CHAPTER X.

THE ENGLISH IN NEW YORK, 1664-1689.

BY JOHN AUSTIN STEVENS.

THE trading spirit is not of itself sufficient to establish successful

settlement, and monopolies cannot safely be intrusted with the

government of colonies. The experience of the Dutch in the New

Netherland established this truth, which later experience has fully

confirmed.

Toward the middle of the seventeenth century Holland controlled the

carrying trade of the world. Nearly one half of the tonnage of Europe

was under her flag. Java was the centre of her East Indian enterprise,

Brazil the seat of her West Indian possessions; and the seas between,

over which were wafted her fleets, freighted with the rich products of

these tropical lands, were patrolled by a navy hardy and brave. Yet it

was at the very zenith of her power that her North American colony,

which proudly bore the name of the Fatherland, was stripped from the

home government at one trenchant blow.

The cause of this misfortune may be found in the weakness of the Dutch

settlement compared with the more populous New England communities,

which pressed, threatening and aggressive, on its eastern borders.

Under the Dutch rule, New Netherland was never in a true sense a

colony. Begun as a trading-post in 1621, and managed by the Dutch

West India Company, it cannot be said ever to have got beyond

leading-strings, and at the time when it fell into the hands of the

English its entire population did not exceed seven thousand souls,

while the English on its borders numbered not less than fifteen times

as many.

Nor did the West India Company seem ever to comprehend that their hold

upon the new continent could be maintained only by well-ordered and

continuous colonization. Rapidly enriched by their intercourse with

the natives of the sunny climes in which they established their strong

posts for trade, they seem to have looked for no more from their posts

on the North American coast, or to have had further ambition than to

secure their share of the trade in furs, in which they were met by the

active rivalry and greater enterprise of the French settlers on the

Canadian frontier.

Yet the territory of New Netherland was by natural configuration the

key of the northern frontier of the American colonies, and indeed,

it may be said, of the continent. The courses of the Hudson and

Mohawk form the sides of a natural strategic triangle, and with the

system of northern lakes and streams connect the several parts of

the broad surface which stretches from the mouth of the St. Lawrence

on the Atlantic to the headwaters of the Columbia at the continental

divide. This vantage-ground at the head of the great valleys through

which water-ways give access to the regions on the slope below, was

the chosen site of the formidable confederacy of the Iroquois, the

acknowledged masters of the native tribes.

The English jealousy of the Dutch did not spring from national

antipathy, but from the rivalry of trade. The insular position of

England forced her to protect herself abroad, and when Protestant

Holland, by enterprise and skill, drew to herself the commerce of

both the Indies, her success aroused in England the same spirit of

opposition, the same animosity, which had, the century before, been

awakened by the aggrandizement of Catholic Spain. It was the Protestant

Commonwealth of England which passed the Navigation Act of 1660,

especially directed against the foreign trade of her growing rival of

the same religious faith. In this act may be found the germ of the

policy of England not only toward her neighbors, but also toward her

colonies. This act was maintained in active force after the restoration

of Charles II. to the throne. Strictly enforced at home, it was

openly or secretly evaded only in the British American colonies and

plantations. The arm of England was long, but her hand lay lightly

on the American continent. The extent of coast and frontier was too

great to be successfully watched, and the necessities of the colonies

too many and imperious for them to resist the temptation to a trade

which, though illicit, was hardly held immoral except by the strictest

constructionists of statute law; and it was with the Dutch that this

trade was actively continued by their English neighbors of Maryland

and Virginia, as well as by those of New England. In 1663 the losses

to the revenue were so extensive that the farmers of the customs, who,

after the fashion of the period, enjoyed a monopoly from the King at

a large annual personal cost, complained of the great abuses which,

they claimed, defrauded the revenue of ten thousand pounds a year.

The interest of the kingdom was at stake, and the conquest of the New

Netherland was resolved upon.

This was no new policy. It had been that of Cromwell, the most

sagacious of English rulers, and was only abandoned by him because of

the more immediate advantages secured by his treaty with the Grand

Pensionary, a statesman only second to Oliver himself. The expedition

which Cromwell had ordered was countermanded, and the Dutch title to

the New Netherland was formally recognized by the treaty of 1654.

It seems rational to suppose that the English Protector foresaw the

inevitable future fall of the Dutch-American settlement, hemmed in by

growing English colonies fostered by religious zeal, and that he was

willing to wait till the fruit was ripe and of easy grasp to England.

It is the fashion of historians to ascribe the seizure of the New

Netherland to the perfidy of Charles; but the policy of kingdoms

through successive administrations is more homogeneous than appears

on the surface. The diplomacy of ministers is usually traditional;

the opportunity which seems to mark a change is often but an incident

in the chain. That which presented itself to Clarendon, Charles’s

Lord Chancellor, was the demand made by the States-General that the

boundary line should be established between the Dutch and English

possessions in America. Consent on the part of Charles would have been

a ratification of Cromwell’s recognition of 1654. This demand of the

Dutch Government, made in January, 1664, close upon the petition of

the farmers of the customs of December, 1663, precipitated the crisis.

The seizure of New Amsterdam and the reduction of New Netherland was

resolved upon. Three Americans who happened to be in London,—Scott,

Baker, and Maverick,—were summoned before the Council Board, when

they presented a statement of the title of the King, the intrusion

of the Dutch, and of the condition of the settlement. The Chancellor

held their arguments to be well grounded, and on the 29th of February

an expedition was ordered “against the Dutch in America.” The demand

of the Holland Government was no doubt stimulated by the intrigues of

Sir George Downing, who had been Cromwell’s ambassador at the Hague,

and was retained by Charles as an adroit servant. A nephew of the

elder Winthrop and a graduate from Harvard, Downing appears to have

determined upon the acquisition by England of the Dutch provinces,

which were held by the New England party to be a thorn in the side of

English American colonization. The expedition determined upon, Scott

was sent back to New England with a royal commission to enforce the

Navigation Laws. The next concern of the Chancellor was to secure to

the Crown the full benefit of the proposed conquest. He was as little

satisfied with the self-rule of the New England colonies as with the

presence of Dutch sovereignty on American soil; and in the conquest

of the foreigner he found the means to bring the English subject into

closer dependence on the King.

James Duke of York, Lord High Admiral, was the heir to the crown. He

had married the daughter of Edward Hyde, the Chancellor of the kingdom,

who now controlled its foreign policy. A patent to James as presumptive

heir to the crown, from the King his brother, would merge in the

crown; and a central authority strongly established over the territory

covered by it might well, under favorable circumstances, be extended

over the colonies on either side which were governed under limitations

and with privileges directly secured by charter from the King. In this

adroit scheme may be found the beginning in America of that policy of

personal rule, which, begun under the Catholic Stuart, culminated under

the Protestant Hanoverian, a century later, in the oppression which

aroused the American Revolution. The first step taken by Clarendon

was the purchase of the title conveyed to the Earl of Stirling in 1635

by the grantees of the New England patent. This covered the territory

of Pemaquid, between the Saint Croix and the Kennebec, in Maine, and

the Island of Matowack, or Long Island. The Stirling claim had been

opposed and resisted by the Dutch; but Stuyvesant, the Director of New

Netherland, had in 1650 formally surrendered to the English all the

territory south of Oyster Bay on Long Island and east of Greenwich

on the continent. A title being thus acquired by the adroitness of

Clarendon, a patent was, on the 12th of March, 1664, issued by Charles

II. to the Duke of York, granting him the Maine territory of Pemaquid,

all the islands between Cape Cod and the Narrows, the Hudson River, and

all the lands from the west side of the Connecticut to the east side

of Delaware Bay, together with the islands of Martha’s Vineyard and

Nantucket. The inland boundary was “a line from the head of Connecticut

River to the source of Hudson River, thence to the head of the Mohawk

branch of Hudson River, and thence to the east side of Delaware Bay.”

The patent gave to the Duke of York, his heirs, deputies, and assigns,

“absolute power to govern within this domain according to his own rules

and discretions consistent with the statutes of England.” In this

patent the charter granted by the King to the younger John Winthrop in

1662 for Connecticut, in which it was stipulated that commissioners

should be sent to New England to settle the boundaries of each colony,

was entirely disregarded. The idea of commissioners for boundaries

now developed with larger scope, and the King established a royal

commission, consisting of four persons recommended by the Duke of York,

whose private instructions were to reduce the Dutch to submission and

to increase the prerogatives of the Crown in the New England colonies,

which Clarendon considered to be “already well-nigh ripened to a

commonwealth.”

[Illustration]

Three of these commissioners were officers in the Royal army,—Colonel

Richard Nicolls, Sir Robert Carr, Colonel George Cartwright. The fourth

was Samuel Maverick, an earnest adherent of the Church of England and

bitter enemy of Massachusetts, in which colony he had passed his early

manhood. These commissioners, or any three or two of them,—Nicolls

always included,—were invested with full power in all matters,

military and civil, in the New England colonies. To Colonel Nicolls the

Duke of York entrusted the charge of taking possession of and governing

the vast territory covered by the King’s patent. To one more capable

and worthy the delicate trust could not have been confided. He was in

the fortieth year of a life full of experience, of a good Bedfordshire

family, his father a barrister of the Middle Temple. He had received an

excellent education. When, at the age of nineteen, the Civil War broke

out, he at once joined the King’s forces, and, obtaining command of a

troop of horse, clung persistently to the Royal cause. Later, he served

on the Continent with the Duke of York in the army of Turenne. At the

Restoration he was rewarded for his fidelity with the post of Groom

of the Bedchamber to the Duke, to whose interests he devoted himself

with loyalty, prudence, and untiring energy. His title under the new

commission was that of Deputy-Governor; the tenure of his office, the

Duke’s pleasure.[694]

The English Government has never been scrupulous as to method in the

attainment of its purposes, justification being a secondary matter.

When the news of the gathering of the fleet reached the Hague, and

explanation was demanded of Downing as to the truth of the reports that

it was intended for the reduction of the New Netherland, he boldly

insisted on the English right to the territory by first possession.

To a claim so flimsy and impudent only one response was possible,—a

declaration of war. But the Dutch people at large had little interest

in the remote settlement, which was held to be a trading-post rather

than a colony, and not a profitable post at best. The West India

Company saw the danger of the situation, but its appeals for assistance

were disregarded. Its own resources and credit were unequal to the

task of defence. Meanwhile the English fleet, composed of one ship

of thirty-six, one of thirty, a third of sixteen, and a transport of

ten guns, with three full companies of the King’s veterans,—in all

four hundred and fifty men, commanded by Colonels Nicolls, Carr, and

Cartwright,—sailed from Portsmouth for Gardiner’s Bay on the 15th

of May. On the 23d of July Nicolls and Cartwright reached Boston,

where they demanded military aid from the Governor and Council of the

Colony. Calling upon Winthrop for the assistance of Connecticut, and

appointing a rendezvous at the west end of Long Island, Nicolls set

sail with his ships and anchored in New Utrecht Bay, just outside of

Coney Island, a spot since historical as the landing-place of Lord

Howe’s troops in 1776. Here Nicolls was joined by militia from New

Haven and Long Island. The city of New Amsterdam was at once cut off

from all communication with the shores opposite, and a proclamation

was issued by the commissioners guaranteeing the inhabitants in their

possessions on condition of submission. The Hudson being in the

control of the English vessels, the little city was defenceless. The

Director, Stuyvesant, heard of the approach of the English at Fort

Orange (Albany), whither he had gone to quell disturbances with the

Indians. Returning in haste, he summoned his council together. The

folly of resistance was apparent to all, and after delays, by which the

Director-General sought to save something of his dignity, a commission

for a surrender was agreed upon between the Dutch authorities and

Colonel Nicolls. The capitulation confirmed the inhabitants in the

possession of their property, the exercise of their religion, and

their freedom as citizens. The municipal officers were continued in

their rule. On the 29th of August, 1664, the articles were ratified,

and Stuyvesant marched out from Fort Amsterdam, at the head of his

little band with the honors of war, and embarked the troops on one

of the West India Company’s ships for Holland. Stuyvesant himself

remained for a time in the city. The English entered the fort, the

Dutch flag was hauled down, the English colors hoisted in its place,

and the city passed under English rule. The first act of Nicolls on

taking possession of the fort, in which he was welcomed by the civic

authorities, was to order that the city of New Amsterdam be thereafter

known as New York, and the fort as Fort James, in honor of the title

and name of his lord and patron.

At the time of the surrender the city gave small promise of its

magnificent future. Its entire population, which did not exceed 1,500

souls, was housed within the triangle at the point of the island, the

easterly and westerly sides of which were the East and North Rivers,

and the northern boundary a wall stretching across the entire island

from river to river. Beyond this limit was an occasional plantation

and a small hamlet known as New Haarlem. The seat of government

was in the fort. Nicolls now established a new government for the

province. A force was sent up the Hudson under Captain Cartwright,

which took possession of Fort Orange, the name of which was changed

to Albany, in honor of a title of the Duke of York. On his return,

Cartwright took possession of Esopus in the same manner (the name of

this settlement was later changed to Kingston). The privileges granted

to the inhabitants of New Amsterdam were extended to these towns. The

volunteers from Long Island and New England were now discharged to

their homes.

The effect of the prudent and conciliatory measures of Nicolls, which

in the beginning had averted the shedding of a single drop of blood,

and now appealed directly to the good sense of the inhabitants, was

soon apparent. The fears of the Dutch were entirely allayed, and as

no inequality was imposed upon them, they had no reason to regret the

change of rule. Their pride was conciliated by the continuance of

their municipal authorities, and by the cordial manner in which the

new-comers arranged that the Dutch and English religious service should

be held consecutively under the same roof,—that of the Dutch church

in the fort. Hence when Nicolls, alive to the interests of his master,

which could be served only by maintaining the prosperity of the colony,

proposed to the chief citizens that instead of returning to Holland,

as had been arranged for in the capitulation, they should take the

oath of allegiance to the King of Great Britain and of obedience to

the Duke of York, they almost without exception, Stuyvesant himself

included, accepted the conditions. The King’s authority was thus

peaceably and firmly established in the metropolis and in the outlying

posts of the province of New York proper, which, by the King’s patent

to the Duke, included all the territory east of the Delaware. The

commissioners next proceeded to reduce the Dutch settlements on the

Delaware, and established their colleague, Carr, in command, always

however in subordination to the government of New York. The necessities

of their condition, dependent upon trade, brought the Dutch inhabitants

into easy subjection. Indeed it seems that though their attachment

to the mother country, its laws and its customs, was unabated, the

long neglect of their interests by the Holland Government had greatly

weakened if not destroyed any active sentiment of loyalty.

The southern boundary established, the commissioners turned to the

more difficult task of establishing that to the eastward. The Duke of

York’s patent covered all the territory claimed alike by the Dutch and

by the Connecticut colony under its charter of 1662,—involving an

unsettled controversy. A joint commission finally determined the matter

by assigning Long Island to New York, and establishing a dividing

line between New York and Connecticut, to run about twenty miles

distant eastwardly from the Hudson River. The superior topographical

information of the Connecticut commissioners secured the establishment

of this line in a manner not intended by the Board at large. The

boundary was not ratified by the royal authorities, and was later the

source of continual dispute and of endless bad feeling between the two

colonies.

Nicolls next settled the rules of the customs, which were to be paid

in beaver skins at fixed valuations. Courts were now established,—an

English modification of those already existing among the Dutch. These

new organizations consisted of a court of assizes, or high court of

law and equity. Long Island was divided, after the English manner,

into three districts or ridings, in which courts of sessions were held

at stated intervals. The justices, sitting with the Governor and his

Council once in each year in the Court of Assizes, formed the supreme

law-making power, wholly subordinate to the will of the Governor, and,

after him, to the approval of the Duke. To this body fell the duty of

establishing a code of laws for such parts of the province as still

remained under the Dutch forms of government. Carefully examining

the statutes of the New England colonies, Nicolls prepared from them

a code of laws, and summoning a convention of delegates of towns to

meet at Hempstead on Long Island, he submitted it for their approval.

These laws, though liberal in matters of conscience and religion,

did not permit of the election of magistrates. To this restriction

many of the delegates demurred; but Nicolls fell back upon the terms

of his commission, and the delegates submitted with good grace. The

code thus established is known in jurisprudence as the “Duke’s Laws.”

Its significant features were trial by jury; equal taxation; tenure

of lands from the Duke of York; no religious establishment, but

requirement of some church form; freedom of religion to all professing

Christianity; obligatory service in each parish every Sunday;

recognition of negro slavery under certain restrictions; and general

liability to military duty.

Next in order came the conforming of the style and manner of the city

governments to the custom of England. The Dutch form was abolished,

and a mayor, aldermen, and sheriff appointed. The Dutch citizens

objected to this change from the habit of their forefathers, but

as the preponderance of numbers was given to citizens of their

nationality, the objection was not pressed, and the new authorities

were quietly inaugurated, if not with acquiescence, at least without

opposition or protest. These changes occurred in June, 1665. Thus in

less than a single year, in a population the Dutch element of which

outnumbered the English as three to one, by the moderation, tact,

energy, and remarkable administrative ability of Nicolls, was the

conquered settlement assimilated to the English body politic to which

it was henceforth to belong, and from the hour of transmutation it

was accustomed to look to Great Britain itself for government and

protection. Such was the first step in the transition of the seat of

the “armed commercial monopoly” of New Amsterdam, through various

modifications and changes, to the cosmopolitan city of the present day.

* * * * *

The war which the violent seizure of New Netherland precipitated upon

Europe was little felt on the western shores of the Atlantic. There was

nothing in New York itself, independently of its territorial situation,

to tempt a _coup de main_. There were “no ships to lose, no goods to

plunder.” For nearly a year after the capture no vessel arrived from

England with supplies. In the interval the King’s troops slept upon

canvas and straw. The entire cost of maintaining the garrison fell

upon the faithful Nicolls, who nevertheless continued to build up

and strengthen his government, personally disposing of the disputes

between the soldiers and settlers at the posts, encouraging settlement

by liberal offers to planters, and cultivating friendly relations with

the powerful Indian confederacy on the western frontier. While thus

engaged in the great work of organizing into a harmonious whole the

imperial domain to his charge, which, extending from the Delaware to

the Connecticut, with the Hudson as its central artery, was of itself

a well rounded and perfect kingdom, he received the disagreeable

intelligence that his work of consolidation had been broken by the Duke

of York himself. James, deceived as to gravity of the transaction,

influenced by friendship, or because of more immediate personal

considerations, granted to Carteret and Berkeley the entire territory

between the Hudson River on the east, Cape May on the southward, and

the northern branch of the Delaware on the west, to which was given the

name of Nova Cæsarea or New Jersey. In this grant, however, the Duke

of York did not convey the right of jurisdiction; but the reservation

not being expressed in the document, the grantees claimed that it

also passed to them, an interpretation which received no definitive

settlement for a long period.[695]

While the Dutch Government showed no disposition to attempt the

recovery of their late American territory by immediate attack, they

did not tamely submit to the humiliation put upon them, but strained

every nerve to maintain the honor of their flag by sea and land. For

them as for the English race, the sea was the natural scene of strife.

The first successes were to the English fleet, which, under the command

of the Duke of York in person, defeated the Dutch at Lowestoffe, and

compelled them to withdraw to the cover of their forts. Alarmed at

the triumph of England and at the prospect of a general war, Louis

XIV. urged peace upon the States-General, and proposed to the English

King an exchange of the territory of New Netherland for the island of

Poleron, one of the Banda or Nutmeg Islands, recently taken from the

English,—a kingdom for a mess of pottage. But Clarendon rejected the

mediation, declining either exchange or restitution in a manner that

forced upon the French King a declaration of war. This declaration,

issued Jan. 29, 1666, was immediately replied to by England, and the

American colonies were directed to reduce the French possessions to the

English crown. Here was the beginning of the strife on the American

continent which culminated a century later in the conquest of Canada

and the final supremacy of the English race on the Western continent.

While the settlers of New England, cut off from the Western country by

the Hudson River and the Dutch settlements along its course, and alike

from Canada by pathless forests, and in a manner enclosed by races

whose foreign tongues rendered intercourse difficult, were rapidly

multiplying in number, redeeming and cultivating the soil and laying

the foundations of a compact and powerful commonwealth, divided perhaps

in form, but one in spirit and purpose, their northern neighbors were

no less active under totally different forms of polity. The primary

idea of French as of Spanish colonization was the conversion of the

heathen tribes. The first empire sought was that of the soul; the

priests were the pioneers of exploration. The natives of the soil

were to be first converted, then brought, if possible, through this

subtile influence into alliance with the home government. This peaceful

scheme failing, military posts were to be established at strategic

points to control the lakes and streams and places of portage, the

highways of Indian travel, and to hold the country subject to the King

of France. Unfortunately for the success of this comprehensive plan,

there was discord among the French themselves. The French military

authorities and the priests were not harmonious either in purpose

or in conduct. The Society of Jesus would not subordinate itself to

the royal authority. Moreover the Iroquois confederacy of the Five

Nations, which held the valley of the Mohawk and the lakes south of

Ontario, were not friendly at heart to the Europeans. They had not

forgotten nor forgiven the invasion by Champlain; yet, recognizing

the value of friendly relations with a power which could supply them

with firearms for their contests with the fierce tribes with whom

they were at perpetual war, they welcomed the French to dwell among

them. French policy had declared itself, even before England made

her first move for a consolidation of her power in America. In 1663

the Old Canada Company surrendered its rights to Louis XIV., who at

once sent over a Royal Commissary to organize a colonial government.

The new administration established by him was not content with the

uncertain relations existing with the Iroquois, which the fierce

hostility of the Mohawks, the most important and powerful of the

confederate tribes, constantly threatened to turn into direct enmity.

A policy of conquest was determined upon. An embassy sent by the

Iroquois to Montreal to treat for peace in 1664 was coldly received,

and the next year the instructions of the French King declared the Five

Nations to be “perpetual and irreconcilable enemies of the colony.”

Strong military assistance arrived to enforce the new policy, and

before the year closed, the Marquis de Tracy, the new viceroy, had

erected fortified posts which controlled the entire course of the St.

Lawrence. In December four of the confederate tribes,—the Onondagas,

Oneidas, Cayugas, and Senecas,—alarmed at this well-ordered progress

toward their territory, made submission, and entered into a treaty by

which Louis was acknowledged as their protector and sovereign. The

Mohawks alone were not a party to this arrangement. They refused to

acknowledge subjection. To punish their obstinacy the viceroy at once

despatched an expedition against their villages. Missing its way, it

was attacked near Schenectady by a party of Mohawks. The news of the

skirmish alarmed the English at Albany. From their pickets Courcelles,

the commander of the French expedition, first learned of the reduction

of the Dutch province to English rule, and, it is reported, said in

disturbed mind, “that the King of England did grasp at all America.”

Thus for the first time within the limits of the New York province the

English and French were confronted with each other on the territory

which was destined to become the scene of a century of strife; and thus

also were the Mohawks naturally inclined to the only power which could

protect them against the aggressions of the French. Nicolls induced

the Mohawks to treat for peace with the French. He also urged the

Connecticut authorities to arrange a peace between the Mohicans and

the Mohawks; and negotiations were opened in time to counteract the

French emissaries, who were already tampering with the former tribe.

Shortly after these successful mediations, instructions arrived from

King Charles to undertake hostilities against Canada; but Connecticut

refusing to join in an expedition, and Massachusetts, considering the

reduction of Canada as not at the time feasible, Nicolls changed his

tactics, and declared to the Canadian viceroy his purpose to maintain

peace, provided the bounds and limits of his Majesty’s dominions were

not invaded. Meanwhile, the Oneidas having ratified the treaty made by

their colleague tribes with the French, the Mohawks were left alone

in resistance, and committed outrages which the viceroy determined to

punish. Leading an expedition in person, he marched upon the Mohawks,

captured and destroyed their four villages, burned vast quantities

of stored provisions, devastated their territory, and took formal

possession of the country in the name of the King of France. Yet such

was the independent spirit of this proud tribe, that it required the

threat of another expedition to bring them to submission. A treaty was

made by which they consented to receive missionaries. This completed

the title of possession of the Western territory which the French

Government was preparing against a day of need.

The war in Europe was closed by the treaty of Breda, which allowed

the retention by each of the conflicting parties of the places it

occupied. This provision confirmed the English in peaceful and rightful

possession of their conquest of New Netherland. The intelligence was

proclaimed New Year’s Day, 1668. It enabled the Duke of York to accede

at last to the repeated requests of his faithful and able deputy, and

permission was granted to Nicolls to return to England. His successor,

Colonel Francis Lovelace, relieved him in his charge in August

following.

[Illustration]

Francis Lovelace, the successor of Nicolls, continued his policy with

prudence and moderation. To him the merchants of the city owed the

establishment of the first exchange or meeting-place for transaction

of business at fixed hours. He encouraged the fisheries and whaling,

promoted domestic trade with Virginia, Massachusetts, and the West

India Islands, and took personal interest in ship-building. By his

encouragement the first attempt toward a post-road or king’s highway

was made. During his administration the first seal was secured for

the province, and one also for the city. He appears to have concerned

himself also in the conversion to Christianity of the Indian tribes,—a

policy which Nicolls initiated; but as yet there was no printing press

in the province to second his efforts. Of more practical benefit was

his interference to arrest the sale of intoxicating liquors to the

savage tribes from the trading-post at Albany.

In 1668 the policy of the English Government again veered. A treaty,

known as the Triple Alliance, was signed between Great Britain, the

United Provinces, and Sweden, to arrest the growing power and ambitious

designs of France. Popular in the mother country, the alliance gave

peculiar satisfaction to the New York province, and somewhat allayed

the disappointment with which the cancellation of the order permitting

the Dutch freely to trade with New York was received by its citizens

of Holland descent. Throughout the Duke’s province there was entire

religious toleration. None were disturbed in the exercise of their

worship. At Albany the parochial Dutch church was maintained under his

authority, and in New York, he authorized the establishment of a branch

of the Dutch Reformed Church, and directed the payment of a sufficient

salary to the minister invited from Holland to undertake its charge.

The efforts begun by Nicolls and continued by Lovelace, to bring into

harmonious subjection the diverse elements of the Duke’s government

were not wholly successful. The inhabitants of eastern Long Island

clung tenaciously to the traditions of the Connecticut colony, and

petitioned the King directly for representation in the Government;

but the Council for Plantations denied the claim, on the ground that

the territory was in the limits of the Duke of York’s patent and

government. The unsettled boundaries again gave trouble, Massachusetts

renewing her claim to the navigation of the Hudson, which the Dutch

had, during their rule, successfully resisted. Massachusetts further

claimed the territory to the Pacific westward of the line of the Duke

of York’s patent. The contiguous territory was however held by the

Mohawks, who had never acknowledged other sovereignty than their own.

In 1672 this tribe made a considerable sale of lands on the Mohawk

River to the inhabitants of Schenectady, by which New York practically

acquired title to the soil as well as sovereignty.

In 1672 English politics again underwent a change. The Triple Alliance

was dissolved, and a secret treaty entered into with France. War was

declared against the Dutch. In a severe action at Solebay, the Dutch

won an advantage over the allied fleets of England and France. In

the engagement Nicolls, the late governor of the New York province,

fell, killed by a cannon ball, at the feet of his master, the Duke of

York, Lord High Admiral of England, who commanded the British fleet.

But while the Dutch maintained an equality at sea with the combined

fleets of the powers, their fortune on land was not as favorable.

Turenne and Condé led the armies of France to the soil of the Dutch

Republic, and to mark his advantage, Louis XIV. brought his court to

Utrecht. A revolution in Holland was the immediate consequence. The

Grand Pensionary, who in his alarm sought peace, lost the favor of the

people, resigned his office, and was quickly murdered by the excited

followers of William of Orange. William, having demanded and obtained

appointment as Stadtholder, at once placed himself at the head of the

war party, and active hostilities were prosecuted by sea and land,

both far and near. Among the rumors which reached the inhabitants

of the New York province, whose kinsmen were again at war with each

other, was one to the effect that a Dutch squadron which had been

despatched against the West India colonies was on its way along the

Atlantic coast. Lovelace discredited the information, and seems to

have made no immediate efforts to strengthen the forts. Troops were

called in, however, from the river garrisons and the posts on the

Delaware; but their number, with the volunteers, reached only three

hundred and thirty men. The alarm soon subsiding, the new-comers were

dismissed, and the garrison left in Fort James did not exceed eighty

men. Lovelace himself, in entire serenity of mind, left the city on a

visit to Governor Winthrop in Connecticut. The rumor, however, proved

true. The Dutch squadron, after capturing or destroying the Virginia

fleet of tobacco ships in the Chesapeake, sailed northward, and on

Aug. 7, 1673, anchored off Staten Island. Informed of the precise

state of the New York defences by the captain of a prize captured

at the mouth of James River, the Dutch commander made an immediate

demand for the surrender of the city. The Dutch fleet, commanded by

Evertsen, originally consisting of fifteen ships, had been reinforced

in its course by seven men-of-war, and with its prizes now numbered

twenty-seven sail, which carried sixteen hundred men. Against this

force no resistance was possible. On the morning of the 8th the fleet

moved up the bay, exchanged shots with the fort, and landed six hundred

men on the shore of the Hudson just above the city, where they were

joined by a body of the Dutch burghers. A storming party was advanced,

under command of Captain Anthony Colve, to whom Captain Manning, who

commanded in the Governor’s absence, surrendered the fort, the garrison

being permitted to march out with the honors of war. Thus New York was

again surrendered without the shedding of a drop of blood.

A few days later Lovelace, entrapped into a visit to the city, was

first courteously entertained, then arrested on a civil suit for debt

and detained. The river settlements of Esopus and Albany surrendered

without opposition; and those in the immediate neighborhood of the

city, where the Dutch population was in ascendency, made submission.

The eastern towns of Long Island, of English descent, came in with

reluctance. The commodores Evertsen and Binckes, who acted as council

of war of New Netherland, after confiscating the property of the

Duke of York and of his agent, by proclamation commissioned Captain

Anthony Colve Governor-General of the country, and set sail for

Holland,—Binckes taking Lovelace with him on his ship at his request.

New York had greatly changed in nine years of English rule. From a

sleepy Dutch settlement it had become the capital of a well-ordered

province. Colve, the new Dutch governor, went through the form of a

return to the old order of city government of the home pattern, and

prepared a provincial Instruction to which the outlying towns were to

conform. Massachusetts again asserted her old claim to run her southern

line to the Hudson, and Connecticut hankered once more after the

fertile towns of Long Island, settled by her sons. But Massachusetts

had no disposition to take up arms to restore the Duke of York to

his possessions. The refusal of the Duke to take the test oath of

conformity to the Protestant religion of the Established Church, and

the leaning of Charles to the French alliance, alarmed the Puritans,

and Connecticut was content, by volunteer reinforcements, to strengthen

the eastern towns in their resistance to Colve’s authority.

The news of the recapture of New York reached Holland in October,

when Joris Andringa was by the States-General appointed governor of

New Netherland under the instructions of the Board of Admiralty.

Notwithstanding the earnest request of the Dutch inhabitants of

the reconquered province and the petition of persons interested in

its trade in the mother country, the States-General recognized the

impossibility of holding their American possessions on the mainland,

surrounded as they were by a growing and aggressive English population.

The Prince of Orange, with true statesmanship, saw that the only

safety of the Republic was in a concentration of resources in order

to oppose the power of France. The offer of a restitution of New

Netherland was directly made to Charles II. as an evidence of the

desire for peace and a good understanding. Charles referred the subject

to Parliament, which instantly recommended acceptance, and within three

days a treaty was drawn up and signed at Westminster, which once more

and finally transferred the province of New York to the King of Great

Britain. Proclamation of the treaty was made at Guild Hall early in

July, 1674. The news came by way of Massachusetts and Connecticut.

Connecticut determined to make one more push for the control on Long

Island of Southampton, Easthampton, and Southold, and petitions were

addressed to the King. At the same time she sought again to include the

territory between the boundary line established in 1664 and the Hudson.

And it may be stated as a curious instance of the politics of the

time, that some friend of Massachusetts, urged by her agent in London,

actually contemplated the purchase of the entire province of New York

in her interest.

The new governor appointed by the King to receive the surrender of the

New Netherland was one Edmund Andros, major in a dragoon regiment. In

continuance of the liberal policy of 1664, all the inhabitants were by

his instructions confirmed in their rights and privileges, and in the

undisturbed possession of their property. By the treaty of Westminster,

the New Netherland, the rightful possession of which by the Dutch

was implied by its tenor, was ceded to the King. Although termed a

restitution, it was held that the rights of the Duke of York had been

extinguished by the conquest, and that restitution to the sovereign did

not convey restoration to the subject. The Duke of York, now better

informed as to the nature and value of the territory, on June 29, 1674,

obtained from his royal brother a new patent with enlarged authority.

To Andros, who bore the King’s authority to receive submission, the

Duke now conferred his commission to govern the province in his

name. Lieutenant Anthony Brockholls was named his successor in case

of death. Andros was a man of high character, well suited by nature

and experience to carry out the policy of his master,—the policy

skilfully inaugurated by Nicolls and loyally pursued by Lovelace,—the

institution of an autocratic government of the most arbitrary nature in

form, but of extreme mildness in practice; one which, insuring peace

and happiness to the subject, would best contribute to the authority

and revenue of the master. Colonization was encouraged, the customs

burdens lightened, the laws equally administered, and freedom of

conscience secured. Although the Duke of York, in his refusal to take

the test oath prescribed by the Act of 1673, had proclaimed himself an

adherent of the Church of Rome, and Brockholls was a professed Papist,

and neither master nor servant could hold office in England under that

Act, and although the British American colonies were not within its

provisions, yet it does not appear that any effort was made by the

Church of Rome to exercise its religion under the guarantee of the

King and of the Duke. There were doubtless few of that faith in the

Protestant colony of New York to claim the privilege. It was left to

the wise men who laid the foundations of the Empire State in 1777 to

put in practice the freedom of religion _to all_, which, strangely

enough, was first guaranteed in word by the Catholic prince.

The new patent of 1674 restored to the Duke his full authority over

the entire domain covered by the original grant, and brought New

Jersey again within his rule; yet he was persuaded to divest himself

of this proprietorship by a new release to Carteret. No grant of power

to govern being named in either the first or the second instrument,

this authority was held as reserved by the Duke. The cession was

nevertheless of extreme and lasting injury to the New York province,

as it impaired its control over the west bank of the mouth of the

Hudson and the waters of the bay. On the other hand, the Duke’s title

to Long Island and Pemaquid was strengthened by a release obtained

from Lord Stirling; and the assumption of Connecticut to govern the

eastern towns in the former territory was summarily disposed of. The

Duke’s authority in Pemaquid, Martha’s Vineyard, and Nantucket, though

disturbed by some of the inhabitants who sought to bring them under the

government of Massachusetts, had been maintained during the period of

Colve’s administration. They had not been named in the commission of

the Dutch commanders to Colve. The claim of Connecticut to the strip of

land between the Mamaroneck line and the Hudson River was disallowed

by the Duke, and possession of the territory entered by Connecticut

was demanded by Andros. Connecticut held to the letter of her

charter; Andros to the letters-patent of the King. The rising of the

Narragansett tribes under King Philip afforded Andros an opportunity to

assert the Duke’s authority. Sailing with three sloops and a body of

soldiers, he landed at Saybrook, and read the Duke’s patent and his own

commission. The Connecticut officers replied by reading the protest of

the Hartford authorities. It is reasonable to suppose that had Andros

found the Saybrook fort unoccupied, he would have put in a garrison to

protect from the Indians the territory which he claimed to be within

his commission. Had he intended a surprise, he would not have given

notice to Winthrop that the object of his journey was “the Connecticut

River, his Royal Highness’s bounds there.” Neither Andros nor the

Connecticut authorities desired an armed collision. Andros, content

with the assertion of his claim, crossed the Sound, despatched aid to

his dependencies of Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket, and returned,

after reviewing the militia and disarming the Indians. The course of

Andros was approved by the Duke, who, while insisting on his claim

to all the territory west of the Connecticut River, ordered that the

distance of twenty miles from the Hudson be observed for the dividing

line.

The northern frontier was also watched with jealous solicitude. The

increase of French influence through their missionaries now became the

occasion of an English policy of far-reaching significance,—a policy

felt throughout the American Revolution and in the later contest of

the States of the Union for Western territory. The friendship of the

Mohawks, the only tribe which did not acknowledge French supremacy, was

encouraged. Andros personally visited the stronghold of the Mohawks,

and on his return to Albany confirmed a close alliance with the

Iroquois and organized a board of Indian Commissioners. This sagacious

plan served in the future as an effectual check to the encroachments of

the French. The ministers of Louis XIV. were quick to feel the blow,

and in 1677 the counter claim was set up that the reception of the

Jesuit missionaries had given sovereignty to France over the Iroquois.

The future contest which was to shake the two continents was already

foreshadowed. The same year the supremacy of New York over the Iroquois

was tacitly admitted by Massachusetts in the treaty made with them

“under the advice” of Andros.

In the details of his administration Andros showed the same firmness.

The old contraband trade with the Dutch was arrested; no European goods

were admitted from any port that had not paid duties in England. This

strict enforcement of the Navigation Laws diminished the coastwise

trade with Massachusetts and promoted a direct intercourse with

England, which gradually brought the province into close relation with

the English commercial towns. Social and political alliance was the

natural result, and New York grew gradually to be the most English in

sentiment of the American colonies, notwithstanding the cosmopolitan

character of her population.

Increasing commerce requiring greater accommodation, a great mole or

dock was built on the East River, which afforded protection to vessels

in the rapid tide, and for a long period was the centre of the traffic

of the city of New York. The answer of Governor Andros to the inquiries

of the Council of Plantations as to the condition of the province

gives the best existing account of it in 1678. The following are the

principal points:—

“Boundaries,—South, the Sea; West, Delaware; North, to ye Lakes or

ffrench; East, Connecticut river, but most usurped and yett posse’d by

s’d Connecticut. Some Islands Eastward and a Tract beyond Kennebeck

River called Pemaquid.... Principall places of Trade are New Yorke

and South’ton except Albany for the Indyans; our buildings most wood,

some lately stone and brick; good country houses, and strong of their

severall kindes. About twenty-four towns, villages, or parishes in

six precincts, divisions, Rydeings, or Courts of Sessions. Produce is

land provisions of all sorts, as of wheate exported yearly about sixty

thousand bushells, pease, beefe, pork, and some Refuse fish, Tobacco,

beavers’ peltry or furs from the Indians, Deale and oake timber,

plankes, pipestavves, lumber, horses, and pitch and tarr lately begunn

to be made. Comodityes imported are all sorts of English manufacture

for Christians, and blanketts, Duffells, etc., for Indians, about

50,000 pounds yearly. Pemaquid affords merchantable fish and masts.

Our merchants are not many, but most inhabitants and planters, about

two thousand able to beare armes, old inhabitants of the place or of

England, Except in and neere New Yorke of Dutch Extraction, and some

few of all nations, but few serv’ts much wanted, and but very few

slaves. A merchant worth one thousand pounds or five hundred pounds

is accompted a good substantiall merchant, and a planter worthe half

that in moveables accompted [rich?]. With all the Estates may be

valued at about £150,000. There may lately have trade to ye Colony

in a yeare from ten to fifteen ships or vessels, of which togeather

100 tunns each, English, New England, and our own built, of which

5 small ships and a Ketch now belonging to New York, four of them

built there. No privateers on the coast. Religions of all sorts,—one

Church of England, several Presbyterians and Independents, Quakers

and Anabaptists of severall sects, some Jews, but Presbyterians

and Independents most numerous and substantial. There are about 20

churches or meeting-places, of which about half vacant. Noe beggars,

but all poor cared for.”

In 1678, the affairs of the province being everywhere in order, Andros

availed himself of the permission given him by the Duke to pay a

visit to England. He sailed from New York on the 12th of November,

leaving Brockholls to administer the government in his absence, with

the commission of commander-in-chief. On reaching London Andros was

knighted by the King. His administration was examined into by the

Privy Council and approved. In May he sailed for New York with the new

commission of vice-admiral throughout the government of the Duke of

York. He found the province in the same quiet as when he left it.

The marriage of William of Orange with Mary, daughter of the Duke of

York and heiress to the throne of England, in the autumn of 1677,

was of happy augury to the New York colony. It gave earnest of a

restoration of the natural alliance of the Protestant powers against

France, the common enemy. To the Dutch of New York it was peculiarly

grateful, allaying the last remains of the bitterness of submission to

alien rule. Andros wisely promoted this good feeling by interesting

himself in the formal establishment of their religion. Under his

direction a classis of the Reformed Church of Holland met in New York

for purposes of ordination, and its proceedings were approved by the

supreme ecclesiastical authority at Amsterdam. New points in law were

now decided and settled; strikes or combinations to raise the price of

labor were declared illegal; all Indians were declared to be free.

But Andros was on occasion as energetic and determined as he was

prudent and moderate. He dallied with no invasion of his master’s

rights or privileges, as he evinced when, in 1680, he arrested Carteret

in New Jersey and dragged him to trial[696] for having presumed to

exercise jurisdiction and collect duties within the limits of the

Duke’s patent.

The position of the Duke of York now became daily more difficult,

indeed almost untenable in his increasing divergence from the policy of

the kingdom. The elements of that personal opposition which was later

to drive him from the throne were rapidly concentrating. His adherents

and those who favored a Protestant succession were forming the historic

parties of Tories and of Whigs. To avoid angry controversy the Duke

ordered the question of his right to collect customs dues in New Jersey

to be submitted to Sir William Jones. Upon his adverse decision so far

as related to West Jersey, the Duke directed the necessary transfer

to be made; and when the widow of Carteret made complaint of his

dispossession from authority, the action of Andros was wholly disavowed

by the Duke, and his authority over East Jersey was relinquished in

the same form. Andros himself, against whom complaints of favoring the

Dutch trade had been made by his enemies, was ordered to return to

England, leaving Brockholls in charge of the government; at the same

time a special agent was sent over to examine into the administration.

[Illustration: SIR EDMUND ANDROS.

[Regarding this portrait, see _Memorial History of Boston_, ii.

5.—ED.]]

Conscious of the integrity of his service, Andros obeyed the summons

with alacrity, proclaimed the agent’s commission, called Brockholls

down from Albany to take charge of the government, and took ship for

England. The absence of his firm hand was soon felt. The term for the

levy of the customs rates under the Duke’s authority had expired just

before his sailing, and had not been renewed. Immediately after his

departure the merchants refused to pay duties, and the collector who

attempted the levy was held for high treason in the exercise of regal

authority without warrant. He pleaded his commission from the Duke,

and the case was referred to England. The resistance of the merchants

was stimulated by the free condition of the charter just granted to

Pennsylvania, which required that all laws should be assented to by

the freemen of the province, and that no taxes should be laid or

revenue raised except by provincial assembly. The Grand Jury of New

York presented the want of a provincial assembly as a grievance; a

petition was drafted to the Duke praying for a change in the form of

government, and calling for a governor, council, and assembly, the last

to be elected by the freeholders of the colony. On the arrival of the

Duke’s agent in London with his report upon the late administration,

Andros was examined by the Duke’s commissioners, whereupon he was

fully exonerated, his administration was complimented, and he was made

a gentleman of the King’s Privy Chamber. The Duke’s collector, after

waiting in vain for his prosecutors to appear, was discharged from

his bond, and soon after appointed surveyor-general of customs in the

American Plantations.

Notwithstanding his dislike to popular assemblies, the Duke of York

saw the need of some concession, and gave notice of his intention to

Brockholls. Thus by the accident of the non-renewal of the customs’

term, the people of New York were enabled, in the absence of the

governor, to assert the doctrine of no taxation without representation,

to which the Duke in his necessity was compelled to submit.

Great changes had taken place in the neighboring territory of New

Jersey, which the Duke had alienated from his original magnificent

domain, to its mutilation and lasting injury. Pennsylvania was formally

organized as a province, and Philadelphia was planned. East New Jersey

passed into the hands of twelve proprietors, who increased their number

by sale to twenty-four, selected a governor, summoned a legislature,

and organized the State.

While the English race, true to its instincts and traditions, was thus

organizing its settlements, bringing its population into homogeneity,

and preparing for a gradual but sure extension of its colonization from

a firm, well-ordered base, the more adventurous French were pushing

their voyages and posts along the lakes and down the Western streams,

until the discovery of the mouth of the Mississippi by La Salle

completed the chain and added to the nominal domain of the sovereign of

France the vast territory from the Illinois to the Gulf of Mexico, to

which he gave the name of Louisiana.

* * * * *

The governor selected by the Duke of York to succeed Andros and to

inaugurate the new order of government in his province was Colonel

Thomas Dongan, an Irish officer who had commanded a regiment in the

French service. Though a Roman Catholic, an Irishman, and a soldier, he

proved himself an excellent and prudent magistrate. The instructions

of the Duke required the appointment of a council of ten eminent

citizens and the issue of writs for a general assembly, not to exceed

eighteen, to consult with the Governor and Council with regard to the

laws to be established, such laws to be subject to his approval,—the

general tenor of laws as to life and property to be in conformity with

the common law of England. No duties were to be levied except by the

Assembly. No allusion was made to religion. No more democratic form of

government existed in America, or was possible under kingly authority.

[Illustration]

Dongan reached the city of New York, Aug. 28, 1683, and assumed the

government. Installing his secretary and providing occupation for

Brockholls, he summoned an assembly, and then hastened to Albany to

check the attempt of Penn to extend the bounds of the territory of

Pennsylvania by a purchase of the valley of the Upper Susquehanna

from the Iroquois, who claimed the country by right of conquest from

the Andastes. In this Dongan was successful; the Cayugas settling the

question by a formal conveyance of the coveted territory to the New

York Government, a cession which was later confirmed by the Mohawks.

At the same time this tribe was instructed as to their behavior toward

the French. The claim of New York to all the land on the south side of

the lake was again renewed and assented to by the Mohawks. The astute

Iroquois already recognized that only through the friendship of the

English could their independence be maintained.

The New York Assembly met in October. Its first act bore the title of

“The Charter of Liberties and Privileges granted by his Royal Highness

to the Inhabitants of New York and its dependencies.” The supreme

legislative authority, under the King and the Duke, was vested in

a governor, council, and “the people met in general assembly;” the

sessions, triennial as in England; franchise, free to every freeholder;

the law, that of England in its most liberal provisions; freedom of

conscience and religion to all peaceable persons “which profess faith

in God by Jesus Christ.” In the words of the petition of right of 1628,

no tax or imposition was to be laid except by act of Assembly,—in

consideration of which privileges the Assembly was to grant the Duke

or his heirs certain specified impost duties. The province was divided

into twelve counties. Four tribunals of justice were established;

namely, town courts with monthly sessions for the trial of petty cases;

county or courts of sessions; a general court of oyer and terminer,

to meet twice in each year; and a court of chancery or supreme court

of the province, composed of the Governor and Council. An appeal to

the King was reserved in every case. In addition to these there was

a clause unusual in American statutes, naturalizing the foreign born

residents and those who should come to reside within the limits of

the province, which had already assumed the cosmopolitan character

which has never since ceased to mark the city of New York. The liberal

provisions of the statute gave security to all, and invited immigration

from Europe, where religious intoleration was again unsettling the

bases of society. It was not until the 4th of October, 1684, that

the Duke signed and sealed the amended instrument, “The Charter of

Franchises and Privileges to New Yorke in America,” and ordered it to

be registered and sent across sea.

Connecticut making complaint of the extension of New York law over the

territory within the contested boundary lines, Dongan brought the long

dispute to a summary close by giving notice to the Hartford authorities

that unless they withdrew their claims to territory within twenty miles

of the Hudson he should renew the old New York claim to the Connecticut

River as the eastern limit of the Duke’s patent, and refer the subject

directly to his Highness. In reply to an invitation from Dongan,

commissioners proceeded from Hartford to New York, who abandoned the

pretensions set up, and accepted the line proposed by Dongan, thus

finally closing the controversy.

The city of New York was now divided into six wards, certain

jurisdiction conferred upon its officers, and a recorder was appointed.

Dongan with the vision of a statesman recognized the value of the

friendship of the Indians. The Iroquois tribes he described as the

bulwark of New York against Canada. The policy of the Duke’s governors

from the time of Nicolls was unchanged. It consisted in a claim to all

the territory south and southwest of the Lake of Canada (Ontario), and

the confining of the French to the territory to the northward by the

help of Indian allies. The French officers by negotiation and threat

endeavored first to impose their authority on the several tribes of the

Iroquois confederacy, and failing in this to divide them. But Dongan,

carefully observing their manœuvres, obtained from a council of chiefs

a written submission to the King of England, which was recorded on

two white dressed deer-skins. The presence on the occasion at Albany

of Lord Howard of Effingham, the Governor of Virginia, added greatly

in the eyes of the Indians to this solemn engagement. Four nations

bound themselves to the covenant, and asked that the arms of the Duke

of York should be put upon their castles; and Dongan gave notice of

the same to the Canadian Government, in witness that they were within

his jurisdiction and under his protection. But in this submission

the Indians recognized no subjection. The Iroquois still claimed his

perfect freedom.

The claim of Massachusetts to territory westward of the Hudson was

another perplexing element in the Indian question. In answer to a

renewal of this demand, Dongan set up his claim as the Duke’s governor

to jurisdiction over the towns which Massachusetts had organized on

land covered by the Duke’s patent on the west side of the Connecticut

River; but the matter being soon disposed of by the cancelling, for

various offences, of the Massachusetts patent by the King, through

the operation of a writ of _quo warranto_, the Duke had no further

contestant to his claims. The New Jersey boundary was also matter of

dispute, but Dongan, at first of his own motion, and later by specific

instruction from the Duke, took care to prevent Penn from acquiring any

part of New Jersey or from interfering with the Indian trade.

The controversy with Canada as to the country south of the St. Lawrence

and Lake Ontario now drew to a head. Dongan clung persistently to

the claim asserted by Andros in 1677. Against this the Canadians set

up the sovereignty of France, acquired by war and treaties and the

planting of missionaries among the tribes. The question turned upon

the independence of the Iroquois, parts of which tribes had never

made submission, or had repudiated the interpretation set upon their

engagements. The new French governor, De la Barre, made ineffectual

menace, but not supporting his threat with arms, lost the respect

of the savages. The prestige of the English was increased, and the

coveted trade passed into their hands to such an extent that in 1684

the Senecas alone brought into Albany more than ten thousand beaver

skins. Nor was Denonville, who succeeded De la Barre in the government

of Canada, more fortunate in enforcing his policy. His wily effort to

engage the sympathies of his co-religionist Dongan in a support of

the French missionaries among the tribes, was foiled by the New York

governor, who at the same time secured the approbation of his Roman

Catholic master by proposing to replace them with English priests.

* * * * *

The death of Charles II., early in the year 1685, and the accession

to the throne of the Duke of York as James II., were of momentous

influence upon European politics. They at once changed the political

position of New York. The condition of proprietorship or nominal

duchy altered with that of its master and proprietor. The Duke became

a King; the duchy a royal province. The change involved a change in

the New York charter, and afforded opportunity for a reconsideration

and rejection of the entire instrument. The words “the people” were

particularly objected to by the new King as unusual. The revocation of

the Massachusetts charter by the late King, the government of which

colony had not yet been settled, presented a favorable occasion for

an assimilation of all the constitutions of the American colonies as

preliminary to that consolidation of government and power at which

James aimed as his ideal of government. Nevertheless the existing New

York charter remained,—not confirmed, not repealed, but continued. The

Scotch risings and the Monmouth rebellion interfered with any immediate

action by the Government in American affairs. Yet the New York province

hailed with joy the accession of their Duke and Lord proprietor to the

throne. His rule had been just and temperate; his agents prudent and

discreet. The immediate Governor, Dongan, was thoroughly identified

with the interests of the province confided to his care, and aimed to

make of its capital the centre of English influence in America. In

1686 the city received a new charter, with a grant of all the vacant

land in and about the city. Albany, also, under an arrangement with the

landed proprietors, was incorporated and intrusted with the management

of the Indian trade. The suppression of the Monmouth rebellion enabling

James to turn his attention to America, he directed proceedings to

be instituted in the English courts to cancel the charters of the

Connecticut, Rhode Island, West Jersey, and Delaware colonies. In the

interim a temporary government was established for Massachusetts,

Plymouth, Maine, and New Hampshire, in accordance with the order of

Charles made in 1684. A board of councillors was appointed, of whom

Joseph Dudley was named president.

Weary of the trouble and expense of maintaining authority in

distant Pemaquid, Dongan urged the King to annex this dependency to

Massachusetts, and to add Connecticut to New York. Dudley pleaded the

claim of Massachusetts with the Connecticut authorities. They held

an even balance between the two demands, however, and resolved to

maintain the autonomy of the colony, if possible, against either the

machinations of her neighbors or the warrant of the King.

It has been seen that as Duke of York the policy of James in the

government of his American province was, with the exception of

the weakness shown in the case of Carteret and New Jersey, the

consolidation of power. His accession to the throne enabled him to

carry out this policy on a broader field. He determined to put an end

to the temporary charge by commissioners of the New England colonies,

and to unite them all under one government, the better to defend

themselves against invasion. The assigned reason was the policy of

aggression of the French on the frontiers. The person selected for the

delicate duty of harmonizing the colonies into one province was Sir

Edmund Andros, who, as the Duke’s deputy, had first suggested that a

strong royal government should be established in New England, and of

whose character and administrative abilities there was no question.

He was accordingly commissioned by the King “Captain-General and

Governor-in-Chief over his territory and dominions of New England in

America.” By the terms of his instructions, liberty of conscience was

granted to all, countenance promised to the Church of England, and

power conferred on the Assembly to make laws and levy taxes. Pemaquid

was annexed to the new government.

To assimilate the New York government to that of the new dominion a

new commission was issued to Dongan as King’s captain-general and

governor-in-chief over the province of New York. The charter of

liberties and privileges recently signed was repealed; the existing

laws, however, were to continue in force until others should be framed

and promulgated by the Governor and Council. The liberty of conscience

granted in 1674 and limited in 1683 to Christians, was now extended

to all persons without restriction. A censorship of the press was

established. The trade of the Hudson River was to be kept free from

intrusion by any.

While the King was thus strengthening his power and gathering into

one grasp the entire force of the colonies, his ministers allowed

themselves to be outwitted by the French in negotiation. A treaty

of neutrality inspired by France engaged non-interference by either

Government in the wars of the other against the savage tribes in

America, and struck a severe blow at the policy of the New York

governors. The announcement of the treaty was accompanied by the

arrival of reinforcements in Canada and the organization of an

expedition against the Iroquois. The treacherous seizure and despatch

to France of a number of chiefs, who had been invited to a conference

at Quebec, opened the campaign, at once ended the French missions among

the Five Nations, and consolidated their alliance with the English.

The expedition of Denonville was partially successful. The Seneca

country was occupied, sovereignty proclaimed, and a fort built on the

old site of La Salle’s Fort de Conty. But the power of the Iroquois

was not touched. Hampered by his instructions, Dongan could only lay

the situation before the King and suggest a comprehensive plan for the

fortification of the country and assistance of the friendly tribes.

Alarmed at the news from the frontier, he resolved to winter in Albany,

and ordered the Five Nations to send their old women and children to

Catskill, where they could be protected and cared for. A draft was

also made of every tenth militia man to strengthen the Albany post.

Denonville, despairing of conquering the fierce Iroquois, though they

were supported only by the tacit aid of the English, now urged upon

Louis XIV. the acquisition of the coveted territory by exchange or by

purchase, even of the entire province of New York, with the harbor of

the city.

Dongan’s messenger to James easily satisfied the King that the treaty

of neutrality was not for the interest of England, and that if the

independence of the Five Nations were not maintained, the sovereignty

over them must be English. Orders were sent to Dongan to defend and

protect them, and to Andros and the other governors to give them

aid. To the complaints of Louis, James opposed the submission made

at Albany in 1684 by the chiefs in the presence of the Governor of

Virginia. As a compromise between the Governments it was agreed

by treaty that until January, 1689, no act of hostility should be

committed or either territory invaded. The warlike defensive operations

against the French put the New York Government to extraordinary

charges, amounting to more than £8,000, to which the neighboring

colonies were invited to contribute under authority of the King’s

letter of November, 1687. The occasion to urge the importance of New

York as the bulwark of the colonies, and of strengthening her by the

annexation of Connecticut and New Jersey, was not forgotten by the

sagacious Dongan. Now that the Dutch pretension to rule in America was

definitively set at rest, it was evident to statesmen that a struggle

for the American continent would sooner or later arise between the

powers of France and England,—indeed the rivalry had already begun.

To James, who thoroughly understood the practice as well as the theory

of administration, and was as diligent in his cabinet as any of his

ministers, it was equally evident that the consolidated power of New

France in the single hand of a viceroy was more serviceable than the

discordant action of provinces so much at variance with each other

in principle and feeling as the American colonies. To the viceregal

government of New France he resolved to oppose a viceregal government

of British America. To New England he now determined to annex New York.

Dongan was recalled, gratified with military promotion and personal

honor, and Sir Edmund Andros was commissioned governor-general of the

entire territory. His commission gave him authority over

“All that tract of land, circuit, continent, precincts, and limits

in America lying and being in breadth from forty degrees of northern

latitude from the equinoctial line to the River St. Croix eastward,

and from thence directly northward to the River of Canada, and in

length and longitude by all the breadth aforesaid throughout the main

land, from the Atlantic or Western Sea or Ocean on the east part to

the South Sea on the west part, with all the islands, seas, rivers,

waters, rights, members, and appurtenances thereunto belonging (our

province of Pennsylvania and country of Delaware only excepted), to be

called and known, as formerly, by the name and title of our territory

and dominion of New England in America.”

On the 11th of August, 1688, Andros assumed his viceregal authority

at Fort James in New York. A few days later the news arrived of the

birth of a son to King James. A proclamation of the viceroy ordered

a day of thanksgiving to be observed within the city of New York and

dependencies. Thus New York was formally recognized as the metropolis

and the seat of government in the Dominion of New England. By the

King’s instructions the seal of New York was broken in council, and the

great seal of New England thereafter used.

The Governor of Canada was notified that the Five Nations were the

subjects of the King of England, and would be protected as such. The

new governor visited Albany, and held a conference with the delegates

from the Five Nations, and renewed the old covenant of Corlaer. The

Indians showing signs of restlessness all along the frontier as far as

Casco Bay, the viceroy endeavored to settle the difficulties between

Canada and the New York tribes, and engaged his good offices to secure

the return of the prisoners from France. On his return to Boston

Andros left the affairs of the New York government in the charge of

Nicholson. Dongan retired to his farm at Hempstead on Long Island.

Though peaceful, the new dominion was not at rest. The liberty of

conscience declared by the King was not precisely that which each

dissenting denomination desired. Gradually men of each grew to believe

that James was indifferent to all religions that were not of the true

faith; and regarding the simple manner in which by legal form he had

stripped them of their chartered rights, began to fear that by an act

as legal he might strip them of their liberty of worship. The test Act

which he had refused to obey, to the loss of his dignities and honors

as Duke, might be altered to the ruin of its authors. A Roman Catholic

test might take the place of the Protestant form. The King reigned, and

a son was born to him, who doubtless would be educated in the papist

faith of the Stuarts. William of Orange was only near the throne.

[Illustration: GREAT SEAL OF ANDROS.

[See authorities in _Memorial History of Boston_, ii. 9.—ED.]]

While the colonies were thus agitated, a spirit of quiet resistance was

spreading in England, where alarm was great at the arbitrary manner

in which charters were stricken down. Property was threatened. In the

American colonies the agitation was chiefly religious. Among their

inhabitants were Huguenot families whom the revocation of the Edict of

Nantes in 1685 had ruthlessly driven from their homes to a shelter on

the distant continent. The crisis was at hand. Strangely enough, it

was precipitated by the declaration of liberty of conscience and the

abrogation of the test oath against Dissenters which King James had

commissioned Andros to proclaim in America. This liberty of conscience

included liberty to Catholics, which the Protestants would have none

of. The abrogation of the test oath opened the way to preferment and

honor to Catholics, which the Protestants were equally averse to.

Ordered to read the proclamation in the churches, seven bishops,

headed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, refused to obey the command.

The prelates were committed, tried, and acquitted. Encouraged by this

victory, the great Whig houses of England now addressed an invitation

to William of Orange, who was already, with naval and military force,

secretly prepared to cross the sea. On the 5th of November the great

Stadtholder landed on the shores of Devon, and proclaimed himself the

maintainer of English liberties. Thus a declaration of liberty of

conscience brought about the fall of a Catholic king. The news caused

great excitement in the colonies.

[Illustration]

Andros, who had but lately returned to Boston from an expedition to

the northeastern frontier of Maine, where he had established posts for

protection against the tribes who were threatening a second Indian

war, was seized and imprisoned by a popular uprising. In New York the

agitation was as intense. Nicholson, the lieutenant-governor, unequal

to the emergency, let slip the grasp of power from his hand; and on

the open revolt of Leisler, one of the militia captains, who seized

the fort, he determined to sail for England, and the control of the

province passed to a committee of safety. The revolt of Leisler forms

the opening of a new chapter in the story of the New York province.

CRITICAL ESSAY ON THE SOURCES OF INFORMATION.

THERE are several comprehensive general histories of what is now the

State of New York. The first edition[697] of Smith’s History was

dedicated to the Earl of Halifax, First Lord Commissioner of Trade and

Plantations. The dedication bears date New York, June 15, 1756. It is

illustrated with a folding frontispiece plate, entitled “The South View

of Oswego on Lake Ontario.” In his Preface the author states that his

researches while engaged under appointment of the New York Assembly in

a review and digest of the laws of the province, a work in which he was

associated with William Livingston, induced the preparation of this

the first History of the colony. He excuses himself from an attention

to details, which he considered would not interest the British public,

and declares his purpose to confine himself to a “summary account of

the first rise and present state” of the colony. He presents it as a

“narrative or thread of simple facts,” rather than as a history.

A second edition of this work appeared at London in 1776, from the

press of J. Almon. It is a reprint in an octavo volume of three hundred

and thirty-four pages. The troubles with the colonies and the important

position of New York as the headquarters of the British army no doubt

prompted this venture.

An American edition next appeared, in April, 1792, from the press of

Mathew Carey, at Philadelphia, in an octavo volume of two hundred and

seventy-six pages. It was announced “to the citizens of the United

States as the first part of a plan undertaken at the desire of several

gentlemen of taste, who wish to supply their libraries with histories

of their native country.” The titlepage describes it as “The Second

Edition,” Almon’s reprint having been ignored by Carey. The copy in

the Library of the New York Historical Society is illustrated with a

“Frontispiece View of Columbia College, in the City of New York,” from

the plate originally engraved for the _New York Magazine_ of 1790.

Another edition appeared at Albany, from the press of Ryer

Schermerhorn, in 1814, an octavo volume of five hundred and twelve

pages. The anonymous editor, supposed to have been Mr. J. V. N. Yates,

states in his Advertisement, that in “copying Smith’s History few

deviations from his mode of spelling the names of places, particularly

such as are derived from the aboriginal tongues, have been made. It is

believed that he [Smith] adopted the mode of spelling which conveyed

most clearly the sound of Indian words.” Mr. Yates intended to add a

“Continuation from the year 1732 to the commencement of the year 1814,”

but these additions stopped at 1747.

A French translation of Smith’s History, by M. Eidous, appeared in

Paris in 1767, and bears the imprint “Londres.” It is a duodecimo of

four hundred and fifteen pages.

Smith, the historian, who died Chief-Justice of Canada, left behind him

a continuation of his _History of New York_, written by his own hand.

It covers the period from 1732 to 1762. This interesting manuscript

was communicated to the New York Historical Society in 1824 by William

Smith, son of the author, then a distinguished member of the King’s

Council in Canada, and also well known as the author of the History

of that province. In his note to the Society, Mr. Smith states that

“the Continuation of the History is as it was left by the author,

with only a few verbal alterations and corrections.” The manuscript

appeared in print for the first time in 1826, as the fourth volume of

the _Collections_ of the New York Historical Society, an octavo of

three hundred and eight pages. Copies of Smith’s original volume having

become rare, the Society determined to reprint it from the author’s

corrected and revised copy in a form similar to that in which they had

published the Continuation, and in 1829 the work appeared complete

for the first time. It was accompanied by a memoir of the author,

written by his son. In making up sets of the Society’s _Collections_,

the complete work is generally bound as vols. iv. and v. of the first

series.

The next year, 1830, the Society issued a second edition of the

complete work: also an octavo in two volumes, but printed in larger

type and on better paper. This edition bears the press-mark of

“Gratton, Printer.” Interesting sketches of the historian, with notices

of his family, prepared by Mr. Maturin L. Delafield, appeared in the

_Magazine of American History_, April and June, 1881. A small edition

was struck off for Mr. Delafield for private distribution, illustrated

with portraits.

Several criticisms on Smith’s History have appeared in print: “Remarks

on Smith’s History of New York, London Edition, 1757, in Letters

to John Pintard, Secretary of the New York Historical Society, by

Judge Samuel Jones,” written in 1817 and 1818, were printed in the

_Collections_ of the New York Historical Society, vol. iii., 1821;

“Correspondence between Lieutenant-Governor Cadwallader Colden and

William Smith, Jr., the Historian, respecting certain alleged Errors

and Misstatements contained in the _History of New York_, with sundry

other Papers relating to that Controversy,” printed in the _N. Y.

Hist. Soc. Coll._ (second series, vol. ii., 1849); “Letters on Smith’s

History of New York, by Cadwallader Colden,” printed in the _N. Y.

Hist. Soc. Coll._ (Fund series), in 1868; “Letter of Cadwallader Colden

on Smith’s History, July 5th, 1759,” _N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll._ (Fund

series), 1869.

The late Hon. Benjamin F. Butler, of New York, in an able discourse

before the Albany Institute, April, 1830, gives a fair and impartial

estimate of the value of Smith’s History. He notices the incomplete and

summary manner in which the earlier period was disposed of and ascribes

it to the insufficient information within the reach of the author

and his want of acquaintance with the Dutch language, in which the

ancient records of the colony were written.[698] The posthumous work

he condemns as “written in the spirit of a partisan,” and therefore to

be received with caution, if not distrust. Yet he freely acknowledges

the deep indebtedness of the State and of the friends of learning for

the mass of authentic information discovered by him. With this judgment

scholars generally concur. In reading the pages of this the first of

the historians of New York, it must be borne in mind that Smith was one

of the leaders of the Dissenting element in the New York colony, and at

a time when religious partisanship was at its height.[699]

The second general history of New York was that of Macauley.[700]

Its first volume treats “of the extent of the State, its mountains,

hills, champaigns, plains, vales, valleys, marshes, rivers, creeks,

lakes, seas, bays, springs, cataracts, and canals; its climate, winds,

zoology,” etc. The second, “of the counties, cities, towns, and

villages; antiquities of the west; origin of the Agoneaseah, their

manners, customs, laws, and other matters; discovery of America;

voyages of Cabot and Hudson; settlements of the New Netherlands by the

Dutch in 1614; location of the Indian tribes; controversies between the

Dutch and English; surrender in 1664, and thence to 1750.” The third

volume covers “the war between England and France for the conquest of

Canada, the war of the Revolution, and other matters which occurred,

etc.” The leaning of the author is, as these words imply, essentially

towards the physical features of the State. He himself calls it a

compendium, or abridged history. The reader will find little original

matter of an historical nature.[701]

The author of the next general history of the State[702] is well known

as the historian of the American Theatre and of the Arts of Design in

America, both commendable works. With the taste of an antiquary, Mr.

Dunlap has gathered some curious details; but _The History of the New

Netherlands_, etc., has little merit as historical authority. The first

volume passed through the press during the fatal illness of the author;

the second was supervised by a friend who apologized for his want of

“intimacy with the subject.” It appeared after the author’s death.

The main value of the work consists in the abstracts published as an

appendix to the second volume.[703]

A much more thorough work followed, a dozen years later, when Mr.

Brodhead began his History.[704] Its two volumes comprise all the

known information concerning the period they cover, up to the time

of publication. Mr. Brodhead by birth and education was eminently

qualified for his ponderous task. He united in his blood the English

and Dutch strains; on the father’s side being descended from one of

the English officers, who came out with Nicolls at the time of the

conquest. A lawyer by profession, he was attached to the legation at

the Hague, and was commissioned by the State of New York to procure

original materials relating to its early history. In this labor he

spent three years in the archives of England, Holland, and France. At

his death he left manuscript material for a third volume, which it is

the hope of students may yet be made accessible. He divides his work

into four marked periods: The first, from the discovery, in 1609, to

its conquest by the English in 1664; the second carries the story

down to 1691. The treatment is of the most exhaustive character, and

the work is a monument of literary industry and careful execution.

The authorities are in all cases given in foot-notes. The sympathies

of the author are plainly with Holland in the original struggle, and

later with New York in her occasional antagonism to the influence of

New England. While the reader may sometimes smile at his enthusiasm and

differ from his opinions, he will find no occasion to quarrel with

his candor. The tendency of his mind will be found legal rather than

judicial. His chief merit is his admirable co-ordination of an immense

mass of material, covering a vast circuit of investigation.[705]

[Illustration]

EDITORIAL NOTES.

=A.= SPECIFIC AUTHORITIES.—More particular mention of such sources as

pertain jointly to the Dutch and English rule in New York is made in

Mr. Fernow’s chapter on “New Netherland,” in Vol. IV.

Chalmers’ _Political Annals of the Present United Provinces_ reviews

the English rule; but Brodhead (i. 62) considers that Chalmers’s

treatment is biased, and grossly misrepresents the facts.

The documents in Hazard’s _Historical Collections of State Papers_

which relate to New York were reprinted in 1811 in the _N. Y. Hist.

Soc. Coll._, i. 189-303, and in the printed series published by the

State under the editing of Dr. O’Callaghan, an account of which can

better be made, unbroken between the Dutch and English portions, in

connection with Mr. Fernow’s chapter. Various papers of importance,

however, have appeared in the _Collections_ and _Proceedings_ of the

New York Historical Society, and others are in the _Manual of the City

of New York_, edited for thirty years, since 1841, successively by

Valentine and Shannon. The journals of the Council and Assembly of the

Colony of New York are rich in material.

Some original documents have appeared in connection with inquiries

into the history of the boundaries of the State: _Report to ascertain

and settle the Boundary Line between New York and Connecticut_, Feb.

8, 1861; _Report on the Boundaries of New York_, Albany, 1874; papers

of Dawson, Whitehead, etc., in _Historical Magazine_, xviii. 25, 82,

146, 211, 267, 321. Cf. also C. W. Bowen’s _Boundary Disputes of

Connecticut_, Boston, 1882, part iv.

At a commemoration of the English conquest of 1664, held by the New

York Historical Society in 1864, the oration was fitly made by Mr.

Brodhead. _Historical Magazine_, viii. 375. The first printed Dutch

report of the capture is given in the _Kort en bondigh Verhael_,

Amsterdam, 1667, p. 27; cf. Asher’s _Essay_, no. 354. The list of

those in New York city who took the oath, October, 1664, is given in

Valentine’s _Manual_, 1854. The patent of March 12, 1664, granted the

Duke of York, under whose authority the conquest was made, is given in

Brodhead’s _New York_, ii. 651; cf. also Learning and Spicer’s _Grants,

etc. of New Jersey_, p. 3, and _New York Colonial Documents_, ii. 295.

Charles E. Anthon, in the _Magazine of American History_, September,

1882, urges that a commemorative sculpture be placed in Central Park,

to preserve the memory of the royal Duke whose twin titles of York and

Albany are borne by the two chief cities of the State.

The Clarendon Papers, 1662-67, covering this early period of the

English rule, are in the _N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll._ (Fund series), vol.

ii. The important code known as the Duke’s Laws are also in the same

Society’s _Collections_. Mr. O. H. Marshall examines the charters of

1664 and 1674 in the _Magazine of American History_, viii. 24.

A few of the letters of Nicolls and Lovelace to the Secretary of State,

dated prior to 1674, are in the London State-Paper Office, but not till

that year does the regular record seem to begin. Brodhead, ii. 261.

[Illustration]

Of Thomas Willett, the first English mayor of the town, Brodhead gives

the best account, in his _History of New York_, ii. 76, which may be

supplemented by the account of his family given in the _N. E. Hist.

and Geneal. Reg._, ii. 376; xvii. 244. Cf. also Dr. John F. Jameson

on the origin and development of municipal government in New York

city, in _Magazine of American History_, 1882. The _Manual_ published

successively by Valentine and Shannon preserves much information

regarding the city’s history. Cf. General De Peyster on “New York and

its History,” in _International Review_, April, 1878, and Mrs. Lamb’s

_History of New York City_, and other local monographs, of which

further mention is made in the notes to Mr. Fernow’s chapter, in Vol.

IV.

The English occupation of New York was confirmed by the Treaty of

Breda, July 31, 1667. The original Latin and Dutch of its text appeared

at the Hague in 1667. (Muller, _Books on America_, 1872, p. 119;

Stevens, _Historical Collections_, vol. i. no. 31.) A contemporary

engraving of the signing is in the _Kort en bondigh Verhael_,

Amsterdam, 1667. (Stevens, no. 1079; Muller, _Books on America_, 1877,

nos. 1697, 2268.) There was a French edition published at Amsterdam in

1668. (_Recueil van de Tractaten_, Hague, 1684).

The Dutch bibliographies refer to scores of pamphlets launched

against Sir George Downing, the English diplomat who is charged with

instigating the war with England (1663-67), and not infrequently

assigning his animosity towards the Dutch to feelings engendered in his

early New England home, Downing being a nephew of Governor Winthrop,

and a graduate of Harvard College. (Sibley’s _Harvard Graduates_,

i. 28, with a list of authorities, p. 51, and the _Carter-Brown

Catalogue_, ii. 959, 975. Cf. on Downing’s agency, O’Callaghan’s _New

Netherland_, ii. 515; Palfrey’s _New England_; Brodhead’s _New York_

and his _Colonial Documents of New York_; and R. C. Winthrop’s paper in

5 _Mass. Hist. Coll._ vol. i.)

On the Dutch side, Aitzema’s _Historie van Saken van Staet en Oorlogh_,

1621-1668, Hague, 1657-1671, is a vast repository of documentary

evidence, vol. iv. covering Downing’s period, and vol. vi. giving the

negotiations of Breda. The best edition, with a supplement by Sylvius,

was published in eleven volumes in 1669-1699. (Muller, _Books on

America_, 1877, no. 47.) Sabin, _Dictionary_, v. 20,783, etc., gives

various titles of Downingiana, and a full list of Downing’s works is

given by Sibley, _Harvard Graduates_, i. 48. The Dutch also charged

upon Downing the initiative in “curbing the progress and reducing the

power” of their State through the Navigation Acts of 1651 and 1660; cf.

Upham, in _Hunt’s Merchants’ Magazine_, iv. 407.

The relations of the new English province with the French and Indians

are particularly illustrated in the papers relating to De Courcelles

and De Tracy’s expedition against the Mohawks (1665), published in

the _Documentary History of New York_, vol. i., where will also be

found the documents concerning Denonville’s expedition against the

Senecas and into the Genesee country in 1687. Cf. also the narrative of

Denonville with O. H. Marshall’s notes, in 2 _N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll._,

ii. 149. For the expedition against Schenectady, 1689-90, see _N. Y.

Hist. Soc. Proc._, 1846, p. 137; cf. _Historical Magazine_, xiii. 263,

by J. G. Shea. A further treatment of the French and Indian wars is

made in Vol. IV.

The Hon. Henry C. Murphy found in Holland the _Relation de sa Captivité

parmi les Onneiouts en 1690-91_, by Father Millet, the Jesuit,

and it was edited by Mr. Shea in New York in 1864. Field, _Indian

Bibliography_, no. 1063, says that with the narrative of Jogues it

gives us nearly all we know from personal observation of the Five

Nations at this time. Further references to the literature of the

aboriginal occupation will be given in Mr. Fernow’s chapter.

Regarding the seals of the province, see _Documentary History of New

York_, vol. iv., for various engravings. (Cf. _Historical Magazine_,

ix. 177, and Valentine’s _Manual_, 1851.) Reports on the Province,

1668-1678, are in the _Documentary History of New York_, vol. i.;

and in vol. iii. the papers on Manning’s surrender in 1673, and the

subsequent restoration.

Of the Catholic Governor Dongan there are special treatments by R. H.

Clarke in the _Catholic World_, ix. 767, and by P. F. Dealy, S. J., in

_Magazine of American History_, February, 1882, p. 106. Dongan’s report

on the state of the province, 1687, is in the _Documentary History of

New York_, vol. i. A view of his house is given in Lamb’s _New York_,

i. 326.

Upon Andros’s rule, compare the general historians, and _Memorial

History of Boston_, vol. ii. chap. 1.

Something will be said of the more specific local histories, covering

both the Dutch and English periods, in connection with Mr. Fernow’s

chapter in Vol. IV.

The news of the movements in the province, both under the Dutch and

English rule, as it reached Europe, is recorded in _De Hollandsche

Mercurius_, 1650-1690, a periodical. Cf. Asher’s _Essay_, p. 220;

Muller’s _Catalogue_ (1872), p. 104 (1877), no. 2,100; Sabin’s

_Dictionary_, viii. p. 378.

=B.= VIEWS, MAPS, AND DESCRIPTIONS OF NEW YORK AND THE PROVINCE UNDER

ENGLISH RULE.—_Views._ The earliest views of New Amsterdam date back

to the Dutch period, the first being that in the _Beschrijvinghe van

Virginia_, etc., 1651, of which a fac-simile is given on the title of

Asher’s _List of Maps_, Amsterdam, 1851, and in the _Popular History of

the United States_. The next appeared on the several maps issued by N.

J. Visscher, Van der Donck, Allard (first map), Nicolas Visscher (first

map), and Danckers. It is seen in the heliotype of Van der Donck’s

map given in Vol. IV., and in the engraving of the Visscher map, in

Asher’s _List_.[706] A view very like this is that given on p. 124 of

Arnoldus Montanus’s _De Nieuwe en Onbekende Weereld of Beschryving van

America_, a sumptuous folio printed at Amsterdam, 1671, and at present

variously priced from $5 to $20. Cf. _Carter-Brown Catalogue_, ii.

1,066, with fac-simile of title.

The same picture is reproduced in the later, 1673, edition of Montanus,

p. 143, and in Ogilby’s _America_, 1671, p. 171, where the description

also follows Montanus, with aid from Denton. (_Carter-Brown Catalogue_,

ii. 1,067, 1,092.) Montanus’s account is translated in the _Documentary

History of New York_, iv. 75, 116, with a fac-simile of the view in

question. Cf. also Gay’s _Popular History of the United States_, iii.

1, and the fac-simile issued, with descriptive notes, by J. W. Moulton

in 1825 as _New York One Hundred and Seventy Years Ago_; and Watson’s

_Olden Times in New York_, 1832.

The picture is also given in fac-simile in Mr. Lenox’s edition of

Jogues’s _Novum Belgium_, edited by J. G. Shea, and in _N. E. Hist.

and Geneal. Reg._, July, 1882, with a paper by J. R. Stanwood on the

settlement of New Netherland. Muller, of Amsterdam in one of his

catalogues, of recent years, offered for 250 marks a water-color

drawing made in 1650, which he claimed as the original sketch upon

which the engraver in Montanus worked. Muller, _Catalogue of American

Portraits_, etc., no. 305. This view is now in the New York Historical

Society’s Library. It is inscribed “In ‘t schip Lydia door Laurens

Harmen Z^n Block, A^o 1650.” There is no record of any ship of such

name arriving at New Amsterdam, and this together with certain changes

in the picture, as compared with Montanus, have led good judges to

suspect that it is a copy of that view, by one who was never in New

Amsterdam, rather than its original. The paper and frame are old, at

all events.

A view purporting to represent the town in 1667 is given in Valentine’s

_New York City Manual_, 1851, p. 131, and in his _History of New York

City_, p. 71.

The view of which an engraving is herewith given is from a map entitled

_Totius Neobelgii nova et accuratissima tabula, ... Typis Caroli

Allard, Amstelodami_.

[Illustration: NEW YORK, OR NEW AMSTERDAM, 1673.]

The reference-key to the view is as follows:—

A. Fort Orangiensche oft N. Albanische Jachten.

B. Vlagge-spil, daer de Vlag wordt opgehaelt, alsercomen

schepen in dese Haven.

C. Fort Amsterdam, genaemt Jeams-fort bij de Engelsche.

D. Gevangen-huijs.

E. Gereformeede Kerck.

F. Gouverneurs-Huijs.

G. ’t magazijn.

H. De Waeg.

I. Heeren-gracht.

K. Stadt huijs.

L. Luthersche Kerck.

M. Waterpoort.

N. Smidts-vallij.

O. Landtpoort.

P. Weg na ’tversche Water.

Q. Wint-molen.

R. Ronduijten.

S. Stuijvesants Huijs.

T. Oost-Rivier, lopende tusschen ’t Eijlandt Manhatans,

en Jorckshire, oft ‘t lange Eijlandt.

The view is inscribed: “Nieuw-Amsterdam, onlangs Nieuw jorck genamt,

ende hernomen bij de Nederlanders op den 24 Aug., 1673, eindelijk aan

de Engelse weder afgestaan.” It took the place of the engraved view,

already mentioned as appearing in the first edition of Allard’s map,

and was probably etched by Romeyn de Hooghe, a distinguished artist

of the day, when Hugo Allard retouched his old plate to produce an

engraved map to meet the interest raised by the recapture of the town.

It also did service in the later issues of the same plate by Carolus

Allard and the Ottens, and was reproduced in an inferior way by Lotter

on his map. See Asher’s _List of Maps and Views_, p. 20. A view of 1679

is given on a later page, with its history.

The annexed cut of the Strand follows a view in _The Manual of the

City of New York_, 1869, p. 738. The Central House, with three windows

in the roof, was the earliest brick house built in the town, and was

at one time the dwelling of Jacob Leisler, and had been built by his

father-in-law, Vanderveen; cf. the narrative in the _Manual_. It is

also engraved in Gay’s _Popular History of the United States_, iii. 14.

Other houses of this period are shown in the _Manual_, 1847, p. 371,

1858, p. 526, and 1862, p. 522; in Valentine’s _History of New York

City_, pp. 177, 214, 319; in Riker’s _Harlem_, p. 454 (Dutch Church of

1686), etc.

[Illustration: THE STRAND, NEW WHITEHALL STREET, NEW YORK.]

_Maps._ An account of the maps of the Dutch period is given in Vol.

IV. For the English period, the earliest of the town of New York was

probably that supposed to have been sent home by Nicoll (1664-68) after

his occupation, and of which a portion is herewith given.

Of about the same date is the original of the Hudson River Map (1666),

which will be found in the next volume. Then came the map of the

province by Nicolas Visscher, issued in the first edition of his _Atlas

Minor_ about 1670.[707] Not far from the same time (1671) appeared

the map which is common to Montanus’s _Nieuwe en Onbekende Weereld_

and to Ogilby’s great folio _America_, which shows the coast from

the Penobscot to the Chesapeake, and is entitled “Novi Belgii, etc.,

delineatio.” It closely resembles Jansson’s earlier map. The Allard map

of 1673, from which our engraved view is taken, was the second by that

cartographer of New Netherland, who retouched the plate of the earlier

one, which had been mainly a reproduction of N. J. Visscher’s, as the

later one of Schenk and Valch (1690) was. Asher says (nos. 13, 15, 16)

that Allard in this second map confined his additions to new names in

the Dutch regions. The same plate was later used by Carolus Allard, and

as late as 1740-50 by Ottens.

About 1680, in Danckers’ Atlas, published at Amsterdam, is found a map,

“Novi Belgii, etc., tabula, multis in locis emendata a J. Danckers,”

which, however, in Asher’s opinion was but a revamping of the earlier

Visscher plate.[708] The map which N. J. Visscher published about

1640 was reissued about 1690 by Nicolas Visscher, “Novi Belgii, etc.,

tabula, multis in locis emendata,” making use of the work of Montanus

and Allard, of which there were also later issues. (Asher’s _List_,

no. 14; Muller, no. 2,276.) An eclectic map, showing the province at

this period, was made up from Montanus, Roggeveen, and others, by J. P.

Bourjé, and appeared in Lambrechtsen’s _Korte Beschryving_, Middelburg,

1818. The maps of Nicolas Visscher in Sanson’s _Atlas Nouveau_ (1700),

and of Henry Hondius and Homan, belong to a later period.

[Illustration: SKETCH PLAN OF NEW YORK CITY, 1664-68.

This is a reduced reproduction of the fac-simile in Valentine’s

_New York City Manual_, 1863, of one of the sheets of Nicoll’s map

of Manhattan Island, preserved in the British Museum. It bears an

attestation of correct correspondence with the original, from Richard

Simms, of the Museum, who transmitted in 1862 the copy to George H.

Moore, then of the Historical Society. Cf. also another representation

in Valentine’s _Manual_, 1859, P. 548, and in his _History_, p. 226.]

Of the charts of the coast about New York, there were two standard

atlases of this period, the _Zee-Atlas_ of Pieter Goos, of which there

were editions in 1666, 1668, 1673, 1675, 1676,—some of them with

French text. (Asher’s _List_, no. 22-24; Muller’s _Catalogue_, 1877,

no. 1254.) Better executed are the charts in the special American

collection issued at Amsterdam by Arent Roggeveen under the title

of _Het Eerste Deel van het Brandende Veen_, 1675, and known in the

English edition as _The Burning Fen_. Asher also adds the charts of Van

Keulen, remarking, however, upon their inaccurate coast-lines.

[Illustration: THE STADTHUYS IN NEW YORK, 1679.—BREVOORT’S DRAWING.]

[Illustration: THE STADTHUYS, 1679.—ORIGINAL SKETCH.]

_Descriptions._ Edward Melton was in New York in 1668, and in his

_Zee-en Landreizen_, Amsterdam, 1681, and again 1702, he gives a

detailed description of the place, borrowing somewhat from Montanus.

(Asher’s _Essay_, no. 17; and _Carter-Brown Catalogue_, ii. 1,221,

which says the later editions were issued in 1704-1705.) Though an

Englishman, his account was not published in the original, and we owe

the earliest one in English to Daniel Denton, whose _Brief Descriptions

of New York_ appeared in London in 1670. It is now very rare. (Sabin’s

_Dictionary_, v. 350.) It is a small quarto, and Rich priced it in 1832

at £1 12_s._ There are copies in Harvard College Library; in the State

Library, Albany; besides two copies in the Carter-Brown Library, with

different imprints. (_Catalogue_, ii. 1,038.) Sabin, in the _Menzies

Catalogue_, says he had sold a copy for $275, and at that sale it

brought $220. (Cf. _Brinley Catalogue_, no. 2,778.) It was reprinted by

the Pennsylvania Historical Society in 1845, 16 pp., and by Wm. Gowan

in New York the same year, with an Introduction by Gabriel Furman, 57

pp.

A few years later we have another description in the _Journal of a

Voyage to New York_, 1679-80, by Jasper Dankers and Peter Sluyter,

which was translated from the original Dutch manuscript by Henry C.

Murphy, and, enriched by an Introduction from the same hand, appeared

in 1867 as vol. i. of the _Memoirs_ of the Long Island Historical

Society, and also separately. Some particulars of Danckaerts or

Dankers are noted in _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, 1874, p. 309. The

MS., when found by Mr. Frederick Muller, of Amsterdam, from whom Mr.

Murphy procured it, was accompanied by certain drawings of the town,

seemingly taken on the spot. These are given in Mr. Murphy’s volume

in fac-simile, with descriptions by Mr. J. Carson Brevoort, who has

also re-drawn certain parts of them with better perspective, and other

rectifications. The re-drawings are also engraved. The originals

consist: (1) of a view of the Narrows, looking out to sea; (2) of a

long panoramic view of the town as seen from the Brooklyn shore; (3)

the East River shore looking south; (4) a view down the island from the

northern edge of the settlement, with the Hudson River on the right,

and a supposable East River on the left. The views which Mr. Brevoort

has rectified are no. 4; the Stadthuys, with adjacent buildings and

half-moon battery, extracted from no. 2; and three parts of no. 3,

namely the Dock, the Water-gate (foot of Wall Street), and the shore

north of the Water-gate. A reduction of the Brevoort Stadthuys view and

the original, full size, are given herewith. This building stood on the

corner of Pearl Street and Coentys slip, was erected as a city tavern

in 1642, became a city hall in 1655, and was torn down in 1700. The

battery when built projected into the river. There are other views of

the Stadthuys given in Valentine’s _Manual_, (1655-56) p. 336, (1852)

p. 378, (1853) p. 472; his _History_, p. 52; Lamb’s _New York_, i. 106;

Gay’s _Popular History of the United States_, ii. 139, etc. Mr. J. W.

Gerard published a monograph in 1875, _Old Stadthuys of New Amsterdam_.

In the train of Andros, and as his chaplain, a Rev. Charles Wooley

came to New York in 1678, and his _Journal of Two Years_ was published

in 1701. (_Historical Magazine_, i. 371.) There is a copy in Harvard

College Library. It was edited in 1860, with notes by Dr. O’Callaghan,

as Gowan’s _Bibliotheca Americana_, no. 2; and no. 3 of the same

series, J. Miller’s _Description of the Province and City of New York_

(1695), though of a little later date, is best examined in the same

connection. It is edited by John G. Shea, as Gowan printed it in 1862.

Cf. also C. Lodwick’s “New York in 1692,” in 2 _N. Y. Hist. Coll._,

vol. ii.