THE HUGUENOTS
ON THE HACKENSACK.
REV. DAVID D.
DEMAREST, D. D.,
PROFESSOR IN
THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY,
NEW BRUNSWICK,
N. J.
NEW BRUNSWICK,
N. J.: THE DAILY FREDONIAN STEAM PRINTING PRESS 1886.
Editor’s note: This document is an exact machine-readable version
of the original printed document, scanned in, and edited. Punctuation errors
have been silently amended. All spellings are as in original. Original
footnotes are marked [DDD] at their conclusion; additional footnotes by the
editor are marked [MDD] at their conclusion.
NB: The genealogical information in the appendix has been
superceded by the 1964 Voorhis Demarest genealogy; the genealogical information
in this document is provided for completeness alone, and it should not be used
or incorporated into genealogical databases under any circumstances.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
The original source of this document may be found in
photofascimile form at: http://www.demarests.com/documents/ddd_hh_fac.pdf.
An annotated PDF version of this document may be found at:
http://www.demarests.com/documents/ddd_hh.pdf.
The paper which I propose to read to you this evening will chiefly
comprise matters so purely local, that I can scarcely hope to secure the
interest of this national society. The actors were men who were not great in
either Church or State. Much will necessarily be said about my own ancestor
whose name I bear, and perhaps some may consider my narrative more appropriate
to a family reunion, than to an annual meeting of the "Huguenot Society Of
America.”
But having been assured that the members of this Society will be
glad to hear about the fortunes of any one, even of the smallest and least of
the Huguenot colonies in America, I am here to tell you what I know about the
Huguenots on the Hackensack, in the Province of New Jersey.
The fact that there ever was a colony of Huguenots on the
Hackensack is probably known by very few people, and these few are doubtless
indebted for most of their knowledge about it to the admirable history of
Harlem, by Mr. James Riker. I gratefully acknowledge my obligations to Mr.
Riker for a knowledge of many facts which he has, by his faithful and patient
investigations, brought to light. On page 392, of his book, is a very valuable
footnote on this colony, containing statements which I have verified by
original documents, and to which I have been enabled to add somewhat.
This little settlement was, so far as I know, the only one looking
to organization and permanency that was made by Huguenots in the province of
New Jersey, though individual families did locate here and there, and a little
cluster of them settled in the neighborhood of Princeton. The colony was
composed of very few families at the beginning, and the number was never
increased to any great extent by accessions from without. Very little is to-day
known about its origin and history, even in the immediate vicinity of the
original settlement, so thoroughly have all traditions about it died out. The
French element was so speedily absorbed by the surrounding Dutch, that not a
few of the numerous descendants of the Huguenot pioneers, from whom the farms
they occupy have come down in unbroken descent through seven or eight
generations, verily believe that they are of pure Holland stock, and the story
of their French origin is to them a new revelation.
To gather up what may be found of the true and almost romantic
history of this little company of 200 years ago, has been with me a labor of
love, and a work of absorbing interest. But little would I have found if the
men of that day had not kept public records in Church and State, with some
measure of care, and if my only resource had been the materials preserved by a
pious reverence for ancestry.
It is even necessary that I should define the geographical
position of this colony. Where was it situated? You may have occasion at some
time to travel on the New Jersey and New York railway which connects Jersey
City and Stony Point on the Hudson, running through the valley of the
Hackensack, in Northern New Jersey, and in Rockland county, New York. Twelve
miles from Jersey City, on the line of this road, is the ancient and beautiful
village of Hackensack. About two miles North of this village is the Cherry Hill
station, near to which is a bridge crossing the Hackensack known as the New
Bridge,
to distinguish it from the Old Bridge which crosses the stream a little more
than a mile to the north, at River Edge station. If after leaving Cherry Hill
station you look out of your car window, eastward across the river, you will
soon see on an eminence, a few rods from the shore, the white marble
head-stones that indicate a burial place of the dead. This is what is known in
the neighborhood as the old French burial ground, confessedly, one of the
oldest cemeteries, if not the oldest in that region of country.
How often have I passed this spot in my boyhood, my home being
about three miles to the north of it, and it being quite near to the highway
leading to Hackensack, the county seat. And yet, to my shame be it said, I did
not know until long after I had reached manhood, why this was called the French
burial ground. No one told me the reason, and I had not curiosity enough to
enquire. I had a vague notion that either some Frenchman of note had a long
time ago been buried there, or that such an one had lived in the neighborhood
and given or sold the land for this place of burial. I am, furthermore, ashamed
to say that I never entered it until about two years ago. And yet there lies
the dust of the principal pioneer Huguenot settlers of that vicinity, and among
them of my own ancestors. Not a few of the descendants of the men and women who
have been there buried, doubtless pass every day in sight of this cemetery,
ignorant of the fact that their French ancestors lie there, ignorant even of
the fact that they had French ancestors.
Our surprise at this will, however, be diminished when we consider
that these people brought a knowledge of the Dutch language as well as of their
native French with them from Europe; that being thrown among the Dutch they
were compelled to use their language everywhere, except in their own families;
that in the early generations already the Dutch superseded the French in the
Huguenot families also, and kept its place from generation to generation until
it was in turn pushed out by the English, though to this day retaining a slight
foothold in some households in Bergen and adjacent counties. It is, therefore,
not so strange after all, that the descendants of the Huguenots should be
reckoned by others, and believed by themselves to be Dutch, and should even
take pride in their Dutch descent.
Now it was in the neighborhood of this cemetery that David des
Marest with his wife, his two sons, Jean and David, with their wives and
children, a third unmarried son Samuel, and Jaques La Rou settled in the Spring
of 1678, and where they were soon after joined by Nicholas de Veaux, Jean du
Rij, (Durie) Daniel du Voor, Andries Tiebout, Daniel Ribou and others. Who then
was this David des Marest,
the leader and chief spirit of this colony, and how did he happen to locate in
this spot? He was a native of Beauchamp, a little village of Picardy, in
France, about 22 miles West of the City of Amiens.
He was born about the year 1620. The family of des Marest was very numerous in
that part of France, and highly respectable. David des Marest, Sieur le Feret,
whose seat was at Oisemont, held many high offices in the State, and he was
moreover an influential Elder in the French Protestant Church. His son, Samuel,
known in the theological world as Maresius, his name being Latinized after the
custom of the times, was Professor of Theology, at Groningen, and a voluminous,
controversial writer. His sons, Daniel and Henri, were preachers, and with the
aid of their father, prepared what has been pronounced the finest edition of
the French Bible that has ever been published. How closely the David des
Marest, who came to this country, was allied to them is not known. His father's
name was Jean, a Protestant Christian, who, with his family, had left his dear
native France, like many others, on account of the troubles of the present .and
the uncertainties of the future, to find peace, and freedom of worship among
their Dutch neighbors who gave to all such a hearty welcome and secure home. He
settled at Middleburg, on the Island of Walcheren, Zeeland, at what time we are
unable to say. The
marriage of his son David and Marie Sohier, daughter of Francois Sohier, from
Nieppe, a town of Hainault, 13 miles East from Hazebrook, took place, as the
records of the Walloon Church at Middleburg inform us, July 24th, 1643. The des
Marest and Sohier families had probably resided in that City for some time when
the young people formed this matrimonial connection. Two sons were born to them
in Middleburg -- Jean, who was baptized April 14th, 1645, and David, who was
baptized June 22nd, 1649. The latter must have died in childhood, for the name
David was given to a third son who was born after the removal of the family
from this City.
In the year 1651, David des Marest had removed with his family to
Mannheim, on the Rhine, the chief City of the Lower Palatinate. The French
Protestants were at this time going from various parts in great numbers to this
City, invited and encouraged by the Elector, Charles Lewis, who offered great
inducements for them to settle in his dominions. A French Protestant Church was
there formed, the Elector himself providing the building. It was called the
"Temple of Concord," because Lutherans as well as Calvinists were
allowed to use it for public worship. Some of the Huguenots, who afterward came
to New Paltz, were connected with this Church. At Mannheim two sons were born to
David des Marest, David in 1652 and Samuel in 1656. It is probable that another
child was born in the same city, who died in infancy shortly after the arrival
of the family in America, for there were four children when the family landed
in this country, the youngest of whom was one year old, and we know that of
these, only the three eldest, Jean, David and Samuel reached maturity. Another
son, Daniel was born in Harlem, N. Y., and baptized in the Dutch Church of New
York, July 7th, 1666, who died as the result of an accident when 5 years of
age.
But Mannheim was not to be the permanent home of this family. The
Catholic Princes were threatening the Palatinate with hostilities, and many of
the Protestant refugees, well knowing the woes that would come upon them if the
country should fall into the hands of-the deadly enemies of their faith,
resolved to leave it. Des Marest and some others determined to emigrate to
America. He was in the prime of life, being little more than forty years of
age. He felt that at least rest from persecution would be found in the new
world, which also gave a better promise than the old for the temporal future of
his children and children's children in all their generations.
Several of these families passed down the Rhine to Amsterdam, and
sailed thence in the "Boutekoe," spotted or brindled cow, for New
Amsterdam, which they reached April 16th, 1663.
Immediately on his arrival, David des Marest with his family
joined the Huguenot Colony on Staten Island, a little South of the Narrows. The
high esteem in which he was held by the people of the island is evident from
the fact that in the following year, 1664, he was chosen as one of the two
delegates from Staten Island to the Provincial Assembly of New Netherland,
which met to consider the state of the Province just before its surrender to
the British.
After a residence of two years on Staten Island, he bought
property at New Harlem, and removed thither in the autumn of 1665. He
afterwards added several lots of land to his original purchase, and Harlem was
his home during 12 1/2 years.
Mr. Riker has related many of the incidents of his life during
those years. He was one of the most prominent citizens of that place, and was
deemed worthy of the highest positions which that little community could give
him, and seems to have been faithful to every trust. He sometimes had
difficulties with his neighbors, and we strongly suspect that he was a man of
hasty temper, not disposed to submit meekly to injustice, one who knew his
rights and was prepared to maintain them. But the grievance which he seems to
have taken most deeply to heart, which was "the last straw on the camel's
back," and which confirmed him in the purpose already entertained to leave
Harlem, was the outrageous act of assessing him for the payment of his share
toward the salary of Henry Jansen Vander Vin, the Dutch Voorleser, and for
attempting to collect the money by process of law. On the 6th of March, 1677,
the Mayor's Court of New York ordered that the Clerk should have his pay for
his past services, and that he should be continued in office and be paid for
his future services, and that if any of the inhabitants "should refuse to
pay what is due from them for the time past and for the time to come, then the
Constable is hereby ordered to levy the same by distress and sale of the goods
for satisfaction of what is or shall hereafter become due to said Clerk."
Claude Delamater and David des Marest, Sr., were the delinquents
in this matter, and they were summoned before the Town Court. Delamater
stubbornly refused to pay, defying the authorities, and his goods were levied
on, but for some reason the matter was not prosecuted any further. Des Marest
gave them to understand that lie too would hold out, if he were to remain in
the place, but since he intended to remove he would pay what was demanded,
which he accordingly did.
But why should not Delamater and des Marest have been assessed for
the salary of Hendrick Jansen Vander Vin, the Voorleser, and why should they
not have paid their shares as well as their neighbors? The plea was (and you
will mark the words,) "that they of the French congregation in the
time of Gov. Francis Lovelace, having received.a preacher, the aforesaid
Governor had said that the French of the town of New Harlem should be free as
to contributing to the Dutch Voorleser." In the autumn of 1676, des Marest
was two years in arrears on this salary account. And thus we learn that there
was a French congregation and a French preacher as early as 1674, or nine years
before the Rev. Pierre Daille came to minister to the French in New Amsterdam.
It also shows the attachment of these people to their mother Church and native
tongue. The Dutch language was as familiar to them as the French, but not so
dear, and they were ever ready to slip away from it.
This brings us to the purchase of a tract of land on the
Hackensack River in Bergen County, New Jersey, and which was known as the
French patent. Des Marest proposed to establish on it a number of families of
his countrymen and co-religionists from France, so that they might live in the
secure enjoyment of their religious liberty, and at the same time promote their
temporal welfare. Having disposed of his property in Harlem, he bought from the
Tappan Indians a large tract of land lying between the Hackensack and Hudson
rivers. The deed of conveyance bears date June 8, 1677. It was given by
Mendawasey, Sachem of Tappan, Jan Claus, Seriockham, Haharios and Kassamen who
signed it for themselves, and for other Indians to the number of twenty-six,
who are named in the instrument, to Sir George Carteret, Lord Proprietor of the
Province of New Jersey on behalf of David des Marest, Sr., and his children on
payment of the following articles:
100 fathem of black wampen, 100 bars of lead, 100 fathem of white
wampen, 100 knives, 15 fire lock guns, 1 barrel of powder, 15 kettles, 4
barrels of beere, 20 blankets, one saw, 20 match coates, one acker of rum, 20
hatchets, one pistoll, 20 hows, one plaine, 30 pairs of stockings, one great knife,
20 shirts, one carpenter's ax.
This land was conveyed "together with all the woods,
underwoods, trees, marshes, meadows, pastures, vynes, minerals, creeks, rivers
or rivulets, hawkings, huntings, fishing, and all other the commodities,
benefits or improvements that are or shall [be] therefore belonging and
appertaining.”
It is difficult to follow in every particular the description of
this tract as given in the deed. The Western and Eastern boundaries cannot be
mistaken. The Western was the Hackensack river, the Easter “a great mountain
standing between a great swamp and Hudson’s river,” which must mean the
Palisade range, there being no other mountain or hill of any size between these
two rivers. The tract was bounded on the South by lands of Laurence Andriessen
or Van Buskirk, and the dividing line was a brook called by the Indians
Kessawakey, a little stream running into the Hackensack at New Bridge, and
which in documents of a later date is called French Creek. This line running
Eastward must have passed not far from Tenafly, and struck another stream
running Northward called the Gessawacken [Tenakill] and which turning to the
West emptied into the Hackensack, “which two creeks,’ says the deed, “doe
emcompass the aforesaid tract of land.” A few years later in 1683, when David
des Marest petitioned the Governor’s Council for the privilege of cutting
timber on the part of his Indian purchase which had not been patented to him by
the proprietors, he represented the tract as two miles in breadth, coming to a
point, and six miles in length, which must mean six miles following the river
Northward from the mouth of the creek at New Bridge. On Ratzer’s map
of New Jersey, made at the time of the final settlement of the boundary line
between New York and New Jersey, this part of the Hackensack is called Des
Marest’s Kill. The number of acres is not stated, but there
must have been several thousand.
About one-half of this tract must have fallen within the province
of New York, when, shortly after, the boundary line was run between New York
and New Jersey. The boundary between these wo provinces was not permanently
fixed until the year 1769, but various lines were run at different times,
causing considerable confusion in the way of collecting taxes and administering
justice. .Jean des
Marest and his brother Samuel and nephew David, in 1704, petitioned Lord
Cornbury for an order for a survey of that Northern portion of. the Indian
purchase which had fallen to New York by the boundary, which, they said, had
been recently made, so that it might be secured to them by patent, and they
claimed that it embraced about three thousand acres. Against the granting of
this petition Capt. John Berry presented a remonstrance, claiming that he had a
right to two thousand acres of that Indian purchase, that he had waived his
claim on condition that des Marest should bring thirty or forty families from
Europe to occupy the lands, that the condition had not been fulfilled, and that
he was therefore entitled to two thousand acres of the tract which was claimed
by the petitioners.
The petition and remonstrance were both laid on the table, and
whether subsequent action was taken by the Council, I have not been able to
learn.
The Indian deed only extinguished the Indian title. For a good and
permanent title, a quit claim deed from the Lords proprietors, successors of
Sir George Carteret, became necessary. This does not appear to have been
clearly understood at the time, for the des Marests took possession of their
lands at once, cleared a tract at Old Bridge, built their log houses and barns,
and mill-dam and mills,
and removed their families in the Spring of 1678, before they had any title
except that which was conveyed by the Indian deed to Sir George Carteret in
their behalf. It is certain that a mill-dam and at least one mill on the
Western side of the river existed in 1681, for in that year the Surveyor
General, Robert Vauquellen, made a survey for David des Marest, Sr., of sixteen
acres lying on the Western side of the river, the Eastern boundary of which is
described as the "mill and mill-dam and river." This little tract had
been bought, probably near the time of the purchase of the large tract East of
the Hckensack, of an Indian Sachem named Mumshaw, whose right to dispose of it
was afterward 1684) disputed by another Indian named Korough. How the matter
was settled we are not told, but certainly des Marest remained in possession.
At the same time (1681) Vauquellen surveyed various tracts of land
for David des Marest, Sr., and his three sons, and Nicholas de Vaux, on the
Eastern side of the Hackensack, extending from New Bridge northward
considerably beyond Oradell, and Eastward one hundred chains or one mile and a
quarter. Probably this survey was not made earlier because of the unsettled
condition of the province. Sir George Carteret died in 1679 and by will
directed his property to be sold for the benefit of his creditors. Governor
Andros of New York then claimed jurisdiction and seized and imprisoned Governor
Philip Carteret. In 1681 Governor Andros relinquished his claims and Governor
Philip Carteret was restored to his position.
In 1682 the Duke of York confirmed the sale of the province to the
twenty-four proprietors. On the 23d of March, 1682, David des Marest, Sr., petitioned
the Council for permission to cut timber for the supply of his saw mill, in the
parts of the land he had purchased from the Indians which had not yet been
patented. The Council denied his request, but at the same time ordered that
patents should be given for the lands that had been surveyed for him and his
sons, manifestly referring to the surveys made the year before. The
Southernmost portion of this tract beginning at New Bridge and extending
Northward was patented to Jean, the eldest son, the Northernmost portion was
patented to David, Jr., the second son.
A patent was furthermore granted in 1686 to David des Marest, Sr.,
for a tract of land embracing two thousand and ten acres, lying between the
lands just named and Chesche [Tenakill] Brook, and bounded on the North by
lands of the proprietors, and South partly by lands of the proprietors and
partly by lands of Laurence Van Buskirk. The Western boundary of this tract was
not, as is commonly supposed, the Hackensack River, but a line running North and
South a little to the West of the two Schraalenberg Churches, and which was the
Eastern boundary of the lands previously patented. Various claims were,
afterwards made to various portions of these lands, which the heirs of David
des Marest, Sr., were obliged to satisfy. Besides the Berry claim already
referred to, were those of William Nicolls and James Bollen. All these lands on
the Eastern side of the Hackensack River were embraced in the Indian purchase,
but they by no means included all of that purchase.
In 1686, the same year in which the patent for 2010 acres East of
the Hackensack was granted, David des Marest, Sr., his son Jean, Jaques La Rou,
Anthony Hendricks, Andries Tiebout, John Du Rij (Durie), Daniel Ribou (Rivers),
Albert Saborisco, David Ackerman, Albert Stevense (Voorhees), patented lands on
the Western side of the river, extending from the vicinity of New Bridge
Northward to Kinderkamack in the neighborhood of the school house, and Westward
two miles to Winocksack (Sprout) Brook and below its mouth to the Saddle River.
The first house in which David des Marest resided after his
removal to New Jersey was on the East side of the Hackensack and doubtless very
near to his mills at the Old Bridge. He lived. on that side of the river until
1686 at least. In that year, the land on the West side adjacent to the mill was
patented to him, and the probability is that he at once began to build a house
for himself on the rising ground a few rods
from the river. He must have removed into it before 1689, for in that year he
made his will in which he is described as belonging to Essex County. At that
time the Hackensack River was the dividing line between Bergen and Essex
Counties. 1-us death took place in Essex County in 1693.
The subject of the Ecclesiastical relations and history of these
people is an exceedingly interesting one. They were a religious people,
adherents of the Calvinistic faith and ritual and of the Genevan Presbyterial
form of Government. They believed in the visible church, and a deprivation of
the ordinances of public worship was with them a very serious matter. `We have
seen that David des Marest was at the time of his marriage in fellowship with
the Walloon Church of Middleburg, that he was afterwards active in the
formation of a Church of French Refugees at Mannheim, where he was associated
with Nicholas De Veaux and others who subsequently came to America, that he
connected himself with the Huguenot Church on Staten Island in 1663, and
afterwards when he had become a resident of Harlem, with the Dutch Church of
New York, though attending French services when they were introduced, in
preference to the Dutch. The names of the various members of his family are
found on the Baptismal and Marriage Records, and on the Register of Communicants
of the ancient Collegiate Dutch Church of New York City. And so we are not
surprised to learn that when the family had removed to New Jersey, one of their
first concerns was to find if possible an ecclesiastical home. But there was no
church in the whole province nearer to them than the Dutch Church of New York,
to which they already belonged. This was nearly twenty miles distant, and the
Hudson River was between them and the house of God, and that river was a
serious barrier, for there was no steam ferry-boat to carry them over, nor had
the horse-boat as yet appeared. No church had as yet been formed at Hackensack
nor to the North, at Tappan. At Newark, which was about as far from them as New
York, the settlers from New England had the Rev. Abram Pierson for their
preacher and conductor of worship according to the Presbyterian order, but as
he used the English language he was not competent to edify these Hollandized
Frenchmen. Either French or Dutch would have answered, but not English by any
means.
About the same distance from them as the church of New York, but
without the Hudson river intervening, was that of Bergen, the first Dutch
Church established in the province of New Jersey, and at that time the only
one. This church had been organized at least as early as 1664, for its
registers of baptisms, marriages, admissions of members, and burials have been
kept from that date to the present with little interruption. The first house of
worship was built in 1680, and was an octagonal stone building situated in the
old grave yard West of Bergen avenue, and South of Vroom street. But eighteen
years before that time, in December, 1662, the Schout and Schepens of the
village had petitioned the Governor-General and Council of New Netherland for a
minister, and in connection with their petition they gave the names of
twenty-five persons who had subscribed for his support the sum of four hundred
and seventeen guilders in seawant. For some reason a minister was not settled
among them for the long period of ninety-one years, when, in 1753, Rev. William
Jackson was ordained the first pastor.
During the eighteen years that preceded tile erection of the first
church building the people worshipped in a log school house which was on the
site of the present school house fronting the square. This was the gathering
place for worship for all the people in that region at the time that our
Huguenots settled on the Hackensack. The church during its entire pastorless
period was supplied at first occasionally by ministers from New York and other
parts, but quite early a regular arrangement was made with the ministers of New
York to go over at stated times to conduct the worship, preach and administer
the Sacraments, and for these services they were paid by the Bergen Church. Rev.
Gualterus DuBois went over three times a year for fifty-one years to perform
these services. Sometimes a. week day was taken for them instead of the
Sabbath.
Very promptly after their removal into New Jersey the seven adult
members of the des Marest family and also Jacques La Rou on the 7th day of
October, 1678, united by certificate with this
pastorless Bergen Church worshipping in the log building. Dom. Wm.
Nieuenhuysen, of New York, presided in the meeting of Consistory at the time,
and received their certificates of church membership, two of which, those of
Jacques La Rou, and Samuel des Marest, no doubt came from the French Church in
New York.
I would that I were able to give an authentic account of the
church life and church-going habits of these people during their connection
with the church of Bergen. Doubtless they were all in attendance on every
Communion Day, whether it were the Lord's day or Monday. They would make all
their preparations on Saturday, so that they might start early in the morning,
for the distance was nearly twenty miles, and the roads were not macadamized,
and the wagons were springless, and the farm horses not very fleet. Besides, it
was desirable to have, after so long a journey, a half-hour's rest before
service for the good of body, mind and soul. The proximity of the inn to the
church customary in those days was not an unmingled evil. Perhaps, after the
services some Van Horn or Van Winkle, or Van Riper, or Van Wagenen or Vreeland,
would insist on taking the company home with him to dinner, for nothing pleased
the Dutchman of that day so well as to have his table crowded on a Sunday by
people whom he respected. Sometimes very little of the day, especially in the
winter, would be left after the close of public worship, for the Communion
service occupied hours, and then they would tarry till morning, and on the
Monday wend their way homeward. They were not so driven and hurried in their
worldly business as men now are. Perhaps, they often brought their lunch with
them, and having been refreshed by it, started on their tedious journey for
home, which they would not reach until after nightfall. We may well believe,
too, that the forests through which they passed in going to arid returning from
tile house of God were made to ring with the Psalms of Marot
and Beza.
Are we to suppose that they made this long journey every Lord's
day for the purpose of hearing the Voorleser read the Decalogue, and Creed, and
a chapter from the Bible and the prayers in the Liturgy, and a sermon from the
pen of some famous Holland divine, and to join in the singing of the Psalms in
Dutch? It pleases me to think that they
did not do this habitually, but that the Senior David was like a patriarch of
old, priest in his own household, and that on the Lord's day morning he was
wont to call together his children and grand-children and neighbors into his
own house, and opening his precious French Bible to read from it in the tongue
his mother had taught him at Beauchamp.
Then announcing a Psalm from Marot and Beza's version, the men, women and
children would unite in its singing with uplifted voices and with all their
powers. And then the Creed and prayers would be read from the Liturgy of the
French Protestant Church, and perhaps also an instructive and edifying
selection from the writings of some Huguenot pastor, who had, with his life in
his hand, ministered to some distressed flock of Christ. Nor was the Catechism
forgotten or slighted, but its questions would be duly propounded and answered.
What emotions must such simple services have awakened in the breasts of the
Elders, and what a powerful and healthful influence must they have exerted on
the young people and children! I say again, I would that I knew how it was with
them, in those times, for my picture is a purely fancy sketch.
Their connection with the church of Bergen continued about four
years, during which they must have helped the Bergen people in building their
first church. The last entry of a baptism is dated April 18th, 1682. But during
those four years several other entries were made, one of the marriage of
Samuel, the youngest son, and Maria Dreuyn, sister of the wife of Jean, the
eldest son, and also of the baptisms of two children of Jean, and two of David,
Jr. Also, over against the names of Marie Sohier, wife of David, Sr., and
Jacomyntie Dreuyn, wife of Jean, is the word Overleden, or died, showing
that their deaths occurred during that period. And then over against the name
of David, Sr., is written the word Vertrocken, or removed.
What did that entry mean? Not that he had changed hisilace of
residence, for he never did that after he had fixed it in New Jersey. It meant
that he had left, or withdrawn from that particular church. And what did that
mean in his case? Could it mean that he had turned back into the world, and
away from the visible church altogether? No one knowing his character and
history could suppose that for a moment. It could only mean that he had left,
the Church of Bergen in order to become connected with some other. The word
Vertrocken was doubtless placed by his name only, because be was the patriarch
and representative of the company, and it was not worth while to repeat that
word on the record.
But the question arises, what new Ecclesiastical connection could these
Huguenots form in New Jersey? That they did not go back to the Dutch Church in
New York is conclusively shown by the records of that church, on which their
names do not reappear. nor did they unite with the French Church of that City.
It was true in 1682, as it was in 1678, that there was no church in the entire
province to which they could go and hear a language familiar to them, except
the Dutch Church of Bergen. We can come to only one conclusion, and that is,
that they withdrew from the Church of Bergen, to establish an Ecclesiastical
home for themselves on their own property on the banks of the Hackensack, in
which the French language should be used in the services which were to be
conducted in accordance with the ritual of the French Reformed churches. This
is confirmed by the concurrent testimony of many facts and circumstances.
It is true, and we must start with the candid admission, that we
have no document whatever giving an account of the formation of this church, no
book of minutes, no register complete or partial of' baptisms, marriages, or
admissions to the Lord's Supper. There is a period of. fourteen years from 1682
to 1696, during which the Ecclesiastical history of these intensely
church-loving people is a perfect blank so far as church records known to us
are concerned. Some names of persons on the Bergen record, who were living in
1682, and who then renmoved, it is not said whither, re-appear in 1696 onl the
record of the Dutch Church of Hackensack, which had been formed in 1686.
Now what shall we, in the absence of church records, say about
their Ecclesiastical history during these fourteen years? There were. during
these years, some marriages among the young people; four at least we are
certain of among the des Marests alone, and births of at least fourteen
children of the same name, and we may be sure that every one of these marriages
was solemnized by a Christian minister, and that every child born was baptized.
Now, who performed these marriage ceremonies, ai d who administered these
baptisms, and where were they recorded? Not a church record in New York or New
Jersey, containing them, can be found. Can we doubt that a French Huguenot
minister performed these ceremonies right there on tile banks of the
Hackensack?
It is not supposed by any one that this little church ever had a
pastor of its own, but that it was occasionally visited by the French ministers
from New York, and especially by the Rev. Pierre Daille, `whose special mission
seems to have been to look after the various French settlements in the
province, for the promotion of their spiritual welfare. It is a very
significant fact that the withdrawal of the Huguenots from the Church of Bergen
took place probably in the same year in which Dailie came to minister to the
French in New York City, and in which he began to search out, and to care for
the scattered flocks of his countrymen and co-religionists. What is more likely
than that these Huguenots on the Hackensack should have asked for, and received
a share of these ministrations? An interesting fact connects Mr. Daihle with
these people. Some days after the death of David des Marest, sr., which
occurred in the summer of 1693,
the two surviving sons, Jean and Samuel, and John Durie, who had married the
widow of David, Jr., came together to examine his papers, and to make
distribution of the property in accordance with the terms of the will. They
came “lovingly and kindly" to an agreement which was put in writing, and
the name of the only subscribing witness was that of P. Daille. As the beloved
friend and pastor of their father. and theirs also, he had been invited to be
with them on this occasion. He was doubtless on familiar ground, and in a house
whose hospitality he had often enjoyed in his visits to the little flock on the
Hackensack, who revered him as their spiritual father and guide.
it is moreover quite certain that they had a house of worship
close by the cemetery to which we have referred. Those who in former years had
charge of this cemetery have affirmed that in digging graves they have come to
stones which had evidently belonged to the foundations of' a building. Now what
building could have been standing there in the midst of the graves but a house
of worship? Tradition also says that they had a French school, a parochial
school for the children, in accordance with tile usage of the times.
That a building for public worship should have been provided as
soon as the occasional visits of a preacher could be had, is certainly not a
strange thing. It was almost necessary, certainly desirable, so that his visits
might be made more frequently than they would be if the services were held in a
private house. And since it was contemplated to obtain a number of families
from France to occupy the lands bought from the Indians, it was important to be
able to offer them the powerful inducement of a house of God prepared to
receive them, and in which worship was performed in their own tongue.
The absence of church records is to be deeply regretted, but it is
not surprising. What is more easily lost than are documents of this sort, and
especially such as pertained to a church which never had a settled pastor, and
which existed only fourteen years? Perhaps no record book was ever opened, and
the visiting ministers made on loose paper, memoranda of the official acts
performed by them. Who can tell what may yet come to light some day in the way
of memoranda made by lDaille or Peiret? When the church was finally disbanded
and they who were members at the time joined the Dutch Church at Hackensack,
all official papers should properly have been deposited with the Consistory of
the latter church. But, it may not have been done, at any rate, no such papers
are in possession of that body at the present time.
Strongly as all these considerations point to the conclusion' that
these Huguenots had an organized church and a house of worship on the
Hackensack, there are facts still to be stated which put the matter beyond all
question.
This French Church was established, if at all, about the year 1682
and when as yet, as we have seen, there was no church in tile whole region
nearer than the one at Bergen. But just four years after this, in 1686, a Dutch
Church was formed at Hackensack only three miles distant.. Now if' these Huguenots had not had a church
of their own and services in their own language, would they not at once have
joined this new church which was placed by their door? For four years they had
been accustomed to ride nearly twenty miles to attend a Dutch service. Why then
did they not connect themselves with this Hackensack Dutch Church, planted
close by them, and to which their neighbors belonged? Because, we doubt not,
they had provided themselves with a church edifice, and services in their own
tongue which they preferred, and probably they had a preacher quite as
frequently as the Dutch who had no church edifice, and who were visited at long
intervals by the ministers of the word. The records of' the Hackensack Church
show that for ten years, from 1686 to 1696, only one person bearing a Huguenot
name, Abram DeVouw, had united with it. Doubtless the French were accustomed
during all those years to meet on every Lord's Day in their own house of
worship, and when a minister was present, it was a day of gladness indeed.
But the breaking up and end of this little congregation were at
hand. It was obliged to yield to the stern logic of circumstances. The end came
in 1696. The patriarch of' the colony had died in 1693. His second son, David,
Jr., had died before that time. The colony was not increased by accessions of
French families, for such accessions were balanced by removals. Rev. Mr. Daille
removed in 1696 to Boston. The Dutch people were coming in rapidly and
occupying land on every side. Their young men married the Huguenot maidens, and
their young women the Huguenot young men. All the young people married, and
married early. The Dutch element greatly predominated and the French preachers
could not fail to see what must soon take place, and must have felt little
encouragement to continue their visits which had been so welcome and precious.
Cheerfully, no doubt, did they advise them to cast in their lot with a church
so like their own in doctrine, order and ritual, and whose language was not
strange to them, but in which they had often worshipped in New York and Bergen.
The brave little church was obliged to succumb, and it was swept
by the irresistible tide of circumstances into the Dutch Church of Hackensack.
The organization perished, but the members joined themselves and became
elements of strength to the church then newly-formed, but which has been a
noble witness for God through the succeeding generations for 200 years. They
joined themselves to these Dutch people, not after they had erected and paid
for their church building, that thus without cost to themselves they might
enjoy the fruit of the work and self-denial of their neighbors. No, they cast
in their lot with them just when they were arising to build, so that they might
have the privilege of sharing in the work and the sacrifice. In the walls of
that first church building of Hackensack were placed hewn stones, in which were
cut the initials of a number of those who were prominent in the work. These
stones have been carefully preserved and placed in the walls of every church
building subsequently erected by that congregation. They may be seen today in
the eastern wall of the "Church on the Green." On one of these stones
is engraven the outline of a heart, enclosing the letters D. M. R. (Des Ma
Rest) and the date 1696, on another J. D. R. (Jan Du Rij). Another has an
inscription which, by a little aid of' the imagination, may be pronounced the
initials of Jacques La Rou.~
These inscriptions show how fully these French families had identified
themselves at that time with the Dutch Church, and their recognition at once as
important members of it.
And to establish our position in regard to the existence of a
French Church beyond all doubt, we turn to the record of communicants of the
Church of Hackensack, which has been carefully kept from the time of its
organization in 1686. We find on it the following entries:
1696. Op den 5 April met attestatie van de Fransche Gemeente tot
ous overgekomden, des navolgende:
Jacques Larou
David des Marest, soon van Jan, met zijn
vrouw
Antie Slot
Marritjie (Jacbse) Van Winckell, husvrouw
van Jan De Marest.
Mary de Maree, huysvrouw van Jacobus Slot.
1869, den 10 July zijn met attestatie van de Franscheke tot dese
ghemeente overgekomden:
Jan de Marest
Jan DuRij met zijn huysvrouw Rachel Cresson
David des Marest filius David, ook van
weduwe Junior.
Jacob De Groot met zijn hutsvrouw
Margrietje Jans.
In these two detachments eleven members came by certificate from
the French Church to the Dutch in 1696. These, doubtless, comprised the entire membership
at the time. Indeed the peculiar phraseology of the record indicates that there
was a coming over of the whole church.
Henceforth for a little while the French Bible was read and the French Psalms
were sung in a few families chiefly by the old people. French speedily became a
strange tongue to the rising generations.
Did this French Church have a distinctive name or title? We doubt
not that it was known in the neighborhood as the French Church simply, for
there was no other. It was so designated, we have seen on the record of the
Dutch Church of' Hackensack. Mr. Riker speaks of it several times as the Church
of Kinkachemeck. The authority for this is found in an entry on the marriage
record of the church of Bergen. The marriage of Daniel Du Voor and Engeltie
Cornelis was recorded at Bergen, February 28, 1692-3, and it is noted that they
had come with testimonials from the French Church at Kinkachemeck, in the
County of Bergen. But Kinkachemeck, or Kinderkamack, as the documents of the
time usually have it, was then as now the name of the tract lying on the West
side of the Hackensack River, and extending two or three miles Northward from
Old Bridge. Du Voor went to Bergen from his home at Kinderkamack, and he
belonged to the French Church. It was natural that the name of the neighborhood
should on the record be joined to the church. It is certain that the church
building was on the eastern side of the river and that Kinderkamack was then as
now on the western side.
Perhaps, in my opening remarks, I spoke too disparagingly of my
theme, as being of family rather than general interest. Perhaps the influence
of this little colony was far more extensive arid permanent than would be
thought from a hasty glance at its short history.
Our historians tell us that Northern New Jersey was settled
chiefly by the Dutch, and they know nothing of a Huguenot element as a factor
of any importance in the population of that part of the State. But suppose that
you were to-day to remove from the Northern part of Bergen County, from Passaic
County, from parts of Essex, from Rockland and Orange Counties, New York, all
who bear the names of the original Huguenot settlers on the Hackensack, and of
those who soon after located in their neighborhood as Terheuns, Loziers, De Motts,
Debauns, Ferdons, etc., you would vacate a very large proportion of' the houses
and farms in that extensive district. And if, in addition you were to remove
all, who though bearing Dutch names, have quite as much of French as of Dutch
blood in their veins, you would create a wilderness almost without inhabitants,
for you would carry away the Voorheeses, Bantas, Brinkerhoffs, Blauvelts, Van
Wagenens, Bogerts, Van Buskirks, Ackermans,
Hoppers, about all of them.
This little colony was a permnent one. The French language passed
away and the French Church was absorbed by the Dutch. The plans of David des
Marest in regard to the enlargement of the colony failed, but he and his three
sons came to stay, and they planned for homes for their children and children's
children. Their work was never destroyed, nor were their plans interfered with
by hostile savages. They held what they had obtained at the beginning and
constantly added to their possessions. The three brothers, Jean, David and
Samuel, had an aggregate of thirty-four children, thirty of whom, twelve sons
and eighteen daughters, married and became fathers and mothers of families
which were for the most part entitled to the Old Testament benediction. The two
thousand acres of the patent of 1686, as well as the lands previously secured,
were speedily occupied, and to these were added tract after tract to the north
and west, extending into Rockland and Orange Counties, New York, and what is
now Passaic in New Jersey. Before the Revolutionary War some of the family
emigrated to Adams County, Pennsylvania, joining the Conewago settlement near
Gettysburg. One of these emigrants, Samuel, moved thence to Harrod's Station,
Kentucky, and a considerable number of his descendants are to be found in that
State. Some went from Conewago to western New York, where many of their
descendants still have their homes. One, Guillaurne, who was a Loyalist, went
to Canada after the Revolutionary War, and on lands granted him by the Crown,
founded the town of Demorestville, on the Bay of Quinte, Prince Edwards
District.
The first movement from the original home at Old Bridge was of
course eastward toward the Hudson, and so lands were cleared and farms occupied
at Schraalenberg, Tenafly and Closter, and northward toward Tappan, and as
early as 1724 it was found necessary to establish a church at Schraalenberg for
the convenience of the people of' that neighborhood who had been accustomed to
worship at Hackensack. The names of the original members of this church were to
a large extent Huguenot names, and the same thing is true of the second church
which was established there in 1756. And if' you were to examine the records of
those two churches from the dates of their organization down to the present
day, you would find in every generation, including the present, a very large
proportion of Huguenot names among the baptized, the married and the
communicants. And the same is to a great extent true of all the churches in
that region.
The religious, moral and social influence of this Huguenot element
cannot well be estimated. The descendants of these pioneers, numbering not a
few thousands, have as a body been zealous supporters of tile church, pure and
temperate in their lives, of integrity unimpeached and honor untarnished, true
in all their worldly relations, and patterns of the virtues that adorn the
ordinary walks of' life, and in a word, good members of the Commonwealth. It
has often been remarked by strangers visiting the part of the country occupied
by them, that it would be difficult to find a district of the same extent
exhibiting more decided proofs of thrift, of general comfort and of
contentment, and in which poverty seemed to be unknown.
Surely the province of New Jersey was not damaged by the entrance
and settlement within her borders of the HUGUENOTS ON THE HACKENSACK.
APPENDIX.
Chronological. Table.
[Editor’s note: the appendices are produced in facsimile due to
possibly significant formatting. The genealogical information in these
appendices has been superceded by later work, and should not be used as such.]
