CHAPTER III

THE INDIANS AND THE EARLY SETTLERS

The Dutch Policy toward the Indians. Puritan and Dutch Policy

Contrasted. Long Island Indians: Their Relations with the

Whites. Kieft's Attacks on Pavonia and Corlaer's Hook. Uprising

on Long Island. Overtures for Peace. Mission to Rockaway of De

Vries and Olfertsen. Restoration of Friendly Relations.

These numerous settlements had not been accomplished without the

encountering of Indian difficulties. In general the Dutch policy toward

the Indians was business-like and reasonable, contrasting favorably with

policies prevailing elsewhere among American new-comers. The Dutch were

not so social as the French, but their attitude was more fraternal than

that usually observed among the English colonists. Douglass Campbell,

who is to be regarded as a strong partisan of the Dutch as opposed to

the Puritan system, but whose exhaustive studies both of the Puritan and

of the Dutch people gave him an unusual grasp of the situation, thus

contrasts the policy of the two peoples:--

"Why the Puritans were involved in ceaseless wars can be read in every

line of their history. As they could not make of the Indian a red

Puritan, he was a spiritual outcast, whom it was their duty to

exterminate. Three years after the landing of the Mayflower Miles

Standish and seven of his companions murdered three native chiefs in

cold blood. It was this event which led the devout John Robinson to say,

'How happy a thing it would have been if you had converted some before

you killed any.' In 1637 the white settlers of Connecticut put a red

captive to death by dragging him limb from limb by ropes fastened to his

arms and legs. Bancroft tells us that the Puritans bought the Indians'

land, except that of the Pequots. Look at their laws and see. In 1633

Massachusetts passed a statute in relation to land titles. It confirmed

to the Indians the little patches around their wigwams on which they

raised their corn, but declared that the rest belonged to the whites on

the authority of the first chapter of Genesis 'and the invitation of the

Indians.' But murder and robbery of their land all pale before the

crowning infamy which drove the red man to despair. Above all things he

prized personal liberty; slavery to him was a thousand fold worse than

death. And yet to this fate the settlers consigned thousands of the

natives, sending them to the West Indies to work on the sugar

plantations. Among these victims was the little grandson of the good

king Massasoit, who had welcomed the Pilgrims and been their life-long

friend. Look at the records of Massachusetts, and there you will find

statute after statute offering bounties for Indian scalps, the prices

fixed being from twenty-five to one hundred pounds for males, from

twenty to sixty for women, and from ten to twenty for children under ten

years of age. These same statutes provided that females and children

taken prisoners should belong to the captors, 'to be sold out of the

province.' I mention these facts in no invidious spirit, but in justice

to the red man, who has been called treacherous and cruel. He resented

such conduct; and can you wonder at it? He had no redress except by

arms, and he has written the story of his vengeance all over the face of

New England. What could the Indians think of the gospel of Jesus Christ

and the white man's God? What was true of the New England colonies was

true of the southern colonies as well. The course pursued by Penn can

hardly be taken as a criterion, for he dealt with the Delaware Indians,

who had been conquered by the Iroquois, deprived of the use of arms, and

forced to accept the opprobrious epithet of 'women;' and Penn, in

purchasing their lands, only followed out the example which had been set

by the Dutch.

"Turn now to New York, and see what the Indian was under different

conditions. The upper Hudson and the valley of the Mohawk were first

settled by the Dutch. They simply treated the Indian as a man. Tolerant

in religion, they respected his rude faith; truthful among themselves,

to him they never broke their word; honest in all their dealings with

him, they kept good faith. They suffered from no thefts, because they

took nothing except by purchase. Their land titles were respected,

because for every tract they had an Indian deed. They were scourged by

no massacres, save from the enemy across the border, because they

committed no robbery or murder. This was the whole secret of their

policy. It is easy to belittle it, as historians have done, by saying

that upon no other conditions could they have lived among the natives.

Of course it was politic, but the world has discovered that honesty is

the best policy, without concluding that it is any the less a Christian

virtue. These early settlers in New York were traders, offshoots from

what was the greatest commercial nation of the world. They made no

pretense of doing missionary work. They were simply in pursuit of gain.

But they had learned that the only permanent success in life rests on

honesty and justice. This is the lesson that commerce teaches, and

because it does so it has been the civilizer of the world. After the

English conquest in 1664 the same policy was continued, thanks to the

presence of the Dutch, who still formed the majority of the population.

The Six Nations then placed their lands under protection of the crown

and were recognized as appendant to New York. The burden thus cast upon

the province was very heavy. For more than a century New York kept their

alliance by heavy subsidies and by contributions of men and money for

their defense against the French."[11]

The Indian policy of the Dutch has, indeed, been credited with a most

important influence upon American history. But sagacious as it may have

been as a broad plan of action, there was no way of obviating the

difficulties arising from local and individual blunders. Considering the

number of special provocations to revolt, it is remarkable that Indian

troubles were not more frequent and more serious, and that the storm did

not break sooner and more fiercely than it did. Prime remarks that the

conduct of the Long Island Indians toward the whites is "without a

parallel in the history of the country."

"The Indians on Long Island," says Silas Wood, "seem to have been less

troublesome to the whites than those north of the Sound.... [They]

sometimes committed depredations on the property of the whites.... It

does not appear that they ever formed any combination against the

first settlers, or materially interrupted the progress of their

improvements.... The security of the whites must be ascribed to the

means they employed to preserve peace with the Indians."

When the storm of Indian anger and revenge broke over New England in

1643, New Netherland did not escape a similar if not equally terrible

visitation. If the settlers in New Amsterdam began to experience

anxiety, something like a panic seized upon the settlers of outlying

regions. The Long Island settlers were perhaps less ill at ease than

others at an equal distance from the Fort, so friendly had been their

relations with the Indians; but individual offenses of the settlers and

individual offenses by the Indians produced a strained relation in

certain quarters, and when the excuse came the hot-heads among the Long

Island settlers made trouble.

At New Amsterdam the trouble began when the Mohawks descended upon the

river tribes in retaliation for local offenses, and the river Indians

flocked to the vicinity of the Fort for protection. At "Corlaer's

Bouwery," on Manhattan Island, a group of Long Island Indians, under the

chief, Nainde Nummerius, had encamped. An ill-advised appeal to Kieft

resulted in an impulsive decision on the part of the Governor, who, in

spite of wiser counsel, sent out two secret expeditions on the night of

February 25, 1643, one against the refugees at Pavonia, the other

against the encampment at Corlaer's Hook. The attacks were merciless.

Eighty Indians were slaughtered at Pavonia, and forty at the Hook.

This unfortunate blunder resulted in acts which still further excited

the anger of the Indians. Long Island settlers asked Kieft for

permission to attack the Marechawieck tribe; but Kieft, possibly because

he had already begun to realize the influence of the outrage he had

committed, denied permission on the ground that the Long Island red men

had given no sufficient cause for offensive action. Nevertheless, the

Governor did not deny to the Long Island settlers any retaliatory steps

that might at any time seem necessary. Shortly after this communication,

two wagon-loads of corn in charge of a party of Indians were seized, and

when the Indians resisted the act of plundering, three of them were

killed.

If the massacre on Manhattan Island had caused among the Long Island

Indians a general resentment against the white men, the murders on the

Island itself made their hostility specific and local; and it is not

surprising that many of the Long Island tribes joined hands with the

river Indians. The tragedies which followed belong to the annals of a

"year of blood."

Terror seized the Long Island settlers in common with all outlying

colonists, many of whom lost no time in seeking the shelter of the Fort.

Kieft was bewildered by the consequences of his act. Realizing that the

chief offenses had been against Long Island tribes, he sent to these a

propitiatory message, which was met by shouts of "corn thieves!" by the

Indians. Those settlers who held their posts on Long Island were forced

to adopt measures of fortifying their homes, which they did after the

methods of inclosure peculiar to the time, and to preserve the utmost

vigilance to save their lives. From a number of families women and

children were sent to the Fort, the men remaining to guard the property.

The advent of spring, bringing to the home-staying Indians of this

region, as well as to the white men, the necessity for planting corn,

suggested an effort toward permanent peace. Brodhead's narrative says:--

"Three delegates from the wigwam of Penhawity, their 'great

chief,' approached Fort Amsterdam, bearing a white flag. 'Who

will go to meet them?' demanded Kieft. None were willing but De

Vries and Jacob Olfertsen. 'Our chief has sent us,' said the

savages, 'to know why you have killed his people, who have never

laid a straw in your way, when none has done you aught but good?

Come and speak to our chief upon the sea-coast,' Setting out

with the Indian messengers, De Vries and Olfertsen, in the

evening, came to 'Rechquaaike,' or Rockaway, where they found

about three hundred savages and about thirty wigwams. The chief,

'who had but one eye,' invited them to pass the night in his

cabin, and regaled them with oysters and fish. At break of day

the envoys from Manhattan were conducted into the woods about

four hundred yards off, where they found sixteen chiefs of Long

Island waiting for their coming. Placing the two Europeans in

the centre, the chiefs seated themselves around in a ring, and

their 'best speaker' arose, holding in his hand a bundle of

small sticks. 'When you first came to our coasts,' slowly began

the orator, 'you sometimes had no food; we gave you our beans

and corn, and relieved you with our oysters and fish; and now,

for recompense, you murder our people;' and he laid down a

little stick. 'In the beginning of your voyages, you left your

people here with their goods; we traded with them while your

ships were away, and cherished them as the apple of our eye; we

gave them our daughters for companions, who have borne children,

and many Indians have sprung from the Swannekens; and now you

villainously massacre your own blood.' The chief laid down

another stick; many more remained in his hand; but De Vries,

cutting short the reproachful catalogue, invited the chiefs to

accompany him to Fort Amsterdam, where the Director 'would give

them presents to make a peace.'

"The chiefs, assenting, ended their orations, and presenting De

Vries and his colleague each with ten fathoms of wampum, the

party set out for their canoes, to shorten the return of the

Dutch envoys. While waiting for the tide to rise, an armed

Indian, who had been dispatched by a sachem twenty miles off,

came running to warn the chiefs against going to Manhattan. 'Are

you all crazy, to go to the Fort,' said he, 'where that

scoundrel lives who has so often murdered your friends?' But De

Vries assured them that 'they would find it otherwise, and come

home again with large presents.' One of the chiefs replied at

once: 'Upon your words we will go; for the Indians have never

heard lies from you, as they have other Swannekens.' Embarking

in a large canoe the Dutch envoys, accompanied by eighteen

Indian delegates, set out from Rockaway, and reached Fort

Amsterdam about three o'clock in the afternoon."

The result of this conference was the reëstablishment of peaceful

relations, the Long Island red men aiding in the making of terms with

the river Indians. When, in the following September, trouble broke out

again, Kieft sought to keep the Long Island tribes as allies, but,

before terms could be made, attacks were made at Maspeth and Gravesend,

as well as at Westchester; and the ensuing winter was full of distress,

most of the settlements becoming almost wholly deserted.

The Government, at its wits' end, appealed to New Haven, and finally to

the States-General in Holland itself. In the spring (of 1644) the Long

Island Indians were placated; but with the remainder of the hostiles

Kieft showed no ability to treat, and the wars lasted until the

following year, when the long strain upon Fort Amsterdam was agreeably

broken.

A History of the City of Brooklyn and Kings County, Volume I. · 第 3 / 9 章