This is the fourth in a series.

One of the biggest problems with studying history is that there are few easy answers.

In 1962, American Heritage Magazine ran a story on the signers of the Declaration of Independence, saying, “Not one man of the 56 signers lost his ‘sacred honor.’ Throughout the long ordeal of an often floundering war, in a cause that at times seemed hopelessly lost, there was not among the 56 men a single defection, despite the reservations that some had about independence at the beginning and despite the repeated sagging of popular support for the war.”

This statement has led to a debate about the activities of one of the signers – and he was from New Jersey.

Today his home is the official residence of the governor, and a South Jersey university bears his name. He was once a prominent lawyer and one of the state’s five signers. Before the war, he had served in the royal colonial government and even traveled to England, where he had an audience with King George III.

But it’s from the darkest days of the Revolution, during the fall of 1776 as New Jersey was invaded by the British, that is the center of the Richard Stockton debate.

Following the signing, Stockton and another member of Congress were appointed to travel to Fort Ticonderoga in New York and report on the condition of the northern army. In October he wrote, “The regiment is … marching with cheerfulness, but a great part of the men barefooted and bare legged. There is not a single shoe or stocking to be had in this part of the world, for I would ride 100 miles through the woods to purchase them with my own money.”

As Stockton was returning to his home in Princeton, the British army under Gen. William Howe was chasing George Washington across the state. On Nov. 30, Howe issued a proclamation to the residents offering pardons if they would take this oath: “I do promise and declare, that I will remain in a peaceable obedience to His Majesty, and will not take up arms, nor encourage others to take up arms, in opposition to his authority shall and may obtain a full and free pardon of all treasons, and misprisions of treasons by him heretofore committed or done, and of all forfeitures, attainers, and penalties for the same, and producing to us, or to either of us a certificate of such his appearance and declaration, shall and may have and receive such pardon made and passed to him in due form.”

Finding Princeton unsafe, Stockton traveled to Monmouth County to stay with a friend, John Covenhoven. On the night of Nov. 30 or Dec. 3 (there are conflicting reports), the house was raided by a New Jersey Loyalist regiment and the two men taken prisoner.

Rebel newspapers reported the Loyalists “treated him (Stockton) with the greatest barbarity, driving him, on foot, through rivers and creeks, with the greatest precipitation, to Amboy, where we hear he lies dangerously ill.”

Even a well-known Loyalist, William Smith, recorded in his journal that Stockton had been “apprehended and forced away naked to Amboy, in the most distressed condition.”

By January, the Continental Congress had become involved.

“Whereas Congress hath received information that the honorable Richard Stockton Esquire, of New Jersey and a member of this Congress, hath been made a prisoner by the enemy, and that he has been ignominiously thrown into a common gaol and there detained: Resolved, that General Washington be directed to make immediate inquiry into the truth of this report, and if he finds reason to believe it well founded, that he send a flag to General Howe, remonstrating against this departure from the humane procedure that has marked the conduct of these states to prisoners who have fallen into their hands, and to know of General Howe, whether he chooses that this shall be the future rule for treating all such, on both sides, as the fortune of war may place in the hands of either party.”

John Hancock wrote to Washington, saying, “Make inquiry whether the report which Congress have heard of Mr. Stockton’s being confined in a common gaol by the enemy, has any truth in it, or not.”

A Dec. 29, 1776 document from Col. James Webster to the leader of the Loyalists who had captured Stockton was recently discovered, stating, “Lord and General Howe having granted a full pardon to Richard Stockton Esquire, by which he is entitled to all his property, and he having informed that his horse, bridle and saddle were taken from the ferry by some of the people under your command, you will upon receipt of this restore the same horse and such other of his effects as shall come within your department to the said Mr. Stockton at the House of John Covenhoven in Monmouth.”

Word of Stockton’s actions had already spread. Elbridge Gerry, a member of Congress, wrote, “Judge Stockton of the Jerseys who was also a member of Congress has sued for pardon. I wish every timid whig or pretended whig in America would pursue the same plan, as their weak and ineffectual system of politics has been the cause of every misfortune that we have suffered.”

According to John Hancock, “Stockton, it is said, and truly, has received General Howe’s protection.”

On Feb. 15, 1777, the New Jersey legislature received Stockton’s formal resignation as a member of Congress.

The most damaging of all came from a close friend, John Witherspoon, president of what is today Princeton University, and also a signer of the declaration.

“Judge Stockton is not very well in health and much spoken against for his conduct. He signed Howe’s declaration and also gave his word of honor that he would not meddle in the least in American affairs during the war.”

Stockton was ruined politically and would not live to see the end of the Revolution, dying in 1781.

There is some evidence, however, that he had worked out an agreement to be released short of signing Howe’s proclamation. On March 25, 1777, Howe reported to England the successful signing of almost 2,700 New Jersey citizens to the loyalty oath.

“My Lord we have the honor to enclose to your lordship a state of the declarations subscribed in consequence of our proclamation of the 30th of November. Although none of the leaders, nor principal instigators and abettors of the rebellion, thought fit to avail themselves of the opportunity given them to return to their duty, we have some satisfaction in observing that so considerable a number of His Majesty’s deluded subjects of inferior rank, in those Provinces where the proclamation could be expected to have effect, or dispose to relinquish the unjust cause they had been once induced to support.”

It’s hard to believe that if Stockton had taken the oath, Howe would not have mentioned the fact. Now 250 years later, the question is did Stockton recant his signature on the Declaration of Independence, or simply promise Gen. Howe he would sit out the rest of the war?

Put yourself in his shoes; what would you do? It’s not for me to say.

Next Week: Capturing a General.