Document K.108 · road return · transcription: partial
Warren Co., N.J. Road Books, book pages 46-47 — the return of a public road two rods wide in the Township of Mansfield, laid out on the application of William Cooper and others by order of the Inferior Court of Common Pleas, June 1828; the surveyors met at the house of William Cooper in the township of Mansfield on 18 June 1828. Received 5 July 1828, recorded 20 July 1828. FamilySearch film 008714075, image 43.
K.108: Warren Co., N.J. Road Books, book pages 46-47…People named
| As written | Role | Identified as | What this document says |
|---|---|---|---|
| William Cooper | mentioned | William Cooper 1781 candidate | residence: 18 Jun 1828, Mansfield Twp, Warren Co., New Jersey |
What this document records
🎯🎯 what it establishes a dated house in mansfield
WILLIAM COOPER HAD A HOUSE IN MANSFIELD TOWNSHIP ON 18 JUNE 1828, AND THE COUNTY'S SURVEYORS MET IN IT. That is an independent, dated, physical placement — three months earlier than [K.106] (25 Sep 1828), which had been the catalog's earliest Mansfield evidence for him. And he is the LEAD APPLICANT: the road was laid out "on the application of William Cooper and others, more than ten of the freeholders and residents of said County". A man who petitions the Common Pleas for a public road, and whose house the surveyors use as their meeting place, is a settled freeholder of some standing in that township — not a labourer or a tenant.
🔑 why it matters to the p2090 p12 question
[K.107] shows a William Cooper of Kingwood, Hunterdon selling ~150 acres in Mansfield in 1833. The obvious objection has always been: was he ever actually THERE? This answers that — in June 1828 a William Cooper's house in Mansfield was substantial enough to host a county road survey, and he was the man who applied for the road. It does NOT prove the two Williams are one man, and nothing here names a wife, a child or a parent. Not asserted. But it removes the "he was only ever a Hunterdon man" objection and fits a 150-acre Mansfield farm far better than a 0.21-acre strip does. It is equally consistent with William Cooper being a distinct Mansfield man — the argument lives at William Cooper and William Cooper, not here.
✅ the neighbourhood and a shared official with k106
Five surveyors signed, with their townships annotated: Isaac Shusman[?] · Adam Runkle and Henry Miller braced Mansfield · Caleb H Valentine and Daniel Blict[?] braced Independence. Caleb H. Valentine is the same man who, three months later, took the acknowledgment of [K.106] — "before me Caleb H. Valentine one of the Commissioners for taking acknowledgments of proofs of deeds", 25 Sep 1828 — and witnessed it. The same local official appears in both records, which is ordinary for a small county but does corroborate that [K.106]'s grantor and this road's applicant move in one neighbourhood. The clerk is the same too: this return is recorded by Halsted Clk, and [K.106]'s recording line reads Halsted.
🎯🎯 and he is a named abutting landowner at the terminus
THE ROAD ENDS AT A CORNER OF WILLIAM COOPER'S OWN LAND. The final course closes: "… to a stake and stone, corner to William Cooper and the heirs of John R. Marlat[t]" — read at 2×. So he is not merely the applicant and the host: he is a NAMED ABUTTING LANDOWNER. That is a direct statement that a William Cooper OWNED LAND in Mansfield Township in June 1828, adjoining the heirs of John R. Marlat[t] — five years before [K.107] sells ~150 Mansfield acres. Still does not name a wife, child or parent, and still does not choose between William Cooper and William Cooper. Not asserted.
✅ the route - the morris canal corridor through mansfield
Read at 1:1 native resolution. The road is two rods wide and runs roughly 97 chains (~1.2 miles) from the canal to Cooper's corner: begins at a stake at the Canal Bridge near the house of John R. Brown · (1) S 31° W 15 chains to a stake near the Canal · (2) S 58° W 20 chains to a stake near the Canal Basin, on the land of Joseph Philips · (3) N 88° W 40 chains 80 links to the south east corner of John Smith's land · (4) through lands of Henry Albert, S 69° W 14 chains to a stake · (5) S 55° W 7 chains 80 links to a stake and stone, corner to William Cooper and the heirs of John R. Marlat[t]. Five abutters named: John R. Brown · Joseph Philips · John Smith · Henry Albert · the heirs of John R. Marlat[t] — and William Cooper at the end. The Morris Canal is the anchor: a Canal Bridge at one end and a Canal Basin two courses in. The canal reached this part of Warren County in the later 1820s, which is why new roads were being petitioned for at exactly this date.
🔄 three orient level readings corrected
Three names first recorded from the ORIENTING VIEW were wrong, and are corrected here from the native-resolution crop. Recorded rather than silently fixed, because it is RULE ZERO-B in miniature — all three were plausible, confident misreadings of a downscaled view. • "John H. Brown" → John R. Brown • "Joseph Puchta[?]" → Joseph Philips • "the heirs of John H. Mode[?]" → the heirs of John R. Marlat[t] And one abutter was missed entirely from the orienting view: John Smith, whose south-east corner is course 3's endpoint.
Transcription and notes
Data from the document [partial]
The return — book page 46, lower left column
Heading, read at 2×:
"Public Road in the Township of Mansfield"
Opening, read at 2× across two crops:
"We the Subscribers, Surveyors of the Highways, of the County of Warren appo[inted] on the application of Wil[liam] Cooper and others, more [than ten] of the freeholders and residents of said County, by the In[ferior] Court of Common Pleas of the said County in [the term of] June A.D. 1828 to lay out a public road of two rods wide in the township of Mansfield in said County, as by the order and appointment of the said Court on the minutes of said Court a certified copy whereof is hereunto annexed more fully appears…"
The meeting place and date — the key clause, read at 2× across two crops:
"…Do hereby certify and Return that having met agreeably to the order of the said Court on this eighteenth day of June in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and twenty eight, at the house of William Cooper in the township of Mansfield in said County, and due proof being made to us that advertisements of our said meeting have been signed and set up according to law…"
The route — [desc]
Read at 1:1 native resolution (a 1916×760 crop, undownscaled), with the terminus line re-read at 2×:
"… We do lay out a public Road of two rods wide in the Township of Mansfield in said County to be[gin] at a stake standing at the Canal Bridge near the house of John R. Brown and runs first South thirty one degrees west fifteen chains to a stake near the Canal thence 2 South fifty eight d[egrees] west twenty chains to a stake near the Canal Basin on the land of Joseph Philips thence 3 north eighty eight degrees we[st] forty chains and eighty links to the South east corner of John Smith's land thence through lands of Henry Albert South six[ty] nine degrees west fourteen chains to a stake thence 5 South fifty five degrees west seven chains and eighty links to a stake and stone, corner to William Cooper and the heirs of John R. Marlat[t]"
The road ends on William Cooper's own corner.
Signatures — book page 47
Read at 2×; the township annotations are braced to pairs of names:
"Isaac Shusman[?] · Adam Runkle Mansfield · Henry Miller · Caleb H Valentine Independence · Daniel Blict[?] "
Recording
"Received 5th July 1828 and Recorded 20th July 1828 — Halsted Clk"
Read at 2×.
The next return on the same opening — [desc]
[desc]A second Mansfield road return begins at the foot of page 47, received 15 July 1828 and recorded 31 July 1828. Not read. CORRECTION, same day: this entry first read its applicant as "Joseph Ware[?] and others" from the orienting view. [K.109], the Common Pleas order, shows that the OTHER Mansfield road of June Term 1828 was made on the oath ofJOHN S. DAVIS, with the surveyors to meet at his house. ⇒ The second return is very probably Davis's, not Ware's. Probably — the return itself still has not been read. Cheap to settle: the image is filed.
Illegible / uncertain
Isaac Shusman— the surname could be Shuman or Shipman; read at 2× and not resolved.[?]Daniel Blict— Blickt / Bliet also possible.[?]John R. Marlat— the surname is clear at 2× but the terminal letters could be Marlatt, a common Warren/Hunterdon spelling.[?]Joseph PuchtaandJohn H. Modewere ORIENT-VIEW MISREADINGS and are nowJoseph Philipsandthe heirs of John R. Marlat— see the correction note incoverage.