COLONIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY
While Captain Kidd was still on the high seas and pirates were still
infesting the lower Hudson, the Earl of Bellomont arrived in New York
(in April, 1698), accompanied by his wife and his cousin, John Nanfan,
who had been appointed Lieutenant-Governor. The citizens greeted the
new Governor with every demonstration of delight. The corporation gave
a public banquet and offered a eulogistic address. Bellomont on his
part entered into his task with enthusiasm. In the new Assembly called
in 1699, he spoke of the disorder prevailing in the province, left as
it was with a divided people, an empty treasury, ruined fortifications,
and a few half-naked soldiers. He spoke of the ill repute of New York
as a rendezvous for pirates and said: "It would be hard if I who come
before you with an honest heart and a resolution {181} to be just to
your interests, should meet with greater difficulties in the discharge
of His Majesty's service than those who have gone before me." He
declared it his firm intention that there should be no more
misapplication of the public money, a veiled attack upon Fletcher's
grants of land and privileges which had become a public scandal. He
would, he said, pocket none of the money himself nor permit any
embezzlement of it by others and promised exact accounts to be laid
before the Assembly "when and as often as you require." The Assembly
passed a vote of thanks and voted a six years' revenue. Apparently
everything was auspicious; but the seed of discord was already sown by
Bellomont's early espousal of the Leislerian cause, which was in effect
the cause of the common people.
In the Ecclesiastical Records of the State an account of the
disinterment and reburial of the mutilated remains of Leisler and of
his son-in-law Milborne shows the determination of Bellomont to make
what reparation was possible, in addition to the removal of attainder,
for the injustice done. The document closes with these words:
Yesterday, October 20, [1698] the remains of Commander Jacob Leisler
and of Jacob Milborne [eight years and {182} five months after their
execution and burial] were exhumed, and interred again with great pomp
under our [new] Dutch Church [in Garden Street]. Their weapons and
armorial ensigns of honor were there [in the Church] hung up, and thus,
as far as it was possible, their honor was restored to them. Special
permission to do this had been received by his Honor's son, Jacob
Leisler, from his Majesty. This gave unutterable joy to their families
and to those people who, under him, had taken up arms for our blessed
King William. With this circumstance we trust that the dissensions
which have so long harassed us, will also be buried. To this end our
Right Honorable Governor, my lord the Earl of Bellomont, long wished
for by us, is exerting his good offices. He tries to deal impartially
with all, acting with great fairness and moderation. He has begun [his
administration] by remembering the Lord God; for he has ordered a day
of solemn fasting and prayer throughout the whole land. In a
proclamation of great seriousness, he has exhorted the inhabitants
earnestly to pray for these things [peace among the people] to the
Divine Majesty. We hope the Lord will bestow his gracious blessings
and grace, upon your Reverences, with all our hearts.
This proceeding on the part of Bellomont, combined with the appointment
to office of prominent Leislerians and the dismissal of some of their
opponents, arrayed at once a formidable body of important citizens
against him. Their numbers were augmented by the people who had
profited by {183} unlawful privileges won from Fletcher and now
stripped from them by Bellomont; but the Governor pursued his course
undaunted either by the threats or by the taunts cast against him as a
partner of the pirate, Captain Kidd. So beloved was Bellomont by the
people and so strongly intrenched by influence in the Government at
home that he could probably have carried through the reforms which he
had at heart; but his untimely death in 1701, after a brief rule of
three years, put an end to all his far-reaching schemes for the good of
the colonies.
His death was followed by a condition approaching civil war between the
followers of Leisler and their foes. In 1702 Queen Anne, who had
recently ascended the throne, appointed as Governor her relative,
Edward Hyde, Lord Cornbury. He suppressed the Leislerians and exalted
the aristocratic party, thereby restoring order but at the same time
bringing odium upon his cause by his personal vices. Cornbury was a
type of everything that a colonial governor should not be, a scamp, a
spendthrift, and a drunkard. Relying upon his relationship to Queen
Anne, he felt himself superior to the ordinary restraints of
civilization. He took bribes under guise of gifts, was addicted to all
{184} forms of debauchery, and incidentally proved as foolish as he was
wicked, one of his amusements, it is said, being that of parading the
streets of New York in the evening, clad in woman's attire. His lady
was as unpopular as he and it is said that when the wheels of her coach
were heard approaching the house of any of the wealthy citizens of New
York, the family was hastily set to work hiding the attractive
ornaments to which her ladyship might take a fancy, as she had no
compunction in asking for them as a gift. In an expedition to Albany
in 1702, Cornbury's vanity led him to decorate his barge with brilliant
colors, to provide new uniforms for the crew, and generally to play the
peacock at the expense of the colony. Rumor placed the sum of his
debts at L7000. Moreover he was charged with the embezzlement of L1500
of government money.
A long-suffering community finally demanded the recall of Lord Cornbury
and demanded it with the same insistence which was to make itself felt
in revolution in the last half of the century. As is usual with
sovereigns when any right is demanded with sufficient firmness, Queen
Anne was graciously pleased to withdraw Lord Cornbury in 1708. On the
arrival of his successor, Cornbury was placed {185} by indignant
creditors in the charge of the sheriff, and was held in custody until
the news of his succession to the earldom of Clarendon reached the
colony. The library, furniture, and pictures of the Queen's cousin
were sold at auction, while the ex-Governor skulked back to England to
make the best possible showing as to his appropriation of public moneys
to private uses. We can picture him wiping his eyes in pathetic
deprecation, as he exclaimed: "If the Queen is not pleased to pay me,
the having the Government of New Jersey, which I am persuaded the Queen
intended for my benefit, will prove my ruin!"
Lord Lovelace, Cornbury's successor, demanded a permanent revenue. But
recent experience had taught the colonists to hold the financial power
in their own hands and they consented only to an annual appropriation,
thus making the salary of the Governor dependent on his good conduct.
What would have been the result of this clash of interests will never
be known, since Lord Lovelace died on May 5, 1709, the same day on
which the act was passed.
Major Richard Ingoldesby, Leisler's old enemy, now came into power and
held the reins for a few months, until mismanagement of an expedition
{186} against Canada caused such indignation that he was withdrawn and
Robert Hunter became Governor in 1710. Although of humble Scotch
parentage he had risen to prominence in English society, numbering
Swift and Addison among his friends and being married to Lady Hay,
whose influence had procured for him successive positions of importance
which culminated in this appointment.
With a view to encouraging the production of naval stores and obtaining
a profit for the English Government, Hunter brought over at the expense
of the Crown several thousand Palatines, German inhabitants of the
Rhine valley harried by the French, thereby adding another alien
element to the cosmopolitan population. The British Government
appropriated the sum of L10,000 for the project and agreed not only to
transport the emigrants but to maintain them for a time in return for
their labor. These Palatines settled on both banks of the Hudson in
four villages on lands belonging to Robert Livingston, and in three on
those belonging to the Crown and situated on the west side of the river.
Authorities differ so widely in respect to the treatment of these
German immigrants that it seems only fair to present both sides. One
shows {187} Hunter working in the interest of the English Government
against that of the colony and represents the movement as a clever plan
on the part of the Governor to stimulate the production of tar and
turpentine, to contribute to the government income, and to prevent the
manufacture of wool, linen, and cotton goods, which at that time were
largely bought in England. When Hunter found that the income did not
meet the outlay, it is said, he notified the newcomers that they "must
shift for themselves but not outside the province."
On the other hand, the Governor asserted that dwellers in the lower
Palatinate of the Rhine, when driven from their homes by the French,
begged the English Government to give them homes in America; that Queen
Anne graciously agreed that the Palatines should be transported to New
York at the expense of the English with the understanding that they
were to work out the advance payment and also the food and lodgings
provided by the State and by Livingston; but that the Palatines proved
lazy and failed to carry out their contract.
All accounts agree, however, in describing the hard lot of these
unfortunate exiles. Their ocean voyage was long and stormy with much
fatal {188} illness. The sites selected for their settlements were not
desirable. The native pine was found unsuited to the production of tar
in large quantities. They soon discovered that they would never be
able to pay for their maintenance by such unprofitable labor.
Moreover, the provisions given them were of inferior quality; and they
were forced to furnish men for an expedition against Canada while their
women and children were left either to starvation or to practical
servitude. In this desperate situation some of the Palatines turned
from their fellow Christians to the native savages, and their appeal
was not in vain. The Indians gave them permission to settle at
Schoharie, and many families removed thither in defiance of the
Governor, who was still bent on manufacturing tar and pitch. But the
great majority remained in the Hudson valley and eventually built homes
on lands which they purchased.
The climate of New York disagreed with Hunter, and his mental
depression kept pace with his physical debility. After six years of
hopeless effort, he was obliged to admit the failure of his plans to
produce naval stores. In 1710 he reported of the locality that it "had
the finest air to live upon; but not for me"; again he says that {189}
Sancho Panza is a type for him, since that in spite of every effort to
do his duty no dog could be worse treated. It is easy to understand
that a member of the Pope-Swift-Bolingbroke circle in England should
have found the social atmosphere of early New York far from
exhilarating; and it is equally easy to comprehend that the pioneers of
the New World resented his mismanagement of the campaign of 1711
against Canada and his assertion of the English Government's right to
tax the colonists without the consent of the colonial Governments. But
perhaps Hunter and the people appreciated each other more than either
realized, for when he took leave in 1719 his words were warmly
affectionate and his address embodied the exhortation: "May no strife
ever happen amongst you but that laudable emulation who shall approve
himself the most zealous servant and most dutiful subject of the best
of Princes." And in response to this farewell address the colony of
New York assured Governor Hunter that he had governed well and wisely,
"like a prudent magistrate, like an affectionate parent," and that the
good wishes of his countrymen followed him wherever he went.
It would be pleasant to dwell on this picture of {190} mutual
confidence and regard, but the rude facts of history hurry us on to
quite different scenes. William Burnet, son of the Bishop of
Salisbury, continued the policy of his predecessor, it is true, and
lived on unusually amicable terms with the Assembly. He identified
himself with the interests of the province by marrying the daughter of
a prosperous Dutch merchant and by prohibiting the fur trade between
Albany and Canada; yet even Burnet clashed with the Assembly on
occasion. And when after an interval William Cosby became Governor,
the worst abuses of executive power returned, fomenting quarrels which
reached a climax in the famous Zenger trial.
The truth was that no matter how popular a governor might be, clashes
were bound to occur between him and the representatives of the people
whom he governed, because they represented divergent interests. The
question of revenue was an ever-recurring cause of trouble. Without
adequate funds from the home Government, the Governor looked to the
Assembly for his salary as well as for grants to carry on the
administration of the province. No matter how absolute the authority
conferred by his commission and his instructions, the Governor must bow
to the lower {191} house of the provincial Legislature, which held the
purse strings.
Under Sloughter, Fletcher, Bellomont, and Cornbury the Assembly had
voted revenues for a term of years. But when Cornbury appropriated to
his own uses L1000 out of the L1800 granted for the defense of the
frontiers and when in addition he pocketed L1500 of the funds
appropriated for the protection of the mouth of the Hudson, the
Assembly grew wary. Thereafter for four successive years it made only
annual appropriations, and, wiser still by 1739, it voted supplies only
in definite amounts for special purposes. Short-sighted the Assembly
often was, sometimes in its parsimony leaving the borders unprotected
and showing a disposition to take as much and to give as little as
possible--a policy that was fraught with grave peril as the French and
Indian War drew on apace.
The growing insubordination of the province gave more than one governor
anxious thought. Governor Hunter wrote warningly to friends in
England: "The colonies are infants at their mother's breasts and will
wean themselves when they become of age." And Governor Clinton was so
incensed by the contumacy of the Assembly that he said bluntly: "Every
branch of this {192} legislature may be criminal in the eyes of the
law, and there is a power able to punish you and that will punish you
if you provoke that power to do it by your behaviour. _Otherwise you
must think yourselves independent of the crown of Great Britain!_"
{193}