of his great-grandson, Henry Earl of Stirling, in 1737, without leaving an heir-male of his body, or any collateral male heir lineally descended from the first Earl. The question therefore now arising was, whether, since the union, the laws of Scotland had given place to the law of England in regard to the descent of Scottish peerages. ...

p. 27 (opening of Chapter II, 1759-1761)

The object of Mr. Alexander in procuring himself to be judicially recognized as the heir-male of the deceased Earl of Stirling, was by no means limited to the attainment of the peerage. His main purpose was to obtain the acknowledgment and possession of certain territorial rights of property and jurisdiction in America, which had been granted to his ancestors, and which he conceived to have devolved on him with the title. He did not, however, assume the latter until it had been conferred on him by his correspondents, and he had received the opinion of Mr. Wedderburn and his Scottish Counsel that his case was governed by the laws and customs of Scotland antecedent to the Union.

p. 35 (Stirling's own letter, on being told he must petition)

"... What must I petition for? The foundation of all the precedents of petitions is removed in my case; for the title is on the roll, and I have no competitor. It is hard to petition when I have nothing to ask for; ..." ... To end the controversy, I have petitioned. ... The prayer has already puzzled the Minister, and I believe when it comes to the House of Lords it will puzzle them too.

p. 97

It was at this period that an event occurred, which caused much excitement among the people, and great uneasiness to the Government of New Jersey. In July, 1768, Stephen Skinner, Treasurer of the eastern division of the Province, reported to the Governor, that the iron chest in which he kept the public money, had been robbed of more than six thousand pounds. All attempts to discover the robbers were in vain. The subject engaged the attention of the Legislature, and was warmly discussed at several sessions, without arriving at any conclusion as to the guilty parties. At length a resolution was passed by the Assembly, declaring that the robbery happened through the negligence of the Treasurer. In order to exculpate himself, that functionary made new and greater exertions to discover the criminals; and it seems that his suspicions had for some time rested on one Samuel Ford, an Englishman by birth, who had married and settled in New Jersey. The result of these efforts proved that his suspicions were not unfounded.

Ford had previously resided in the City of New-York, where he had once been apprehended on a charge of uttering forged bills of credit, purporting to have been issued by the Province of New Jersey. On that occasion he was admitted to bail; but no further proceedings were had against him. Immediately upon his release, he made arrangements for carrying on the trade upon a

p. 98

more extensive scale, and for that purpose, removed to New Jersey, and established his manufactory in a secluded spot near Hanover, in the County of Morris. He there formed a connection with one Joseph Richardson; and, after some abortive attempts at imitating the bills of New-York and New Jersey, the two accomplices repaired to Ireland, in consequence of hearing that the art of counterfeiting had been brought to great perfection in Dublin. Not satisfied with their improvement in that school, they crossed the channel, and visited London, and the chief manufacturing towns in England, in order more fully to inform themselves of its mysteries. In 1772 they returned to America, and commenced operations by a new emission of bills in Pennsylvania and New Jersey; and succeeded so well as to escape detection for a year or more.

Ford was a person of much low cunning and some address; and had art enough to persuade several individuals of respectable connections in New Jersey, to aid in the circulation of his spurious currency. The discovery that a quantity of these bills had been suddenly thrown into circulation, alarmed the community, and excited the vigilance of the civil authority; but the guilty parties for a long time eluded detection. The suspicion of the public, however, fell naturally upon Ford. It was well known that he possessed no visible means of livelihood but a neglected and unproductive farm; and that, although he led an idle life, he had always the command of money. These circumstances, in connection with the former charge against him, led to his arrest. Not long after his commitment to prison, with the assistance of one John King, a subordinate confederate, he effected his escape, and, in company with King and Richardson, fled to the western wilderness.

p. 100

from the Treasury, on the ground of his negligence, these confessions of Reynolds and Cooper were pressed by him on the attention of the Assembly, at its next session, as exculpating the Treasurer, and affording a sufficient excuse for the lenity extended to him: but without effect. The Governor's conduct in relation to the Stamp-Act had deprived him of the confidence of the people, and produced the election to the Assembly of a majority opposed to him. In this affair of the Treasury, the opposition members put forth their whole strength against him. A committee, to whom the subject had been referred, made a Report exculpating Ford, and charging the Treasurer himself with the robbery. This Report was concurred in by the House; and a long and angry correspondence ensued between the Governor and the Assembly as to the proper course to be pursued in order to bring the Treasurer to trial. The Governor was supported thus far, by the unanimous voice of his Council, including Lord Stirling, although, since the Stamp-Act, at the head of the political opposition to his administration. The dispute ended by the resignation of the Treasurer, and the appointment of a successor with authority to bring a suit to recover the lost money.

In this controversy, both parties displayed great perverseness. The Governor was, as usual, violent and undignified; his opponents, disrespectful and unreasonable; and it would have been difficult to decide which party was most to blame, had not the Governor afterwards called the Ex-Treasurer to his Council, in contempt of the opinions of a large majority of the people. ...

p. 101 (top)

... The robbery of the Provincial Treasury, the counterfeiters, and all the circumstances which had caused so much agitation, were speedily forgotten; the Ex-Treasurer adhered to the Royal cause; the suit against him was never brought to a close; Ford and his accomplices were no more heard of; and, to the last, as much doubt was entertained by many, as to the guilt of the several parties accused of the robbery, as existed at the time of its discovery.

p. 99

Several of the persons who had aided Ford in the circulation of his bills, were subsequently arrested; and bills of indictment were found in the County of Morris against Doctor Barnabas Budd, Samuel Haynes, David Reynolds, and Benjamin Cooper, who severally pleaded not guilty to the charge. ... Budd, Haynes, Reynolds, and Cooper, were condemned to death; but Reynolds, who had furnished the types, alone was executed. The respectability of the connections of the others enabled them to bring an influence to bear, which proved powerful enough to procure their pardon.

... Cooper, in his first confession, said nothing of the robbery; but he afterwards swore that Ford had made known to him all the circumstances, and acknowledged that he had committed it with the assistance of two soldiers from the garrison of Amboy.

p. 101

The following letter from one of the accomplices, who had been in the employ of Lord Stirling, was addressed to him after the writer had been convicted as an accessory to the forgeries, and shortly before the day fixed for his execution. In this case, it is more probable that the interposition of Lord Stirling, in consequence of this letter, and the former good character of the convict, procured his pardon, than the influence of his family.

pp. 101-104: Benjamin Cooper to the Earl of Stirling

"Morristown, N. J., September 7th, 1773.

"My Lord,—I am here confined and sentenced to die for a crime in itself dreadful; but I had but little to do with it. I will give an exact account to you of all I ever did.

"In the spring of 1771, at the close of the accounts belonging to the Hibernia Company, at your house, Samuel Ford and many others met at Daniel Cooper's, in order to settle and sign my letter of license; at which time Ford was to lend two hundred pounds, to be appropriated to the use of the Company. Shortly afterwards, he called me to Morristown, where he told me first of the villainous scheme of passing bad money. My necessities, distressed to distraction, led me into it. There I received between thirty and forty pounds of what he called counterfeit money, which was passed by John King and Samuel Haines. This was the first. I afterwards had a further parcel. This I burned, conceiving myself wrong. I never had any more; determined and resolved I would quit it; and if I had lived to the year 2000, should not by any means had any further hand. This is all in one week, in the year 1771. Two of the Judges, one of which was my father, and one other that he can inform you who it was, promised me I should never have it mentioned further than as an evidence, if I would give a narration of such as was concerned in counterfeiting and passing, if any I could. On these promises I gave the account that the Judge lays before the Governor and Council. It was at the bottom I gave it, that I had received and passed; but here you have all—the whole.

"I was indicted, and to this confessed guilty of uttering. I then see death, of course. I was also indicted for aiding; and the Judge said it was useless to plead not guilty. This I did; however, I knowed nothing of the making or any thing belonging to it, excepting the paper. I see it going to him. This was all I knowed about the whole. This is the substance, as near as I can recollect. I have just to beg your Lordship's interest and influence with the Governor and Council for me, if you can do it consistent with honour, or as far as may be. This I would be extremely obliged to you for.

"Several deeds ought to be made to you by me, and many things you are a stranger to, I fear, by which you will suffer, that otherwise you would not, had I not been called hence. But God's will be done. I am endeavouring to prepare for the world to come. It is my chief aim now—I believe it is time—I fear I am to depart. I have no one but your Lordship to place the least dependence on; and this only from your natural humane, benevolent disposition towards all mankind. Here only, I hope for your interest, which if properly obtained and applied, no doubt would lengthen my days. Many things in the course of my perplexity I could say more respecting your interest, as also my present situation. Now I pray you only, my good Lord, if you can possibly do me any service in this present situation of mine. Grant me your aid for God's sake.

"I am, &c."

"P. S. I was indicted for aiding Ford, when I left you at Hibernia, and went with my family to Hunterdon Ford was taken while you was at the works. I left you on Saturday morning; I returned the Friday following. I had reason to think he was in the woods. Miss Odle asked me to give her a hat and shirt: I did, and it was for Ford. However, I did not know positively who it was for, but by suspicion. For this alone and all the aid I gave I was indicted, and was advised by Isaac Ogden to plead guilty. My crimes, for which I am condemned, if they were all known, would not appear so bad."

p. 104 (Duer, introducing the Ogden correspondence)

The following correspondence between the late Colonel Samuel Ogden of Newark, and Lord Stirling, probably grew out of some interference, on the part of the former, in relation to Ford and his accomplices, upon which Lord Stirling thought proper to ground a charge before the Council, which he afterwards withdrew, for some good reason that does not appear, but renewed upon being urged by Colonel Ogden to do so.