Father: Henri? Rongnion
Spouse-1: Ann Boutcher
b: ~1645 - Hartford, Co. Huntingdonshire, Eng.
d: ~1696 - Middlesex Co., East Jersey Prov. - bur: Runyan Cemetery, Piscataway
m: 17/Jul/1668 - Elizabethtown, New Jersey Prov.
2: Vincent, Jr. - b: ~1670 - Elizabethtown, New Jersey Prov.
m: Mary Hull - 2/Dec/1691 - Piscataway Twp., Middlesex Co., East Jersey Prov.
4: Mary - b: 2/Jul/1677 - Piscataway Twp., Middlesex Co., East Jersey Prov.
m: Benjamin Drake
5: Peter - b: 1/Jul/1680 - Piscataway Twp., Middlesex Co., East Jersey Prov.
m: Providence Blackford - 12/Oct/1704 - Piscataway Twp., Middlesex Co., NJ
6: Jane - b: 19/Jan/1683(1684) - Piscataway Twp., Middlesex Co., East Jersey Prov.
m: ***** Leonard
7: Sarah - b: 30/Oct/1686 - Piscataway Twp., Middlesex Co., East Jersey Prov.
m: Richard Sutton
m: James Campbell
Spouse-2: Martha *****
Child-1: L***** - b: 4/Mar/1698(1699) - Piscataway Twp., Middlesex Co., East Jersey Prov.
According to published sources, as well as to longstanding family tradition, Vincent Rongnion was a French Protestant, i.e., a Huguenot, and was born at Poitiers, Poitou, Ancienne Province de France, May 7, 1645.1 Because of severe persecution of the Huguenots within France, Vincent first went to the Isle of Jersey, an English possession, and then to North America in 1665. It appears that he had first settled on the Elizabeth Town Tract in the newly formed Province of New Jersey by 1668.2,3 Subsequently, in March of 1671 (1672 N. S.) he testified as a witness at a special court held in Elizabethtown (presently Elizabeth).4 Indeed, this may have been the first jury trial held in New Jersey as has been claimed elsewhere. Vincent Rongnion and Elizabeth Boutcher were married in Elizabethtown on July 17, 1668, with a license issued by Philip Carteret, the first Governor of the Province of New Jersey.5,6 (Counties were not organized until 1675.) She was the daughter of John Boutcher and was reportedly born in Hartford, England. At present there are two locations, viz., one in Cheshire and one in Cambridgeshire, that are identifed as "Hartford". Of these, the one in Cambridgeshire seems a more likely location for the Boutcher family since Protestantism was strong in eastern England in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. (As a matter of history, Hartford was originally in Huntingdonshire, which was amalgamated with Cambridgeshire only in the twentieth century.) Alternatively, Hertfordshire is frequently identifed with the origin of Ann Boutcher; however, this represents little geographical difficulty since Huntingdonshire and Hertfordshire would then have been relatively close in proximity. In contrast, association of Ann Boutcher with the family of Joan, a Protestant martyr burned at the stake in Kent in 1550 as a Baptist or Anabaptist dissenter, is tenuous at best. First of all, Joan's surname seems to have been "Bocher" rather than "Boutcher". Moreover, the Boutcher family is identified as also Huguenot in origin, which may well be true; however, the family of Joan Bocher seems to have inhabited Kent for centuries. A more vexing question regards whether Vincent Rongnion was married twice or only once. Researchers have frequently asserted that Ann Boutcher Rongnion survived until the 1720's, but if this is the case, then she unaccountably changed her given name to "Martha". To remedy this evident inconsistency, the two names are commonly conflated as "Ann Martha Boutcher"; however, there is no justification for such a presumption. In addition, according to facsimiles of civil records of Piscataway (originals now lost), a child was born to Vincent and Martha Runyon on March 4, 1698 (1699 N. S.). If Ann Boutcher Rongnion was the mother of this child, she would have been at least fifty years old. This seems quite unlikely and suggests that Ann died in the 1690's and that Vincent Rongnion then married Martha, a much younger woman about 1698. In any case, it is essentially certain that Vincent and Ann Rongnion moved to Piscataway Township, Middlesex County, East Jersey Province by 1677, since Vincent evidently bought 154½ acres along the Raritan River in that year. This is further supported by the names of Vincent and Ann's four youngest children, viz., Mary, Peter, Jane and Sarah, all born in 1677 or afterward, and which all appear in birth records of Piscataway. Indeed, the name of Vincent Runyon (with many variant spellings) appears frequently in the civil records of Piscataway Township.7,8 Moreover, he was the third signer of a petition to King William III protesting actions of the proprietors of East Jersey.9 Vincent Runyon evidently died in late 1713 leaving a widow, Martha, and several children.10 It is said that he also left gold, silver, a canoe, silver spoons, etc., as part of his personal estate, but no inventory appears to have been made. Various burial places have been suggested; however, there is reasonable evidence that Vincent and Ann Runyon were both buried in the Runyan Cemetery located near the intersection of Possumtown Road and Centennial Avenue in Piscataway. (The First Baptist Church Cemetery in Piscataway has also been suggested; however, there does not seem to be any documentary support for this.) In any case, it does seem likely that as with many seventeenth century inhabitants of Piscataway Township, the Runyons were devout Baptists.Source Notes and Citations:
Immigration of French Huguenots to English and Dutch colonies in North America cannot be understood without consideration of the general history of the Reformation. Although there had been earlier attempts to reform the Roman Catholic Church, viz., Peter Waldo in France, Jan Huss in Bohemia, John Wycliffe and William Tyndale in England, among others, as a matter of convention, the beginning of the Protestant Reformation is identified with the German Augustinian monk, Martin Luther, and his Ninety-Five Theses, which he composed in Latin and which, according to tradition, he nailed to the door of All Saints' Church in the city of Wittenberg in the Electorate of Saxony on October 31, 1517. (Luther's authorship is beyond dispute, but it is not certain that he actually nailed them to the church door.) In the Ninety-Five Theses, Luther condemned certain practices associated with baptism and absolution then prevalent within the Roman Catholic Church. More specifically, he rejected the validity of indulgences. Indeed, he especially comdemned the sale of indulgences, which as a matter of conscience transformed penance for sin into a simple financial transaction rather than an act of genuine contrition. Luther seems to have been particularly incensed by the actions of Johann Tetzel, a Dominican priest, who was then selling indulgences in German lands in support of a fund-raising campaign commissioned by Pope Leo X to finance renovation of St Peter's Basilica in Rome. Even so, this practice was not allowed everywhere since Frederick III, Elector of Saxony, forbade the sale of indulgences in his lands. In contrast, Albert, Elector of Mainz, who was both archbishop and ruling prince (as well as Primate of Germany), had borrowed heavily to pay for his archbishopric and as a consequence, was deeply in debt. Accordingly, he agreed to allow indulgences to be sold within his see in exchange for half of the proceeds. Consequently, although indulgences were not sold in Wittenberg (due to Frederick's edict), its people readily traveled elsewhere to purchase them and when they came later to confession, presenting these plenary indulgences for which they had paid, they claimed that they no longer needed to repent, since the document promised forgiveness of all their sins. Naturally, Luther was outraged that money had been paid for what he believed was as a free gift from God and asserted that such sales were a gross distortion of the original intention of confession and penance and, furthermore, that Christians were being falsely instructed that they could have absolution simply through the purchase of an indulgence. Accordingly, he felt compelled to expose the fraud and engaged in public scholarly debate at the University of Wittenberg, which as might be expected, brought Luther into a sharp intellectual collision with the hierarchy of the Church. The Ninety-Five Theses summarize the content of this debate and challenged all who disagreed to refute them. Therefore, Tetzel was encouraged to defend indulgences (as well as himself) and with the influence of Conrad Wimpina, rector of Frankfurt, he was created a Doctor of Divinity (D. D.) and with Wimpina's further assistance Tetzel promulgated a hundred and six theses in January of 1518 to answer Luther. Even so, Luther continued to refuse to retract his writings as demanded by Pope Leo X in June of 1520 in the Papal bull "Exsurge Domine (Arise, O Lord)", which identified forty-one purported errors in the Ninety-Five Theses as well as in other writings by Luther. Notwithstanding, Luther continued his refusal to recant, publicly setting fire to the bull and decretals at Wittenberg on December 10, 1520, and was excommunicated on January 3, 1520 (1521 N. S.), by the papal bull "Decet Romanum Pontificem (It Pleases the Roman Pontiff)". Consequently, the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, summoned Luther to the Diet of Worms in 1521. Moreover, to prevent Luther from suffering a fate similar to that of Jan Huss (who was tried and executed at the Council of Constance in 1415 despite promises of safety), Frederick III negotiated an agreement of safe passage to the Diet. Therefore, on April 16th, Luther arrived in Worms and was told to appear before the Diet at 4 o'clock the following afternoon. Dr. Jeromee Schurff, a professor in Canon Law at the University of Wittenberg acted as Luther's lawyer before the Diet. On April 17th, the Imperial Herald, Kaspar Sturm, and Imperial Marshal, Ulrich von Pappenheim, came for Luther. Pappenheim reminded Luther that he should speak only in answer to direct questions from the presiding officer, Johann von Eck. Accordingly, von Eck asked Luther if he was the author of a certain collection of books and if he was ready to recant the heresies contained within them. Dr. Schurff replied, "Please have the titles read." There were twenty-five, which in addition to the Ninety-Five Theses, likely includied, "Resolutions Concerning the Ninety-Five Theses", "On the Papacy at Rome", "Address to the Christian Nobility", "The Babylonian Captivity of the Church", and "On the Freedom of a Christian", among others, all of which had been written prior to the Diet of Worms. Luther requested more time to prepare a proper answer and he was given until the next afternoon at 4 o'clock. On April 18th, Luther stated that he had prayed for long hours, consulted with friends and mediators, and then presented himself before the Diet. When the counselor put the same questions to him, Luther first apologized that he lacked the etiquette of the court and then answered, "They are all mine, but as for the second question, they are not all of one sort." Luther then explained that the writings fell into three categories: First, works which were well-received by even his enemies; those he would not reject. Second, books which attacked abuses, lies, and desolation of the Christian world and the papacy. Of these, Luther said, "If I now recant these, then, I would be doing nothing but strengthening tyranny". Third, attacks on individuals, for which he apologized for any harshness, but did not recant the substance of teaching contained within them. Luther further asserted that if he could be shown from the Scriptures that he was in error, then he would recant them and concluded by saying, "Unless I am convinced by the testimony of the Scriptures or by clear reason (for I do not trust either in the pope or in councils alone, since it is well known that they have often erred and contradicted themselves), I am bound by the Scriptures I have quoted and my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and will not recant anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience. May God help me. Amen." Furthermore, according to tradition, Luther is said to have declared, "Here I stand, I can do no other," before concluding with "God help me. Amen." (However, there is no evidence in the transcripts of the Diet or in eyewitness accounts that he ever said this, and it is now doubted that he actually spoke these words.) At this, von Eck informed Luther that he was acting like a heretic and said, "Martin, there is no one of the heresies which have torn the bosom of the Church, which has not derived its origin from the various interpretation of the Scripture. The Bible itself is the arsenal whence each innovator has drawn his deceptive arguments. It was with biblical texts that Pelagius and Arius maintained their doctrines." Private conferences were then held to determine Luther's fate; however, before a verdict was reached, Luther fled and during his return to Wittenberg, he disappeared. The Edict of Worms was issued on May 25, 1521, by Emperor Charles V, declaring, "For this reason we forbid anyone from this time forward to dare, either by words or by deeds, to receive, defend, sustain, or favour the said Martin Luther. On the contrary, we want him to be apprehended and punished as a notorious heretic, as he deserves, to be brought personally before us, or to be securely guarded until those who have captured him inform us, whereupon we will order the appropriate manner of proceeding against the said Luther. Those who will help in his capture will be rewarded generously for their good work." Thus, Luther was declared to be an obstinate heretic, which put his very life in danger. Likewise, reading or possession of his writings was banned. Luther's disappearance was a result of the machinations of Frederick III, who desired to protect him, since despite an agreement of safe passage back to Wittenberg, it was privately understood by the Catholic authorities that Luther would be promptly arrested and punished (and most likely executed). Therefore, Prince Frederick seized him and hid him in Wartburg Castle at Eisenach. Moreover, it was during his "imprisonment" in the Wartburg that Luther began his German translation of the Bible. Furthermore, Luther's testimony of faith at the Diet of Worms made an indelible impression upon the mind of George, Margrave of Brandenburg-Ansbach, who adopted the new Lutheran faith before any other German prince or any other member of the House of Hohenzollern. Concomitantly, Luther corresponded with George and discussed the most important questions of faith with him. Subsequently, the Edict of Worms was temporarily suspended at the Diet of Speyer in 1526, but reinstated in 1529. When Luther eventually reemerged from the Wartburg, the Emperor pressed for his arrest; however, because of public support and protection by certain German princes, the Edict of Worms was never fully enforced within Germany itself. In contrast, the Low Countries, viz., modern Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands, were directly ruled by Emperor Charles and the Edict was enforced against Luther's most active supporters. Hence, in December of 1521, Jacob Probst, prior of the Augustinian monastery at Antwerp, was prosecuted under the terms of the Edict of Worms and in February of 1522, Probst was compelled to make public recantation and repudiation of Luther's teachings. Later that year, additional Augustinian monks were arrested in Antwerp. Of these, two, Johannes van Esschen and Hendrik Voes, refused to recant and were burned at the stake in Brussels on July 1, 1523. As a result of such cruelty and disorder, although he had never intended to cause a schism in the Church, Luther came to realize that the split was fundamental and irrrevocable. Within this context, Martin Luther even rejected celebacy of the clergy and married Katharina von Bora, one of twelve nuns he had helped escape from the Nimbschen Cistercian Convent in April of 1523, arranging for them to be smuggled out in herring barrels. Subsequently, he wrote to Wenceslaus Link, "Suddenly, and while I was occupied with far different thoughts, the Lord has plunged me into marriage." At the time of their marriage, Katharina was twenty-six years old and Luther was forty-one. By 1526, Luther was increasingly occupied with organization of the new Lutheran Church. He continued writing and preaching until the very end of his life, dying at 2:45 o'clock on the morning of February 18, 1545 (1546 N. S), in Eisleben, the city of his birth. At the time of his death, Luther was sixty-two years of age. He was buried in the Castle Church in Wittenberg, beneath the pulpit.
Historically, the Reformation must be regarded as one element of the general Renaissance ending the Middle Ages in Western Europe and, as such, a broad societal movement not just limited to a single country, e.g., Germany. Consequently, religious reforrm began almost simultaneously in Switzerland with the leadership of Ulrich Zwingli. Followers of both Luther and Zwingli were in close agreement on most points of doctrine and practice, but stll some differences remained unresolved. Indeed, some followers of Zwingli believed that the Reformation was too conservative and adopted more extreme positions (some of which still exist among modern successors of the early Anabaptists). Subsequently, the work and writings of the French theologian and pastor, John Calvin (originally born in Picardy as Jehan Cauvin in 1509) were influential in the establishment of a broad consensus among various Reformed groups in Switzerland, Scotland, Hungary, Germany, and elsewhere. As might be expected, Protestantism also spread from German lands into France. As with most (if not all) Western European monarchs of the early sixteenth century, the French king, Francis I, was little concerned with religious reform and at least initially, sustained an attitude of tolerance (in keeping with his personal interest in Renaissance humanism). This changed in 1534 with the "Affair of the Placards", in which Protestants denounced the Catholic Mass, posting broadsides expressing this sentiment in Paris (even within the royal apartments), as well as in the cities of Blois, Rouen, Tours and Orléans. Consequently, religious reform assumed a politial dimension, which Francis regarded as a threat to the stability of his kingdom. As a result, serious persecution of Protestants began in France with establishment in 1535 of the Chambre Ardente (Burning Chamber) within the Parlement of Paris to support an increase of prosecutions for heresy. At this time, several thousand French Protestants fled the country, most notably John Calvin, who emigrated to Basel in 1535 before eventually settling in Geneva in 1536. Nevertheless, although he was safe in Switzerland beyond the reach of French kings, Calvin regularly instructed pastors to lead Reformed congregations in France. King Henry II ascended the throne in 1547 and continued persecution of Protestants. Even so, the Reformed Church of France, essentially Calvinist in doctrine, continued to gain adherents among the urban bourgeoisie and some of the aristocracy by appealing to those alienated by Catholic obduracy and complacency. Henry II died in 1559 and was succeeded on the throne by his son, Francis II, whose wife was Mary Queen of Scots. Mary was an ardent Catholic and supported torture and burning as punishments for Protestant dissenters. (Mary returned to Scotland as a widow in the summer of 1561 and following a series of infamous intrigues, was executed in 1587 at the order of her cousin, Queen Elizabeth I of England.) In 1561, the Edict of Orléans issued in the name of Francis' successor and younger brother, the boy-king, Charles IX, and his regent mother, Catherine de' Medici, declared an end to persecution. This was followed by the Edict of Saint-Germain in January of 1562, which formally recognized Protestants; however, these edicts did little to ease increasing sociopolitical tensions between Protestants and Catholics. Moreover, by 1562 it is believed that the number of French Protestants reached a maximum of approximately two million, mostly located in central and southern France. (The number of Catholics has been estimated contemporaneously at approximately sixteen million.) Concomitanthly, the French Wars of Religion began with a massacre at Vassy on March 1, 1562, in which many Protestants were killed or wounded. During the remainder of the sixteenth century, there were several more civil wars, interrupted by periods of relative peace. Consequently, Protestant trust of the Catholic monarchy continued to diminish with violence becoming increasingly severe, culminating in the notorious St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre in the late summer and fall of 1572. It is generally thought that the massacre was instigated by Catherine de' Medici, but the slaughter soon became uncontrollable and on the night of August 23rd-24th, Catholics killed thousands of Protestants in Paris with similar massacres occurring during the following weeks in other towns, e.g., Aix, Bordeaux, Bourges, Lyon, Meaux, Orleans, Rouen, Toulouse, and Troyes. Motivation for the massacre seems to have been Catherine's fear and hatred of the Protestant leader, Admiral Gaspard de Coligny, who increasingly exercised influence over the the weak and easily manipulated king, and especially since the Admiral advocated alliance with England and the Dutch. Coligny was also hated by Henry, Duke of Guise, who believed that he had ordered the assassination of his father, Francis of Guise, during the siege of Orléans in 1562. Accordingly, Coligny was assassinated in his own lodgings on the night of the 24th after a previous attempt on his life two days earlier. (It has never been determined who exactly ordered Coligny's death, although the Duke of Guise would be the most probable suspect.) In the aftermath of the massacre, Charles' mental and physical constitution (which had always been fragile) weakened rapidly. His moods varied from boasts of the extremity of the massacre to exclamations that the screams of the murdered Protestants kept ringing in his ears. Frantically, he blamed either himself, "What blood shed! What murders! What evil counsel I have followed! O my God, forgive me ... I am lost! I am lost!", or his mother, Catherine, "Who but you are the cause of all of this? God's blood, you are the cause of it all!" Catherine declared that she had a lunatic for a son. Charles died in 1574 and was succeeded on the throne by his brother, Henry III. Upon Henry's assassination in 1589 by Jacques Clément, a Catholic fanatic, Henry of Navarre ascended the French throne as Henry IV and in 1598 issued the Edict of Nantes, which established Roman Catholicism as the official religion of France, but also granted Protestants equality with Catholics and a degree of religious and political freedom. With the proclamation of the Edict of Nantes and collateral protection of Protestant rights, the Wars of Religion abated and emigration of Protestants from France substantially decreased. Even so, enforcement of the Edict weakened during the first half seventeenth century (especially during the reign of Henry's son, Louis XIII), which allowed persecution to reappear and, again, motivated many Protestants to flee the country. Moreover, Louis XIV became king in 1643 and acted aggressively to force Protestants to convert. He began by sending missionaries and rewarding converts financially. This was followed by imposition of penalties, closure of Protestant schools, and exclusion of Protestants from favored professions. Consequently, the Protestant population of France decreased to only 856,000 by the 1660's, most of which lived in rural regions with the largest concentrations in Guienne, Saintonge-Aunis-Angoumois, and Poitou. Accordingly, many Protestants had fled to England, the Netherlands, Prussia, Switzerland, and English and Dutch overseas colonies. Escalating further, Louis instituted dragonnades, which occupied and looted the homes of Protestants, and in 1685, he issued the Edict of Fontainebleau, revoking the Edict of Nantes and declaring Protestantism illegal. With this the Reformation in France was essentially ended at a cost of the loss of many of the country's most productive citizens.
In the sixteenth century, adherents of the Protestant Reformed Church of France became generally known as "Huguenots". The etymology of this name is indefinite at best; however, originally it was almost certainly a derisive epithet. Various hypotheses have been proposed, one of which supposes that "Huguenot" derives from a combined reference to the Swiss politician, Besançon Hugues, and religious conflict within Switzerland. Thus, it may be interpreted as a clever derogatory pun implied by the Flemish word "Huisgenoten", which literally means "housemates". The related German word "Eidgenosse" means "confederate". Of course, Geneva had become John Calvin's adopted home and a center of Calvinist Protestantism. Furthermore, Hugues, although Catholic, was a leader of the "Confederate Party", so-called because it favored independence from the Duke of Savoy by alliance between the city-state of Geneva and the Swiss Confederation. Thus, the epithet, "Huguenot", purportedly was first applied to conspirators (all of them aristocratic adherents of the Reformed Church) that supported the Amboise Conspiracy of 1560, which was an unsuccessful attempt by Protestants to take power in France by abducting the young king, Francis II, and arresting Francis, Duke of Guise, and his brother, the Cardinal of Lorraine. (The conspiracy was one of the precursors of the Wars of Religion that divided France from 1562 to 1598.) Such actions had the collateral effect of strengthening relations with the Swiss. Therefore, "Hugues" combined with "Eidgenosse" as implied by "Huisgenoten", putatively became "Huguenot"; hence, associating Protestants with politics unpopular in France. A variant of this complex etymology has been asserted by O. I. A. Roche that "Huguenot" is, "a combination of a Flemish and a German word. In the Flemish North of France, Bible students who gathered in each other's houses to study secretly were called Huis Genooten ('housemates') while on the Swiss and German borders they were termed Eid Genossen, or 'oath fellows,' that is, persons bound to each other by an oath. Gallicised into 'Huguenot', often used deprecatingly, the word became, during two and a half centuries of terror and triumph, a badge of enduring honour and courage." Within this context, such double or triple non-French linguistic origins seem unlikely for the name to have spread into common use in France; hence, a native French origin seems more probable. Accordingly, the "Hugues hypothesis" asserts that "Huguenot" derives from association with Hugh (or Hugo) Capet, King of France, who reigned several centuries before the Reformation. He was regarded as a noble man who respected the lives and dignity of the people. Supporters of this etymology suggest that "Huguenote" would approximately mean "little Hugos" or "those who want Hugo". In addition, this etymology could further suggest superstitious worship. Indeed, a popular legend supposed that the Huguon, the gate of King Hugo, was haunted by the ghost of le roi Huguet (regarded by Roman Catholics as an infamous scoundrel) as well as other spirits, which rather than being in Purgatory, returned to harm the living at night. Furthermore, in this place in Tours the prétendus réformés (those supposedly reformed) regularly gathered at night, both for political purposes and for prayer and singing psalms. Moreover, Reguier de la Plancha, a sixteenth century contemporary of the Huguenots, accounted for the name as follows: "The name huguenand was given to those of the religion during the affair of Amboyse, and they were to retail it ever since. I'll say a word about it to settle the doubts of those who have strayed in seeking its origin. The superstition of our ancestors, to within twenty or thirty years thereabouts, was such that in almost all the towns in the kingdom they had a notion that certain spirits underwent their Purgatory in this world after death, and that they went about the town at night, striking and outraging many people whom they found in the streets. But the light of the Gospel has made them vanish, and teaches us that these spirits were street-strollers and ruffians. In Paris the spirit was called le moine bourré; at Orleans, le mulet odet; at Blois le loup garon; at Tours, le Roy Huguet; and so on in other places. Now, it happens that those whom they called Lutherans were at that time so narrowly watched during the day that they were forced to wait till night to assemble, for the purpose of praying God, for preaching and receiving the Holy Sacrament; so that although they did not frighten nor hurt anybody, the priests, through mockery, made them the successors of those spirits which roam the night; and thus that name being quite common in the mouth of the populace, to designate the evangelical huguenands in the country of Tourraine and Amboyse, it became in vogue after that enterprise." In any case, "Huguenot" became generally associated with all French Protestants and the animosity surrounding the Wars of Religion.
1. Howard Eugene Bonham and Jean Allin, Bonham and Related Family Lines, Bonham Book(s), 5104 Bridlington Ln., Raleigh, NC, 27612, printed by Genie Plus, Bradenton, FL, 1996: pgs. 533-9.
"Vincent Rongnion/Runyon/Runyan was a Huguenot who came to America in 1665. He settled in East Jersey on the Elizabethtown grant as early as 1668-70. He was called at the first mention of his name, 'a mariner from Poitou.' The province of France endured 'the fiercest persecution on account of religion, until all industries were paralyzed and whole communities depopulated. [Early Germans of New Jersey, p. 474.]"
"Vincent was born 7 May 1645 in Poitiers, France; he married (1) 17 Jul 1668, Ann Bouchierre/Boutcher, who was born ca 1645, Hartford, England; married (2) Martha (_____?). Vincent died intestate in 1713; administration of his estate was granted 5 Dec 1713 to 'his widow Martha Rugnion'."
"Ann died before 1698 as Vincent had married (2) by that date, Martha (_____?). [Family Runyon Research by Marvin Shepherd and a record of a child born to Vincent & Martha (_____?) Runyon in Piscataway Town Register, NJ, From 1668-1805.]"
"NOTE: The children of Vincent Runyon were all born in Middlesex Co., NJ. [Piscataway Town Register, NJ, From 1668-1805, p.50.]"
"1671, Mar 25. Vincent Rongnion bought land at Elizabeth Town. [Under the Runyonn Tree, Section I, p. 1.]
1677. He purchased a farm of 154 1/2 acres in Piscataway, Middlesex Co., New Jersey. [Early Germans of New Jersey, p. 474.]"
back to bio.
2. Robert and Amos Runyon, Runyon Genealogy, privately published, Brownsville, TX, 1955, pgs. 1-3.
"VINCENT RONGNION MANY ACCOUNTS of Vincent Rongnion and his descendants are scattered throughout genealogical literature; however, the authors can give only limited space here to chronicles of our progenitor. Orra Eugene Monnet, First Settlers of Piscataway, New Jaersey, gives much information about Huguenots in general, but specifically about those that came early into New Jersey. His narration of Vincent Rongnion (surname spelled as found in his marriage license) is quoted because the information cannot be improved upon.
'Vincent Rongnion, Huguenot, most strikingly illusrtates French Protestant origins, the religious schism in France, and the expatriation sacrifices, and the struggle for human freedom in a new environment, with a meritorious distinction, which gave vital effect to, and influence upon, the new civilization, in a new world. He was the sole head of a new race, whose progeny, with every French attribute, intermarried, and diffused itself through thousands of early New Jersey people.
'Vincent Rongnion should be memorialized as the distinctive and illustrious 'Head of the Race' in America. He originated in or near the city of Poitiers, in the Province of Ancienne Poitou, France.
'He came before 1668 to the Isle of Jersey, and then to America; married Anne Boutcher, alleged English woman for Herts, England, who in reality was Anne Bouchierre, originally French.
'Vincent Rongnion, patriarch and progenitor of the New Jersey Runyon family came some time before 1668, and first settled in Elizabeth Town, New Jersey. He may have accompanied Governor Philip Carteret, who settled that place in 1665, or migrated very soon after. It is noticeable that many French Huguenots soon appeared in the colony. He was a carpenter.'
Winnifred Beatty, The Baumgardner Family, gives a very excellent account of Vincent and his wife, Ann Martha:
'From France multitudes of protestants, called Huguenots, sought refuge in America for permanent homes. It is a reliable tradition that the founder of the (Runyan-Runyon) Rognon family in America escaped from these cruel persecutions in his native place to the Isle of Jersey, off the coast of France and from there took ship to this country.
'The first reference to his name on this side of the waters is seen in A. D. 1668 in a marriage license given by Phillip (sic) Carteret, the young governor of New Jersey ...'"
"Quoting from Beatty again:
'Ann Martha Boutcher, daughter of John Boutcher of Hertfordshire, England, in all probability was of Huguenot origin from a French family of Boucher that settled in England. She was born about 1650. The date of her death is not known but supposed to be around 1723-25. The name Boutcher or Bouchoree, in its original form, and the old French for 'Burkhart' means strong castle.
'Vincent Rongnion, born in 1645 and died November, 1713, is buried with his wife in the First Baptist cemetery at Piscataway, New Jersey, but their graves are not marked.
'Ann Boutcher, the newly wedded wife of Vincent Rongnion may have been a descendant of the same family as Joan Boutcher of Kent, a lady of distinction and piety, who was a Baptist and was burned at the stake May 2, 1550, within sight of the Canterbury Cathedral.
'The next public notice of Vincent Rongnion's name is found as owner of a piece of ground at Elizabethtown which he bought March 20, 1671-2. He was probably induced to make his first settlement at that place because of the national affinity of the early settlers. The Governor, himself, was of Norman French ancestry anf the Surveyor General, Robert Vanquellin, came from Caen, in France. The Secretary of the Province, James Bolten, was also of French extraction. Besides, there emigrated with Governor Carteret a number of French men and women.
'Vincent Rongnion did not remain long among that settlement, for the stern Puritan element predominated and rendered his relation unpleasant. Disposing his town property as soon as possible, the next notice of him was in the Baptist community, at Piscataway, Middlesex County, New Jersey. Here on the Raritan River in the Spring of 1677, he purchased a farm of 154½ acres and from the homestead established there went out many children to become founders of other large and influential lines of the Rongnion family.'"
back to bio.
3. Albert F. Koehler, The Huguenots or Early French in New Jersey, privately published, Bloomfield, NJ, 1955: pg. 14.
"Vincent Rougnion (Runyon) was born in Poitou, France, about 1643 and came to Elizabethtown Plantations soon after his arrival in 1665. Records show that he married Anne Boutcher in Elizabethtown on July 17, 1668. By 1677 he was in Piscataway, as at that time he had 154½ acres of land allotted to him on the Raritan River. He died in November 1713, his wife, Martha, surviving him."
back to bio.
4. William A. Whitehead (ed), New Jersey Archives - First Series (alt. title Documents Relating to the Colonial History of the State of New Jersey, Vol. I: 1631-1687), New Jersey Historical Society, Trenton, NJ, Printed at the Daily Journal Establishment, Newark, NJ, 1880: Vol. 1, pgs. 80-7.
Record of Proceedings at a Speciall Court by commission from the Hon. Philip Carteret Esqr Governor of the province of New Jersy February 27th 1671. [1671-2.] ...
The names of persons summoned and indicted for pulling down Richard Michells fence. William Meaker, Jeffery Jones, Luke Wattson, Nicholas Carter, Samuel Mash Senr, John Ogden Junr, Joseph Meaker, Hurr Thompson. ...
VINCENT RUNYON testifieth and saith.
That in June last he saw several persons of the towne viz. Goodman Meaker of this towne and his eldest sonn and one of Mr Tompsons sonns Mr Ogdens sonn John and Jeffery Jones & Goodman Carter and Luke Wattson and the old Mash upon Richard Michells lot pulling down the fence, and while they were so doing Mr Pardon Came in, then they asked him whether he were come to help pull down the fence. And Mr Pardon answered that he did not come to help pull down the fence, but to take notice what you do. Then said John Ogden, we do not cair if a hundred such fellows as you are, do take notice of what we do. And Mr Pardon answered you speak very sausily, and that Luke Watson, did not put his hand as I saw, to pull down the fence, but said if I am in place its as good, but after Mr Pardon Came, then he heaved one logg off from the fence, and said you shall not say but I will put my hands to it, and more he saith not.
It appears that this altercation was the result of conflict over land claims. This was a common cause of dispute in colonial America.
back to bio.
5. Oliver B. Leonard, History of the First Baptist Church of Piscataway, Pakenham & Dowling, Steam Printers, New York, NY, Stelton, NJ, 1889: pgs. 116-7.
"RUNYONS. Among the multitude of Christian 'exiles for conscience sake' from France was also the Huguenot family of the Runyons, transplanted to America about 1665. The founders of this large and influential line of pioneers, settled in East Jersey on the Elizabeth Town Grant as early as 1668-70. His name first appears as 'VINCENT RONGNION, mariner of Poitou.' By modern orthography the family is now known as Runyon, with numerous representatives in every State of the Union. The district from which the progenitor of the the (sic) Runyons in America came was one that experienced the most cruel desolation of property, and whose consecrated people endured more inhuman abuses than any other outraged province in the Empire. These devoted Protestants manifested the most unexampled heroism under sufferings, and yet proved steadfast adherents to their religious convictions.
The most popular and diabolical measure of the Papal authorities for intimidating these 'obdurate heretics' and securing enforced conversions among them in this Province of Poitou, was the military occupation by the Dragonades quartered upon their families. This system of outrages impoverished the inhabitants, paralyzed all their industries and finally depopulated whole communities. For rather than bow the knee to Baal; from this strong hold of Calvinists emigrated thousands of the faithful to Holland and England and other islands of the sea. From thence multitudes sought a refuge in this country for permanent homes. It is a reliable tradition that the founder of the Runyon family in America escaped from these cruel persecutions in his native place, to the Isle of Jersey, off the coast of France, and from there took ship to this country. The first reference to his name on this side of the waters is seen A. D. 1668, in a 'marriage license' given by Philip Carteret, the young Governor of East Jersey. The document is on file in the office of Secretary of State of New Jersey, at Trenton, and reads as follows:
To any of the Justices of the Peace or Ministers of the Province of New Jersey:
Whereas I have received information of a mutual agreeement between Vincent Rongnion, of Portiers (sic - Poitiers), in France, and Ann Boutcher, daughter of John Boutcher, of Hartford, in England, to solemnize marriage together, for which they have requested my lycense, and there appearing no lawful impediment for obstruction thereof, these are to require you or eyther of you, to joyne the said Vincent Rongnion and Ann Boutcher in matrimony, and them to pronounce man and wife, and to make record thereof, according to the laws in that behalf provided, for the doing whereof this shall be to you or eyther of you a sufficient warrant.
Given under my hand and seal of the Province, the 28th day of June, 1668, and the 20th year of the raigne of our Sovereign Lord Charles the Second, of England, Scotland and Ireland, King, defender of the faith, &c. /s/Ph. Carteret.
This couple were joyned in matrimony by me the 17th of July, 1668. /s/James Bolton.
The sons and daughters of Vincent and Ann Boutcher Runyon were: Vincent, Darich, Joseph, Reune, Ephraim, Mary, Peter, Jane and Sarah, all born several years before the public organization of the Piscataway Baptist Church.
VINCENT, the oldest son, married Mary Hull 1691, and had children to the number of eleven: Sarah, Martha, Rezia, Mary, Anna, Vincent, Reuben, Reune, and three dying in infancy.
PETER, the youngest son, born 1680, married 1704, Providence Blackford and had five sons and four daughters: John, Joseph, Peter, Richard, Benjamin, Grace, Rosannah, Providence and Sarah.
The other sons and daughters married into the families of Randolph, Sutton, Holton, Webster, Cooper, Layton, Bray, Mollison, Martin and Mannings, and many of their descendants are here to-day at the roll call of their forefathers." (cited op. cit. (R. and A. Runyon): pg. 2.) (cited op. cit. (H. E. Bonham): pg. 538.)
back to bio.
6. Ralph Ege, Pioneers of Old Hopewell, Race & Savidge, Hopewell, NJ, 1908, Reprint ed., 1963: pg. 22. (cited op. cit. (H. E. Bonham): pg. 537.)
"This Runyan family were among the earliest pioneers of Hopewell Township and were descended from a distinguished and eminently pious French Huguenot family, who resided in the Province of Poitou, on the west coast of France, and were driven by fierce religious persecutions to seek refuge, first in the isle of Jersey, and from thence emigrated to America. The first records we have of any member of the family in New Jersey, is of Vincent Rougnion of Portiers, France, Mariner, who in 1668 was granted a license by Philip Carteret, the young governor of East Jersey, to wed 'Ann Boutcher, daughter of John Boutcher of Hartford, in England.'"
In quoting Mr. Ege, Howard Bonham further stated that "John Boutcher was born in England and died in New Jersey after 1678."
back to bio.
7a. William Nelson (ed), New Jersey Archives - First Series (alt. title Calendar of Records in the Office of the Secretary of State, 1664-1703. Part I: East Jersey Records. Part II: West Jersey Records), New Jersey Historical Society, Trenton, NJ, The Press Printing and Pub. Co., Paterson, NJ, 1899: Vol. 21, pg. 42.
Oct. 4, 1678. "Inventory of the estate of John Terry of Piscataway, carpenter, dec'd. (£4.1.10)"
Oct. 8, 1678. "Letters of administration on foregoing estate granted to Vincent Rognion."
b. ibid.: Vol. 21, pg. 59.
Jan. 27, 1679 (1680 N. S.). "Deed. Jabez Hendricks of Piscataway to Reni Piat, alias Laflower of Woodbridge, for his right, title and interst in and to 55 acres of land at Piscataway, bounded S. by Rariton R., W. by Vincent Runnyon, N. by the Commons, E. by Daniel Hendricks."
c. ibid.: Vol. 21, pg. 69.
Feb. 7, 1679 (1680 N. S.). "Deed. Vincent Runyon of Piscataway to Nicholas Munday of the same place, for 3 acres of meadow in Piscataway Town, bounded N. by upland, W. by grantee, S. by William Sutton, E. by Richard Smith and George Wingfield."
d. ibid.: Vol. 21, pg. 57.
Dec. 14, 1680. "Do. Vincent Ronginion of Piscatawy, carpenter, to Thomas Fitzrandolph of the same place, weaver, for two lots there, one, grantor's houselot, bounded S. W. by Raraton R., N. W. by Charles Gilman, S. E, by M. (?) Fitz Randolph, N. E. by the other lot, 12 acres, also 24 a. of upland N. of Charles Gilman, as described in the patent of July 20, 1678."
e. ibid.: Vol. 21, pg. 121.
Jun. 26, 1685. "Do. Same [Elizabeth FitzRandolph] to her son Thomas Fitzrandolph for: 1, 15 acres, E. and S. Michael Symones, N. and W. Vincent Runginion; 2, 50 a., N. E. Thomas Fairnsworth, S. W. Joseph Fitzrandolph; 3, 5 acres of meadow, N. E. upland, S. E. Raraton R., E. and W. Charles Gillman."
f. ibid.: Vol. 21, pg. 75.
Feb. 17, 1685 (1686 N. S.). "Do. to William Suttone of Piscataway, for several parcels, vizt: 1, houselot of 22 acres, bounded E. by Timothy Caute, W. by a road, N. and S. by small brooks; 2, 19 a. of upland, bounded S. by a road, N. by a small brook, W. by Thomas ffarnesworth, E. by George Wingfield; 3, 79 a. of upland, bounded S. W. by Doctor Henry Greenland, N. E. by Michael Symones, N. W. by Daniel Lepington, S. E. by a small brook; 4, four acres of meadow, bounded S. by James Godfrey, N. by Vincent Rognion and Nicholas Munday, E. by Richard Smith, W. by Robert Gannett and Peter Bellew."
g. ibid.: Vol. 21, pg. 108.
Jun. 27, 1687. "Deed. John Langstaff and Symon Brimley, adminstrators of the estate of Michael Symons of Piscataway, dec'd. to Timothy Chanlor, son of Timothy and Abigail Chanlor of the same place, for 75 acres of upland in Piscataway, S. E. unsurveyed land, S. W. Daniel Lippington and William Sutton, N. W. Vincent Ronginon, N. E. Capt. Francis Drake."
h. ibid.: Vol. 21, pg. 126.
Jun. 27, 1687. "Deed. John Langstaff and Symon Brimley, both of Piscataway, adminsitrators of the estate of Michael Symons, late of this same place, dec'd.,to Thomas Fitzrandolph, for 25 acres, W. Mistris Fitzrandolph and Vincent Ronginione, S. Rarato R., E. a small spring, N. Mr. Martin."
i. ibid.: Vol. 21, pg. 112.
Jan. 2, 1687 (1688 N. S.). "Do. to Edmond Dunhame, in right of his late father, Benajah Dunhame, dec'd, for 103½ acres, to wit: 1, a house lot of 10 acres, S. and E. highways, N. Peter Billew, W. Michael Symons; 2, 20 acres of upland, S., N. and W. unsurveyed land, E. a road; 3, 70 acres, W. Raraton R., E. unsurvyed land, N. Mrs. Higgines, S. Vincent Ronginione and Jabez Hendricks; 4, 2½ acres of meadow, N. Michael Symons, S. Raraton R., E. Richard Smith, W. a small creek."
j. ibid.: Vol. 21, pg. 113.
Jan. 2, 1687 (1688 N. S.). "Patent to John Gillman senior of Piscatawy, for 18 acres there, S. Hugh Dun, E. N. and W. highways; also 24 acres, E. Benajah Dunhame, S. Andrew Wanden and unsurveyed land, W. and N. unsurveyed land; and 35 a. of upland, W. Edward Slatter, S. meadows, E. Hopewell Hull, N. Eliakim Higgines; 213 acres at Ambrose Brook, W. Vincent Runyon and unsurveyed land, N., E. and W. unsurveyed land; 10 acres of meadow, S, Raraton R., E. Benjamin Hull and _____, N. Samuel Walker, W. John Langstaff."
k. ibid.: Vol. 21, pg. 165.
Feb. 20, 1687(1688). "Do. Hopewell Hull to Vincent Runione, both of Piscataway, for 70 acres, W. Raraton R., E. unsurveyed land, N. Mrs. Higgines, S. grantee and Jabez Hendricks."
l. ibid.: Vol. 21, pg. 128.
May 10, 1688. "Do. to Thomas Fitzrandolph of Piscatawy, for: 1, 15 acres in Middlesex Co., E. and S. Michael Symons, N. and W. Vincent Ronginione; 2, 5 acres of meadow in Charles Gillman's meadow, N. E. upland, S. E. Raraton R., E. and W. Chas. Gillman."
m. ibid.: Vol. 21, pg. 196.
Dec. 23, 1690. "Do. La Flower alias Reni-Piat to Thomas Grub, blacksmith, both of Piscataway, for one half of 110 acres, bo't of Jabez Hendricks, S. Rariton R., W. Vincent Rugnion, N. land not taken up, S. the other half in possession of John Pound."
n. ibid.: Vol. 21, pg. 233.
Jun. 6, 1695. "Deed ot trust. Nicholas Mundie of Piscataway, who is about to marry Elizabeth Doutey, late of Sumerset Co., to Mark Dusasway (Dusochoy) of Staten island, for all his real property in Piscataway and Woodbridge, to-wit: 1, a townlot of 6 acres in Piscataway, N. John Langstafe, W. a road, S. Daniel Hendricks, E. a swamp; 2, 19 a. woodland, S. John Langstafe and a brook, E. Daniel Hendrick, N. and W. roads; 3, 3½ a. of meadow, W. Daniel Hendrick, E. Vincent Runyon, N. upland, S. William Sutten; 4, 3½ a. of meadow, bo't of Vincent Runyon, N. upland, W. Nicholas Mundie, S. William Sutton, E. Richard Smith and George Wimblefield; 5, 7 a. of meadow at the Roundabout, Woodbridge, bo't of William Compton, N. said Compton, E. Josuah Brodley, S. Mathew Moore, W. Rariton R., in trust for grantor, his wife and prospective children, with testamentary bequests to servant Sarah ffoord, son Nicholas Mundie, dau. Elizabeth, wife of John Compton."
o. ibid.: Vol. 21, pg. 299.
Aug. 31, 1699. "Deed. John Martine of Piscataway and wife Anne to Ralph Ransford of N. Y., butcher, for the following tracts: 1, two houselots, 20 acres, N. the road betw. then and Smally'd town lot, E. grantor's 5 a. lot, S. Nicholas Bonham, W. John Martin senior; 2 25 a., N. a road and Daniel Lippington, W. Vincent Rugnion or a byway, S. Michael Symons and grantee, E. grantee and John Martin junior; 3, 14 a. adjoing the preceding 25, S. Rariton R., E. and W. two small springs, N. John Martin senior; 4, 5 a. meadow, W. said river, E. Hugh Dunn, N. Capt. Drake, S. Hopewell Hull."
p. ibid.: Vol. 21, pg. 334.
Apr. 2, 1702. "Do. to Thomas Grub of Piscataway, for a lot there, where he now lives, 55 acres, S. Rariton R., W. Vincent Runion, N. grantee, E. John Pound."
back to bio.
8. William Nelson (ed), New Jersey Archives - First Series (alt. title Calendar of New Jersey Wills. Vol. I: 1670-1730), New Jersey Historical Society, Trenton, NJ, The Press Printing and Pub. Co., Paterson, NJ, 1901: Vol. 23, pgs. 456-7.
Oct. 8, 1678. "Terry, John, of Piscataway. Adminstration on the estate of, £4.4.10, granted to Vincent Rognion."
Oct. 8, 1678. "Bond of Vincent Rognion of New Piscataway, carpenter, as administrator of estate."
back to bio.
9. William A. Whitehead (ed), New Jersey Archives - First Series (alt. title Documents Relating to the Colonial History of the State of New Jersey, Vol. II: 1687-1703), New Jersey Historical Society, Trenton, NJ, Daily Advertiser Printing House, Newark, NJ, 1881: Vol. 2, pgs. 322-7.
TO THE KINGS MOST EXCELLENT MATY The Remonstrance and Humble Petition of your Matys Loyal Subjects Inhabiting in your Matys Province of East New Jersey in America.
Humbly Sheweth. That Whereas your Matys humble Petitioners did Remove and Settle themselves into the said Province of East New Jersey, and by Vertue of a Licence from the Honoble Coll: Richard Nicholls Governor of the said Province under his the Royal Highness the Duke of Yorke, to purchase Lands of the Native Pagans, did according to the said Licence, Purchase Lands of the said Natives at their own Proper Costs and Charges: And Whereas since his said Royall Highness did sell and Transfer all his Right and Interest to the said Province of East New Jersey to certain Proprietors; by whose Licence severall other your Matys Loyall Subjects have also since purchased Lands at their own proper Costs and Charges of the Native Pagans of the same Place, whereby they humbly Conceive they have Acquired and Gain'd a Right and Property to the said Lands so purchased; Yet notwithstanding your Matys Loyall Subjects are Molested Disturbed, and Dispossessed of their said Lands, by the said Proprietors or their Agents, who under pretence and Colour of having bought the Government with the Soile, have distrained from, and Ejected severall Persons for and under pretence of Quitt Rent and Lords Rent, whereby your Matys Liege Subjects have been sued and put to great Trouble and Charges, and have been Compelled to Answer to vexatious Actions and after they have defended their own Rights and obtained Judgement in their favour, could not have their Charges as according to Law they ought to have, but have been forced to sitt down under the loss of severall Hundreds of Pounds sustained by their unjust Molestations.
And further notwithstanding your Matys Liege Subjects have Purchased their Lands at their own Proper Costs and Charges, by Vertue of the aforesaid Licenses; Yet the said Proprietors, Govrs or Agents without any pretended Process of Law have given and Granted Great part of the said Lands by Pattent to severall of the sd Proprietors and others as to them seemed fitt.
And notwithstanding their Pretence to Government, Yet they left us from the latter end of June 1689, till about the latter end of August 1692, without any Government, and that too in time of Actual War; so that had the Enemy made a Descent upon Us, wee were without any Military officers to Command or Give Directions, in Order to Our Defence, or Magistrates to put the Laws in Execution, and dureing the whole time the said Proprietors have governed this your Matys Province, they have never taken Care to preserve or Defend us from the Native Pagans or other Enimys, by sending or Providing any Arms, Amunition or Stores, but rather have provoked and Incensed the said Natives to make Warr upon Us by Surveying & Pattenting their Lands, contrary to their Liking without purchaseing the same from them, or making any Satisfaction in Consideration thereof And soemtime when the said Natives have sold & Disposed their Lands as to them seemed meet, the said Proprietors have disposed of the same to others or else forced them who had Property in it, to Purchase it of them, upon their own terms, which the said Natives have highly Resented and often complained of and (may justly be feared) waite only for an opportunity to Revenge it upon the Inhabitants of your Matys Province.
And further to manifest the Illegall and Arbitrary proceedings of the said Proprietors in Contempt of yr Matys Laws and against their own knowledge signified in a Letter by them (to the Councill here in East New Jersey) wherein they say as followeth: We have been oblidged against our Inclinations to Dismiss Coll: Hamilton from the Government, because of a late Act of Parliament disabling all Scotch Men to serve in places of Publick Trust or Profitt, And obliging all Proprietors of Collonies to present their respective Governours to the King for his Approbation. So Wee have appointed our ffriend Jeremiah Basse to Succeed Coll: Hamilton in Government, whom Wee have also presented to the King and he is by him owned and approved off.
Notwithstanding which Letter they have Superceeded the said Jeremiah Basse, (whom they wrote was approved by your Maty) and have Commissionated the said Coll: Hamilton again without your Matys Royall Approbation, altho' Removed before by them as a Person disabled by Law, Who now by Vertue of their the said Proprietors Commission only, would Impose himself upon Us as Governour. And when in Government before Superceeded by the aforesaid Basse, was by them continued about a Year after the twenty ffifth of March (1697) without taking the Oath Injoyned by Law. And doth now presume to Exercise Government not having Legally taken the said Oath or having your Matys Royal Approbation. The said Proprietors of East New Jersey have also, in Contempt of your Matys known Laws Commissionated a Native of Scotland to be Secretary and Attorney General of this your Matys Province (being both Places of the greatest Trust next the Governour) and one of the Same Nation to be Clerke of the Supream Court of this your Matys Province, Which may be of Ill Consequence in Relation to the Act of Trade and Navigation, and to the great Hindrance of Your Matys Loyall Subjects (the Power of Government being Cheifly in the Hands of Natives of Scotland) from Informing against any Illegall or Fraudulent Trading by Scotchmen or others in this Province.
Wee your Matys Loyall Subjects Labouring under these and many other Greivances and oppressions by the Proprietors of this your Matys Province of East New Jersey, Do in most humble manner Lay Ourselves before Your Maty (the Fountain of Justice) Humbly Imploreing your Maty will be Graciously Pleased according to your Princely Wisdome to take into Consideration Our Evill Circumstances Under the Present Proprietors, (if the Right of Government is Invested in them) and that your Maty will be Graciously Pleased to give your Royall Orders to the said Proprietors, That with your Matys Royall approbation they Commissionate for Governour A fitt Person Qualified according to Law; Who as an Indifferent Judge may decide Controverseys Arising between the Proprietors and the Inhabitants of this your Matys Province; And settle all the Differences which at present they Labour under.
And your Petitioners as in duty bound shall ever pray &c.
/s/John Royse /s/Sam'll Walker /s/Vincent Rugnion ... /s/The marke of Wander Dedras /s/The marke of Jane Raleman
As was common in proprietary colonies, the inhabitants were often in dispute with the proprietors. This petition was referred to the Lords Commissioners fro Trade and Plantations on November 16, 1700. Well over two hundred inhabitants of East Jersey signed the petition.
back to bio.
10. op. cit. (W. Nelson): Vol. 23, pg. 228.
Dec. 5, 1713. "Rugnion, (Runyon), Vincent, of Rariton River, Middlesex Co. Adminstration on the estate of, granted to his widow Martha Rugnion."
back to bio.
11. Runyan Cemetery, Middlesex County, New Jersey (www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=cr&CRid=1964835&CScn=Runyan&CScntry=4&CSst=33&CScnty=1918&, continuously updated).
12. O. I. A. Roche, The Days of the Upright: The Story of the Huguenots, Clarkson N. Potter, Inc., New York, NY, 1st edition, 1965, pg. unk.
13. Janet G. Gray, "The Origin of the Word Huguenot", Sixteenth Century Journal, Vol. 14, No. 3, 1983, pgs. 349-59.
14. Reguier de la Plancha, "De l'Estat de France 1560". (cited by The Cape Monthly, Vol. XIV, No. 82, February 1877, pg. 126.)
Return to Index