! UPDATE !
NEW DISCOVERY

Milton N. Pegg in his book "A Family Tree and History of some of The Pegg Families descended from Daniel Pegg of Philadelphia" provides some early and factual information on Nathan Pegg, son of Daniel 1^st. He was a cordwainer or woollen mill man. His wife was named Mary and he had two sons Daniel and Elias. Nathan lived near Trenton, New Jersey and there is no record as to when he died or where he is buried. Nathan Pegg left behind a near invisible trail of his life and times.

Since Milton Pegg's book was printed in 1970 there has been some speculation as to the identity of Nathan's wife, Mary. On page 13 of the papers of W. J. Pegg of Sharon, Ontario the surname Heath enters the vocabulary of Pegg researchers: 1747 Heath of Bethlehem, Hunterdon County, Mary Park formerly Mary Heath mentions Daniel Pegg in will (NJ Archives, 1^st series, Vol. XXI). Was this the spark that energized researchers into the theory that somehow Nathan's wife, Mary, and Mary Heath were one and the same? There has been ample confusion on the subject and to my knowledge no documentation. However, among researchers it soon became an acceptable theory that Nathan Pegg died in the prime of his life and his widow then married Richard Heath.

A recently located set of documents microfilmed from original records in the Hunterdon County Court House now casts a shadow of doubt over Nathan Pegg's early demise and his widow's marriage to Heath. It also raises the specter that Nathan and Mary Pegg had children in addition to Daniel and Elias. The following are the facts in the suit of Jacob Moor, the plaintiff, against Nathan Pegg, the defendant in 1754:

Jacob Moor ags't Nathan Pegg
June ye 5^th An.Do.1754
The s'd Nathan being summoned to answer the said Jacob in a Plea of Debt of 5 pounds or under and being sick could not appear according to the Summon, and notwithstanding that the s'd Nathan was sick as afores'd and also a Freeholder: that the said Jacob obtained a Judgement and Execution that same Day against the s'd Nathan for Debt & Cost without being Qualified as the 5 pound Act Directs by making Affidavit that Delay might Endanger the Debt, without such affidavit a Freeholder has the Privilege of three months of (Course?) and the said Execution was forthwith levy'd on a Mare and about Seventeen acres of wheat & rye of the Defendants by Nathaniel Leonard the Constable and also on a saddle and bridle, having first Reduced the Debt of 5 pounds (10 shillings?) to the sum of 5 pounds. And Some time after then Early in the Morning the said Nathan's wife fastened the door of their House (as she says) and went and Milked their Cows and when She came back again from Milking to the said House and went in and She saw the s'd Jacob in the House sitting by the Fire and after she had spoke to him, he told her that he expected the said Constable to meet him there and if did not come he would take more Goods. And the s'd Jacob and the said Constable by their plotting and contriving together, under a pretence of the Power & Authority given them by Virtue of the said Execution, at three times took of thee Goods & Chattles of the s'd Nathan to the Value of 14 pounds and upwards, Proclamation Money. And after then the s'd Jacob and the Constable aforesaid took some of the s'd Goods so taken in Execution to Samuel Flemins now a Tavern in Amwel without giving the said Nathan any Notice about Ten Miles distant and there called a few of the neighbours together and Exposed the s'd mare to sale, and the said Jacob bought her for 13 shillings; being worth 5 pounds and Diverse other things were also exposed and Sold, under the same Authority and Power to them granted as aforesaid - very much under the value or Real Worth. And the Said Nathan having paid the Whole Debt and Cost, and having Sustained Great Damage & Expenses and left Eighteen Days in & upwards about that Vexatious Affair, Requested the s'd Constable to Return the s'd Goods and Chattles which he had so taken by his Irregular Proceedings and Unlawfully Detained, which he says he refused to do. Wherefore the s'd Nathan summoned the said Constable in order to bring him to such Compliance whereby he may have Reasonable Satisfaction of the s'd Constable for the Great Agrievance and Damage which he hath unjustly Sustained as aforesaid. And the s'd Nathan also obtained a judgement for the same against the said Constable (wherewith?????) Obstinately and in Contempt of Authority ???? to Comply.¹

The record tells us a number of things about Nathan Pegg. He was obviously married, a farmer and a Freeholder. He had a minimum of 17 acres of land under cultivation and lived approximately ten miles from Samuel Flemin’s Tavern in Amwell Township, Hunterdon County. All of these things are clues and will eventually help in determining the identity of Nathan Pegg.

Since the statement of facts in the case was given in June of 1754, it's uncertain whether the crops confiscated were grown in 1754 or in the previous year. It's clear that sometime before June 1754 Nathan became indebted to Moor. There is no reason given for the debt. Nathan knew he had been wronged and subsequently filed his own suit against the Constable Nathaniel Leonard in 1755:

Hunterdon Inferior Court of Common Pleas, of Feb'y Term in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred & fifty five: Nathaniel Leonard is Delivered to Bail upon the Takeing of his Body unto Sam'l Fleming of the County af'd Merchant & Jn'o Doe of the same place Gent'l in a plea of Trespass upon the case at the suit of Nathan Pegg.²

Several meetings were held to give evidence on both sides. Some of the meetings were held at Trenton, while others were held in Kingwood at the house of Mansfield Hunt. Finally, in May of 1756 a judgement was given in favour of Nathan Pegg. Judgement was entered for the principal sum of 16 pounds, 17 shillings and 11 pence to be rendered to Pegg the following August.

The Philadelphia County DEED between Nathan and Mary Pegg and John Coats in 1735 has long been considered the last known documented record of Nathan Pegg.³ At this time, Nathan gives his residence as Trentown (Trenton, Hunterdon County) and his occupation as cordwainer (shoemaker). The recital clause in the deed provides proof that Nathan is the son of Daniel 1^st. It also proves that Nathan's line moved into Hunterdon County, New Jersey by 1735. Past research suggests that Nathan died sometime in the ensuing seven or eight years when his widow married Richard Heath. Was it simply assumed that Nathan died given no documented evidence surfaced after 1735? There are several arguments that can be made to support the theory that Nathan Pegg in the 1754 document is the son of Daniel 1^st, belying previous research. The question is also raised as to whether or not Nathan is a son of Nathan and Mary Pegg.

Nathan's brother, Daniel 2^nd, died in 1732/33. Daniel's will, written January 9^th 1732/33, names two sons of his brother, Nathan, and they are Daniel 3^rd and Elias Pegg.⁴ The latter two boys were each devised valuable property in the Northern Liberties. If Nathan had other sons at the time his brother wrote his will they were excluded. However, the indication is that Nathan and Mary only had two sons by this date. If Mary bore additional sons it was after the death of Daniel Pegg 2^nd.

The 1754 document states that Nathan Pegg was a freeholder, which means he owned the property. Nathan, son of Daniel 1^st was born circa 1700. If he was living in 1754 he was 54 years of age and capable of being a freeholder. If Nathan and Mary had a son Nathan born immediately after the death of Daniel 2^nd in 1732/33, his age in 1754 was 21. At such a young age he was less likely to have been a freeholder. The concept of freeholder also ties in with the number of acres under cultivation in 1754. The document provides a minimum number of 17 acres workable land. There might have been more, but 17 acres was the amount seized. The acreage under cultivation is a good indication that Nathan had lived on the property and was a freeholder for a number of years previous to 1754. This fact tends to support Nathan, son of Daniel 1^st, as the freeholder.

The location of Nathan’s property is said to be about ten miles from Samuel Flemin’s tavern in Amwell. See Map The sale of Nathan’s goods took place at the tavern (log house) of Samuel Fleming. The latter first applied for a tavern license in 1746 and for the next ten years operated his public house on the old road to Howell’s Ferry. The location of Samuel’s tavern became known as Fleming’s and later Flemington, NJ. There is no indication in the document as to which direction from Flemington the property lie. Towns near the ten mile mark include Alexandria, Pittstown (formerly Hoff’s Mills) and Clinton to the north and Amwell (village) and Rocktown to the south. Ten miles west of Flemington is Milltown, near the Delaware River. Nathan’s property couldn’t be east of Flemington, since ten miles would place it in Somerset County, New Jersey. Therefore, it can be determined that Nathan’s property was either north, south or west of Flemington. Of the places named, those in Alexandria and Kingwood Townships are the most interesting. Some of Nathan and Mary Pegg’s descendants later lived in Kingwood Township. In 1779 the Hunterdon County tax ratables show a Mary Pegg (a householder owning no acreage) residing in Kingwood Township.5 Is Mary Pegg the widow of Nathan? In the same Kingwood tax ratable, a Daniel Pegg is listed as a single man ---- possibly Mary’s son or grandson. Kingwood is also notable as being the location twice chosen for meetings to gather evidence for Nathan’s suit against the Constable in 1755 and 1756. It’s very possible the selection of Kingwood for the meetings was to obtain evidence from neighbours of Nathan Pegg.

Although not always indicative of an aging man, the mention of Nathan's sickness in the document is noteworthy.

Some clarification and perspective is required regarding the estate of Richard Heath. The papers of W. J. Pegg of Sharon, Ontario suggest that Heath had a will and that Daniel Pegg was mentioned in it. Richard Heath died intestate and therefore never had a will. The only mention of Daniel Pegg was in the accounts where he owed Heath a small sum of money. Daniel's name appears in the list with many other local Hunterdon County men. Whether Daniel Pegg is related to Mary Heath remains suppositional.

It's important to remember that following the death of Daniel Pegg 2^nd in 1732/33 there remained living very few male Peggs descended from Daniel Pegg 1^st. Nathan at age 33 was the eldest living male Pegg of the family. He had two sons, Daniel 3^rd and Elias ---- neither son being old enough to have had a son named Nathan living as a freeholder in 1754. Daniel 3^rd had a son named Nathaniel, but he was born too late. Logic tells us that the only male Pegg that could possibly have a son old enough to be Nathan in 1754, is Nathan, son of Daniel Pegg 1^st. The clues from the document appear to make this scenario less likely, although not impossible. If he is not Nathan's son, then he must be Nathan, son of Daniel 1^st.

In October of 1757 Nathan Pegg was back in court.⁶ It appears that Constable Leonard refused to render payment. Subsequently, Nathan filed suit against Leonard's manucaptor, Samuel Fleming, for the sum of thirty-one pounds, eleven shillings and ten pence. There is no certainty that Nathan Pegg ever received his compensation, as the record does not show it. Nathan's persistence in the matter is his descendants' only glimmer of hope that he finally received retribution.

Daniel K. Dixon
June 3, 2005

 
Endnotes:
¹ Hunterdon County Miscellaneous Court Records, FHL US/CAN 0588745, Document #10270 - Jacob Moor v. Nathan Pegg. Transcription by Daniel K. Dixon, May 2005. Words in brackets with question marks indicate uncertainty of the word in the original copy. The brackets enclosing the words "as she says" is part of the original copy.
² Hunterdon County Miscellaneous Court Records, FHL US/CAN 0588745, Document #10268 - Nathan Pegg v. Nathaniel Leonard. Transcription by Daniel K. Dixon, May 2005.
³ Philadelphia Deed Book G - 4, p. 13. Nathan Pegg & wife, Mary, to John Coats, July 17, 1735.
⁴ Will of Daniel Pegg 2nd, Will Bk. E, p. 235, No. S17 in Office of Register of Wills, Philadelphia.
⁵ Extant years for Kingwood Twp. ratables are 1778, 1779, 1780, 1785, 1786, 1789, 1797, 1802 and 1803. Extant ratables on file at the NJ Division of Archives listed by municipality chronologically. Hunterdon County, New Jersey Taxpayers, 1778-1797, by T.L.C. Genealogy.
⁶ Hunterdon County Miscellaneous Court Records, FHL US/CAN 0819087, Document #29817 - Nathan Pegg v. Sam'l Fleming, manucaptor of Nath. Leonard.