Readings in the History of New York Part IA

-->

by Jonathan D. Kantrowitz, D. Claude Morest,

and Carole Campbell Golden, Ed.D.

Edited by Patricia F. Braccio

Table of Contents

 The Peacemaker ................................................1

Hendrik Hudson ................................................5

Trading at Manhattan ......................................8

The Dutch West India Company ....................10

Albany, New York ............................................12

Peter Minuit and the Patroons ......................15

Territorial Disputes, 1632–1637 ....................18

Wilhelm Kieft, 1637–1639 ..............................21

Indian Wars......................................................25

Peter Stuyvesant..............................................28

New Amsterdam’s Population ........................31

New Amsterdam’s Buildings ..........................34

New Amsterdam Life ......................................36

Fort Neck, Long Island....................................39

Peter Stuyvesant’s Rule ..................................40

Fall of New Amsterdam ..................................43

England Takes Over, 1664 ..............................46

The Dutch Win New York Back ......................49

The British Rule under Sir

Edmund Andros............................................52

A Charter of Liberties and Privileges ............55

Governments Overthrown ..............................57

Frontenac ........................................................59

Jacob Leisler ....................................................63

Pirates ..............................................................68

Earl of Bellomont and Captain Kidd..............71

Lord Cornbury, 1702–1708..............................75

Slave Revolt ....................................................78

John Peter Zenger, 1735..................................82

New York City, 1741 ........................................84

After the 1741 Fires ........................................86

Stamp Act Riots ..............................................94

Lake Champlain Battle ................................102

Battle of Brooklyn Heights ..........................105

Captain Nathan Hale ....................................108

The Fall of Most of Manhattan ....................113

The Fall of Fort Washington ........................116

The Fall of Fort Ticonderoga ........................119

Battle of Bennington ....................................122

Growing Tensions in Central New York ......125

Choosing Sides ..............................................130

Preparations for the Battle of Oriskany ......136

The Battle of Oriskany..................................139

The Effects of the Battle of Oriskany ..........144

Victory at Saratoga........................................150

West Point Defenses ......................................154

The Treason of Benedict Arnold....................157

Occupation of New York ................................161

Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and the

Constitution  ................................................164

Benjamin Lattimore, 1761–1838 ..................166

Life in New York City ....................................169

Aaron Burr and the Democrats ....................172

The Election of 1800 ......................................177

Burr-Hamilton Duel ......................................179

Robert Fulton ................................................181

DeWitt Clinton ..............................................184

The Mohawk & Hudson Rail Road ..............187

Early History of African Americans in

Buffalo, New York ......................................189

Nineteenth-Century Albany, New York ........191

Clipper Ships..................................................193

Riots................................................................195

Immigration ..................................................197

The Invention of the Telegraph ....................199

Martin Van Buren..........................................203

Harriet Powell’s Escape from Slavery ..........206

Elizabeth Cady Stanton ................................210

Why a Women’s Rights Convention? ............212

Susan B. Anthony ..........................................214

The Rescue of Jerry ......................................216

Wealthy Men of New York, 1855 ..................220

Harriet Tubman ............................................221

Millard Fillmore ............................................223

Cornelius Vanderbilt......................................225

William H. Seward ........................................230

from Matilda Joslyn Gage:

Forgotten Feminist ....................................234

New York Central Railroad ..........................241

The West Shore Railroad ..............................245

The Tammany Society ..................................249

Samuel Tilden ................................................253

Roscoe Conkling ............................................255

Chester A. Arthur ..........................................257

Grover Cleveland ..........................................259

Theodore Roosevelt........................................262

The General Slocum  Disaster ......................266

The Fire at the Triangle Shirtwaist

Company ....................................................273

David Sarnoff ................................................279

Alfred E. Smith ..............................................283

Walker and La Guardia ................................284

Franklin D. Roosevelt....................................286

Eleanor Roosevelt ..........................................288

Ralph Bunche ................................................290

Hillary Rodham Clinton................................295

THE PEACEMAKER

Onondaga Lake is in central New York. Over a thousand years ago on those shores,

democracy was born. The Seneca, Cayuga, Onondaga, Oneida, and the Mohawk people had

been warring against each other. There was great bloodshed. The five nations had

forgotten their ways. Their actions saddened the Creator. The Creator sent a messenger

to the people. He wanted the five nations to live in peace.

The messenger is known as “the Peacemaker.” The Peacemaker carried powerful words of

peace to the five nations. The Peacemaker traveled in a stone canoe. He did that to show

to these troubled people that his words are true. In order for the Creator’s message to

spread, the Peacemaker sought out the most evil people of the five nations. The

Peacemaker named the most evil people as leaders. The most evil person of all was an

Onondaga named “Tadadaho.” Tadadaho was said to be so evil that his body was twisted

and snakes grew from his head.

The Peacemaker’s message spread. It changed all of the people. Hiawatha was one of the

people who had accepted the good words of the Creator. He decided to help the

Peacemaker. Tadadaho was determined to stop this message and its messengers.

Tadadaho killed Hiawatha’s daughters. Griefstricken, Hiawatha was no longer able to

spread the Creator’s words.

While grieving, Hiawatha found words that would help console others who had lost loved

ones. He devised a method to remember these words. He strung purple and white

freshwater clamshells together on strings. Hence, the first “wampum” was made.

Once Hiawatha’s mind was clear, he and the Peacemaker were able to confront Tadadaho

again. This time they had the support of forty-nine other leaders from all of the five

nations.

The leaders combed the snakes from Tadadaho’s hair. He accepted Creator’s message.

Tadadaho became the fiftieth chief. The chiefs symbolized this union of peace by uprooting

a great white pine tree. They threw their weapons of war into the hole left by the uprooted

tree. Then they replanted the tree.

The five tribes were called the “Haudenosaunee,” or “People of the Longhouse.” The

Peacemaker placed an eagle on top of the great white pine tree. It was to warn the People

of the Longhouse of any dangers to this great peace. Wampum belts were made to record

the event.

The Peacemaker then set in place a method for leaders to be chosen. He selected women

to be the leaders of their clans. The leader will be called “Clan Mother.” The Clan Mother

will then select their spokesman and leader for their clan called a “Chief.” When either

leader passes away, the clan then selects another to sit in that leader’s place. This process

has continued at Onondaga for countless centuries.

1 .

The Chiefs and Clan Mothers at Onondaga still sit and meet today in the Longhouse. The

names and titles of the men and women that the Peacemaker set in place are still used to

identify leaders. At Onondaga, Tadadaho and the other Onondaga chiefs still sit and

discuss and make decisions for the benefit of the Onondaga people. Onondaga and the

other Indian nations have a unique position with the United States of America.

The Onondagas and the Haudenosaunee made agreements with other Native Nations, the

Dutch, English, and the French long before the formation of the thirteen colonies into the

United States. Then when the United States was first formed, President George

Washington made an agreement of peace and friendship as nation to nation. A wampum

belt was made. From that day in the late eighteenth century, the Onondaga Chiefs, Clan

Mothers, and people have maintained this relationship of an equal and separate nation

from the United States.

1. The Peacemaker was a messenger sent to

a. the Creator.

b. Tadadaho.

c. Hiawatha.

d. the Five Nations.

2. The ally of the Peacemaker was

a. an Onondaga.

b. Tadadaho.

c. Hiawatha.

d. Haudenosaunee.

3. The inventor of wampum was

a. an Onondaga.

b. Tadadaho.

c. Hiawatha.

d. Haudenosaunee.

4. The symbol of Tadadaho’s evil was

a. a great white pine tree.

b. snakes in his hair.

c. an eagle.

d. the Longhouse.

. 2

5. After the fifty chiefs had made peace among themselves they made peace with

a. the Haudenosaunee.

b. the People of the Longhouse.

c. the Clan Mother.

d. other native tribes, the Dutch, English and French.

6. Late in the 18th century, the Five Nations made a treaty with

a. the United States.

b. the People of the Longhouse.

c. the Clan Mother.

d. other native tribes, the Dutch, English and French.

7. Many Native American tribes are considered independent nations within the United

States. What problems and opportunities do you think this may create?

3 .

. 4

HENDRIK HUDSON

Early in September 1609, the ship, Half-Moon, restlessly skirted the American coast. It

was searching for a strait or other water route leading to India. It came to the mouth of a

great river, flowing silently out from the heart of the unknown continent.

The Half-Moon was a small, clumsy, high-pooped yacht. It was manned by a score of Dutch

and English sea-dogs. An English adventurer then in Dutch pay commanded it. He was

known to his employers as Hendrik Hudson. He, his craft, and his crew were all typical of

the age. It was an age of adventure-loving explorers. They were eager to sail under any

flag that promised glory and profit, no matter what the cost in hardship and danger. It was

also an age of hardy seamen. The hardiest and bravest came from England and from the

Netherlands.

Hudson, on coming to the river to which his name was afterward given, did not at first

know that it was a river at all. He believed and hoped that it was some great arm of the

sea. He was sure that in fact it was the Northwest Passage to India, which so many brave

men had died vainly in trying to discover. For a week he lay in the lower bay. Then for a

day he shifted his anchorage into what is now New York harbor.

His boats explored the surrounding shoreline. They found many Indian villages. The

neighborhood seemed well-peopled. The Indians flocked to see the white strangers. They

eagerly traded their tobacco for the knives and beads of the Europeans. Of course,

occasions of quarrel were certain to arise between the rough, brutal sailors and the

suspicious Indians. Once a boat’s crew was attacked by two canoes, laden with warriors.

A sailor was killed by an arrow that pierced his throat. Yet, on the whole, their relations

were friendly. Trading and bartering went on unchecked.

Hudson soon found that he was at the mouth of a river, not a strait. He spent three weeks

exploring it, sailing up as far as he could, near the present site of Albany. He found many

small Indian tribes scattered along the banks. He usually kept on good terms with them.

He presented their chiefs with trinkets of various kinds. He also treated them for the first

time to a taste of “fire-water.”

In return, Hudson was well received when he visited the bark wigwams. His hosts held

feasts for him. The dishes included not only wild fowl, but also fat dogs, killed by the

squaws, and skinned, with mussel shells. The Indians had made some progress in the art

of agriculture. They brought to the ship quantities of corn, beans, and pumpkins from the

great heaps drying beside their villages. Their fields, yielding so freely even to their poor

tillage, bore witness to the fertility of the soil.

Hudson had to be constantly on his guard against his newfound friends. Once he was

attacked by a party of hostile warriors whom he beat off, killing several of their number.

However, what far outweighed such danger in the greedy eyes of the trade-loving

adventurers was the fact that they saw in the possession of the Indians great stores of rich

furs. The merchants of Europe prized furs as they did silks, spices, ivory, and precious

metals.

5 .

Early in October, Hudson set out on his homeward voyage to Holland. There the news of

his discovery excited much interest among the daring merchants, especially among those

whose minds were bent on the fur trade. Several of the latter sent small ships across to

the newly-found bay and river, both to barter with the Indians and to explore and report

further about the country.

1. Hudson was searching for

a. the Hudson River.

b. a Northwest Passage to India.

c. a sea route to the Netherlands.

d. New York harbor.

2. According to the passage, which of the following activities did Hudson and his men do

with the Native Americans they met on their journey?

a. played sports

b. went fishing and hunting

c. shared a feast

d. explored the land and sea

3. Which of the following was not an item traded between Hudson’s men and the

Native Americans?

a. tobacco

b. knives

c. beads

d. canoes

4. Among the items possessed by the Native Americans, what did the Europeans want

the most?

a. furs

b. silks

c. foodstuffs

d. “fire-water”

. 6

5. What did Hudson discover? What did Hudson’s discovery lead to?

7 .

TRADING AT MANHATTAN

The most noted of the sea captains who followed the Hudson was Adrian Block. While at

anchor off Manhattan Island, he lost his vessel by fire. He at once set about building

another. Being a man of great resource and resolution, he succeeded. Creating everything

himself, and working in the heart of the primeval forest, Adrian Block built and launched

a forty-five-foot yacht. This primitive pioneer vessel was the first ever launched in our

waters. She was the first to sail on Long Island Sound.

The first trading and exploring ships did well. Merchants saw that great profits could be

made from the Manhattan fur-trade. Accordingly, they determined to establish permanent

posts at the head of the river and at its mouth. The main fort was near the mouth of the

Mohawk. It was called Fort Orange. The site is now the city of Albany.

They also built a few cabins at the south end of Manhattan Island. There they left half a

dozen of their employees. Hendrik Christiansen was headman over both posts. The great

commercial city of New York thus had its origin in a cluster of traders’ huts.

A Native American soon killed Christiansen. For two or three years, his fellow traders

lived on Manhattan Island. They hunted, fished, and idled. Sometimes they killed their

own game. Sometimes they got it by barter from the Native Americans, together with

tobacco and corn. Now and then they quarreled with the surrounding Indians, but

generally they kept on good terms with them. In exchange for rum and trinkets, they

gathered innumerable bales of valuable furs. Most of it was beaver, which swarmed in all

the streams. They also bought otter, sable, and the fisher. At long intervals, these furs

were piled in the holds of the three or four small vessels. Their yearly or half-yearly arrival

from Holland formed the chief relief to the monotony of the fur-traders’ existence.

1. Adrian Block is best described as

a. lucky.

b. dangerous.

c. hardworking.

d. greedy.

2. New York City started out as

a. an Indian village near Albany.

b. a small group of huts on Manhattan Island.

c. a fort on the Mohawk River.

d. a trading post in Brooklyn.

. 8

3. Which of the following animal furs did the Manhattan fur-traders collect the most of?

a. beaver

b. otter

c. sable

d. raccoon

4. Did the traders who lived on Manhattan Island have an easy life? Why or why not?

9 .

THE DUTCH WEST INDIA COMPANY

The Dutch West India Company was formed for trade. It was also formed to carry on a

fierce war against the public enemy, the king of Spain. It made war or peace as best suited

it. It named governors and judges to colonies and to conquered lands. It founded cities,

and built forts. It hired mighty admirals to lead the ships of its many fleets to battle and

plunder. Sailors in the pay of this company performed some of the most successful and

heroic feats of arms in the history of the Netherlands. Steel in their hands brought greater

profit than gold. The fortunate stockholders of Amsterdam and Zealand received enormous

dividends from the sale of the spoil of the sacked cities of Brazil, and of the captured

treasure-ships that had once formed part of the Spanish “silver fleet.”

In the midst of this turmoil of fighting and trading, the company had little time to think of

colonizing. Nevertheless, in 1624 some Protestant Walloon families were sent to the

Hudson in the ship, New Netherland. Most settled at Fort Orange (Albany). A few of them

stayed on Manhattan Island. The following summer several more families arrived.

Finally in May 1626, the director and a Westphalian, Peter Minuit, was appointed by the

company as first governor of the colony. He arrived in the harbor in his ship, the Sea-Mew,

leading a band of true colonists. These were men who brought with them their wives and

little ones, their cattle and their household goods. They settled down in the land with the

purpose of holding it for themselves and for their children’s children.

1. Which of the following is one reason the Dutch West India Company was founded?

a. to prevent piracy

b. to manufacture weapons and tools

c. to fight Spain

d. to invent new technology

2. One of the ways the Dutch West India Company made money was by

a. trade.

b. selling land in New York.

c. building ships.

d. farming.

3. Peter Minuit was a

a. president of the Dutch West India Company.

b. king of the Netherlands.

c. famous explorer.

d. governor of a colony.

. 10

4. How did the Dutch West India Company make the most money?

11 .

. 12

ALBANY, NEW YORK

by Stefan Bielinski

Albany is one of the oldest cities in the United States. It was founded in 1624. It was

originally a trading post called Fort Orange. It was renamed Albany when New

Netherlands became New York in 1664. The first European residents were Dutch. They

were soon joined by German, Scandinavian, British, French, and African residents.

The fur trade with native hunters diminished. It gave way to more complex commercial,

production, and service enterprises involving a growing settler population. Albany emerged

as the hub of a growing agricultural region. Located at a natural transportation

interchange, Albany attracted newcomers from Europe and the other American colonies.

From Albany settlers populated the Hudson–Mohawk region for the next hundred years.

In New York state, New York City received a royal charter in April 1686. It was the first

city to be so designated. Albany, with a population of about five hundred people was onefourth

the size of New York City. It received its municipal charter from Governor Thomas

Dongan three months later on July 22, 1686. The Dongan Charter incorporated Albany,

fixed its boundaries and set up a municipal government. It endowed the city corporation

with a number of special rights and privileges.

Albany’s essential nature was commercial. Initially, the community economy was based on

the fur trade. By 1686, Albany was evolving into a place where regional farmers bartered

their crops and forest products for imported and locally crafted items. They came to have

tools and other things repaired. They found spiritual and legal guidance. By that time, city

people had begun to divide into business, production, and service enterprises. The Dongan

Charter further enhanced Albany’s status. The English fort provided the community with

its first great government enterprise.

The fledgling community granted a city charter in 1686 was in reality a town of about one

hundred and twenty buildings. They were clustered together city-style and encircled by a

tall, wooden stockade. Seventeenth-century Albany had four principal public buildings. The

city hall was located near the water on Court Street. The Dutch Reformed Church sat in

the middle of the city’s main intersection. A smaller Lutheran church was often without a

pastor. A more imposing wooden fort was located up the hillside and overlooked the

community.

In 1686, most of the people of greater Albany County lived within a clear day’s sight of the

flagpole at Albany’s fort. Population center, goods and service provider, and the only safe

place on the northern frontier, Albany had emerged as the focal point of settlement in the

upriver region of New York.

1. An example of Albany’s “more complex commercial, production, and service

enterprises” would be

a. the fur trade.

b. farming.

c. repairing farmers’ tools.

d. the municipal government.

2. How many people lived in New York City in 1686?

a. 500

b. 1,000

c. 1,500

d. 2,000

3. Which of the following did the Dongan Charter establish?

a. representative government

b. the English fort

c. the size of Albany

d. Albany’s name

4. Which type of building does the passage indicate Albany had?

a. educational

b. private

c. medical

d. financial

5. How did Albany facilitate European settlement of the Hudson–Mohawk region of

New York?

13 .

. 14

PETER MINUIT and THE PATROONS

In 1628, an act was passed in Holland for the purpose of promoting immigration. It

granted a large tract of land to any man who should bring over a colony of fifty souls. It

also granted various privileges, including the title of “Patroon.” These patroons were really

great feudal lords. They farmed out their vast estates to tenants. The tenants held the

ground on various conditions. Their domains were often as large as old-world

principalities. Rensselaerswyck, the property of the Patroon Van Rensselaer, was a tract

containing a thousand square miles.

The introduction of this very aristocratic system was another evidence of the lack of

wisdom of the governing powers. Moreover, the patroons wanted even more extensive

privileges. They were forbidden to enter into the lucrative fur trade. It was the chief

source of profit to the company. The patroons soon began to rebel against this restriction.

They quarreled fiercely with the company’s representatives. They traded on their own

account with the Native Americans. The various private traders cut into the company’s

profits.

For six years, Peter Minuit stayed on good terms with the powerful and haughty patroons.

He ruled the people mildly. By a mixture of tact and firmness, he preserved friendly

relations with the Native Americans and with his English neighbors eastward. He sent a

special embassy to the English settlers. It was most courteously received.

During these years, the trade of the colony increased and flourished. Rich cargoes of

valuable furs were sent to Holland in homeward-bound ships. The population of

Manhattan Island gradually grew in numbers and wealth. Farms or “boueries” were

established. The settlers raised wheat, rye, buckwheat, flax, and beans, while their herds

and flocks throve apace. The company soon built a mill, a brewery, a bakery, and great

warehouses. Society began to gain some of the more essential comforts of civilization.

Nevertheless, the company quarreled with Minuit. He was accused of unduly favoring the

patroons. Their private ventures in the fur trade were encroaching upon the company’s

profits. Moreover, he had been drawn into a scheme of shipbuilding. It was successful. A

very large and fine ship was built and launched in the bay. Nevertheless, it proved much

too expensive for the taste of his employers. Accordingly, Peter Minuit was recalled.

1. A patroon is a type of

a. church official.

b. feudal lord.

c. fur trader.

d. pirate.

15 .

2. Patroons were not allowed to

a. own property.

b. grow tobacco.

c. have tenants.

d. trade fur.

3. Peter Minuit, governor of New Amsterdam, got along well with all of the following

except the

a. company.

b. Native Americans.

c. English.

d. patroons.

4. One of the reasons Peter Minuit lost his job as governor was because he

a. started a war.

b. built too many new buildings.

c. started a shipbuilding business.

d. spent most of his time farming.

5. Do you believe Peter Minuit was a successful governor? Why or why not?

. 16

17 .

TERRITORIAL DISPUTES, 1632–1637

Both England and Holland claimed the country from the Connecticut River to the Delaware

River. Each really wanted it more for purposes of trade than of colonization. Quarrels

often arose over the efforts of rival vessels of the two nationalities to control the trade with

some special band of Indians. An English vessel entered the Hudson and sailed to the head

of navigation. There she anchored and began to barter with the Indians for their furs.

Dutch soldiers from the neighboring Fort Orange (now Albany) fell upon her and drove her

off, confiscating the furs.

At the same time, the Dutch built a fort and established a garrison on the Connecticut

River, at the present site of Hartford. They threatened to hold it by force against the

English. However, the Hollanders failed to make their threats. Puritans from Plymouth

sailed up the river and took possession of the banks in defiance of their foes.

Better luck attended efforts on the Delaware. The Dutch had built a colony on this river.

The colonists fought with the Indians, who fell on them and massacred them to a man.

Then a party of Virginians established themselves in one of the deserted Dutch forts. They

set about founding a settlement and trading post. When the news was brought to the

director at New Amsterdam, he promptly dispatched a party of troops against the invaders.

They were all taken captive and brought in triumph to Manhattan Island.

The director, Van Twiller, hardly knew what to do with them. He scolded them soundly for

the enormity of their offense in trespassing on Dutch territory. Then he shipped them back

to Virginia.

The internal affairs of the colony went more smoothly. There were occasional quarrels with

the powerful patroons, but the director was much too fond of his ease and of wine and high

living to oppress or rule harshly. The value of the trade with the home country on the

whole increased. However, it never became sufficient to make the company take very much

thought for its new possession. Van Twiller, though easygoing to the people, was not an

honest or faithful servant to the company in financial matters. In 1637 he was removed

from his office on the charge of having diverted the monies of the corporation to his own

private use.

1. England and Holland quarreled mostly over

a. fishing rights.

b. shipping rights.

c. trade with Native Americans.

d. religion.

. 18

2. When the Dutch captured some Virginians, Van Twiller dealt with them by

a. sentencing them to prison.

b. sending them back to Virginia.

c. hanging them.

d. drowning them.

3. Van Twiller lost his position as governor because

a. of his treatment of the Virginians.

b. he ruled too harshly.

c. he stole money from the company.

d. trade actually decreased under his rule.

4. What could the Dutch and English have done to avoid conflict?

19 .

. 20

WILHELM KIEFT, 1637–1639

Van Twiller’s successor, Wilhelm Kieft, was much the worst of the four Dutch governors. He

decided to govern by a series of edicts. They were posted on the trees, barns, and fences.

Some of them, such as those forbidding the sale of firearms and gunpowder to the Indians,

were good. Others caused great discontent. He made a bold attempt to stop the drinking

and carousing of the mirth-loving settlers. He interfered with private affairs by settling

when people should go to bed, when laborers should go to work, and the like. The Dutch

were essentially free and liberty-loving. They were accustomed to considerable selfgovernment.

They chafed under the petty tyranny to which they were exposed.

However, under Kieft the appearance of the town was much improved. Streets began to be

laid out. A better class of private houses sprang up. A new church was built. So was the

first tavern. It was a great clumsy inn. It was the property of the company.

Farms made good progress. Fruit trees were planted. Fine cattle were imported. New

settlements were made on the banks of the Hudson and the Sound, on Staten Island, and

on what is now the Jersey shore.

The company made great efforts to further encourage immigration. It gave many

privileges to the poorer class of immigrants. It also continued, in diminishing form, some

of the exceptional advantages granted to the rich men who should form the small colonies.

The colonists received the right hitherto denied them, to manufacture. Unfortunately, the

hereditary privileges of the patroons were continued. These included their right of feudal

jurisdiction, and the exclusive right to hunt, fish, fowl, and grind corn on their vast estates.

The leader in pushing these new settlements was the Patroon de Vries. He was a

handsome, gallant, adventurous man, of brave and generous nature. He was greatly

beloved by the Indians, to whom he was always both firm and kind. The settlers likewise

loved and respected him. He never trespassed on their rights. He was their leader in every

work of danger, whether in exploring strange coasts or in fronting human foes.

Besides the Dutch immigrants, many others of different nationalities came in, particularly

English from the New England colonies. All, upon taking the oath of allegiance, were

treated exactly alike. There was almost complete religious toleration. Many Baptists and

Quakers took refuge among the Hollanders, fleeing from the persecutions of the Puritans.

All this time there was continual squabbling with the neighboring and rival settlements of

European powers. A large body of Swedes, under Minuit, arrived at and claimed the

ownership of the mouth of the Delaware. The English, in spite of many protests, took final

possession of the Connecticut valley and the eastern half of Long Island.

21 .

. 22

1. One way Wilhelm Kieft interfered with people’s lives was by telling them

a. what music they could listen to.

b. what religion to practice.

c. when to go to bed.

d. where they could eat and drink.

2. Which of the following least describes Patroon de Vries?

a. attractive

b. unpopular

c. daring

d. friendly

3. Non-Dutch immigrants were treated

a. worse than the Dutch were.

b. better than the Dutch were.

c. the same as the Dutch were.

d. better than the English, but worse than the Swedes.

4. The Dutch West India Company encouraged poorer immigrants to New Amsterdam

by

a. extending the privileges of the patroons.

b. giving the patroons the exclusive right to hunt, fish, fowl, and grind corn on their

vast estates.

c. allowing poorer immigrants more privileges and permitting manufacturing.

d. squabbling with the neighboring and rival settlements of European powers.

5. Compare and contrast the leadership of Wilhelm Kieft and Patroon de Vries.

23 .

. 24

INDIAN WARS

The distinguishing feature of Wilhelm Kieft’s administration was the succession of bloody

Indian struggles waged between 1640 and 1645. For these wars Kieft himself was mainly

responsible. Kieft was rash, cruel, and irresolute. He precipitated the contest by ordering

a brutal vengeance to be taken on the Raritan tribe. It was for a wrong that they probably

had not committed. They, of course, retaliated in kind. There followed a series of struggles,

separated by short periods of patched-up truce. Kieft took care to stay shut up in the fort.

He wanted to be away from all possible harm. All the wisest and best men—including the

Patroon de Vries, the councilman La Montagne, and the minister, Dominie Bogardus—

protested against his course in bringing on the war.

Early in 1643, by his orders he caused one of the most horrible massacres by which our

annals have ever been disgraced. The dreaded Mohawks had made a sudden foray on the

River Indians who, like the other neighboring tribes, were Algonquins. The River Indians,

fleeing in terror from their adversaries, took refuge close to the wooden walls of New

Amsterdam. There they were at first kindly received. On Shrovetide night, Kieft, with a

hideous and almost inconceivable barbarity and treachery as short-sighted as it was

cowardly, caused bodies of troops to fall on two parties of these helpless and unsuspecting

fugitives. They butchered over a hundred.

This inhuman outrage at once roused every Indian to take a terrible vengeance, and to

wipe out his wrongs in fire and blood. All the tribes fell on the Dutch at once. In a short

time they destroyed every outlying farm and all the smaller settlements, bringing ruin and

desolation upon the entire province. The surviving settlers gathered in New Amsterdam

and in a few of the best fortified smaller villages. The Indians put their prisoners to death

with dreadful tortures. In at least one instance the Dutch retaliated in kind. Neither side

spared the women and children.

The hemmed-in Dutch sent bands of their soldiers, assisted by parties of New England

mercenaries, under a famous woodland fighter, Captain John Underhill, against the Indian

towns. They were able to strike crippling blows at their enemies, because the latter

foolishly clung to their stockaded villages. There the whites would surround them. The

whites would keep them from breaking out by means of their superiority in firearms. The

whites would then set the wooden huts aflame and mercilessly destroy, with torch or bullet,

all the inhabitants, sometimes to the number of several hundred souls. These Indian

stockades offered the best means of defense against rival savages, but they were no

protection against the whites. The whites, on the other hand, were much inferior to the red

men in battle in the open forest. At first the Indians did not understand this. It was in

consequence of this that the seventeenth-century Algonquins suffered not a few

slaughtering defeats at the hands of the New Englanders and New Netherlanders.

Finally, crippled and exhausted, both sides were glad to make peace. The whites again

spread out to their ruined farms. Numerous petitions were sent to Holland asking Kieft’s

removal. Finally this was granted. The harassed colony was given a new director in the

shape of a gallant soldier named Peter Stuyvesant. He arrived and took possession of his

office in May 1647.

25 .

1. The only leading citizen of Manhattan who favored brutality against Native

Americans was

a. Patroon DeVries.

b. councilman.

c. Dominie Bogardus.

d. Governor Wilhelm Kieft.

2. In conducting the wars against the local tribes, Kieft displayed great

a. physical courage.

b. moral courage.

c. cowardice and cruelty.

d. kindness and bravery.

3. Kieft ordered the massacre of ________ Native Americans sheltered at New

Amsterdam.

a. River

b. Raritan

c. Mohawk

d. Pequot

4. What led to the Native Americans’ downfall?

. 26

27 .

PETER STUYVESANT

Peter Stuyvesant had lost a leg in the wars. In its place, he wore a wooden one. It was laced

with silver bands. No other figure of Dutch, nor indeed of colonial days, is so well

remembered; no other has left so deep an impression on Manhattan history and tradition as

this whimsical and obstinate, but brave and gallant old fellow—the kindly tyrant of the little

colony. To this day he stands, in a certain sense, as the typical father of the city.

There are not a few old New Yorkers who half-humorously still pretend to believe the story

that their forefathers handed down from generation to generation. The story is that the

ghost of Peter Stuyvesant, the kindly, self-willed old dictator, still haunts the city he bullied

and loved and sought to guard. At night he stumps to and fro, with a shadowy wooden leg,

through the aisles of St. Mark’s Church, near the spot where his bones lie buried.

Stuyvesant was a man of strong character. His personality impressed all with whom he

came in contact. In many ways he stood as a good representative of his class. He was one

of the well-born commercial aristocracy of Holland. In his own person he illustrated, only

with marked and individual emphasis, the strong and the weak sides of the rich traders.

Like them, he knew how to fight and rule. He feared God and loved liberty. Like them, he

held his head high and sought to do justice according to his lights. However, those lights

were often dim, and his understandings were often harsh and narrow.

He was powerfully built. He had haughty, clear-cut features and a dark complexion. He

always dressed with scrupulous care. He wore the rich costume then worn by the highest

people in his native land. He had proved his courage on more than one stricken field. He

knew how to show both tact and firmness in dealing with his foes. He was far less

successful though, in dealing with his friends. His imperious nature better fitted him to

command a garrison than to rule over a settlement of Dutch freemen.

It was inevitable that a man of his nature, who wished to act justly, but who was testy,

passionate, and full of prejudices, should arouse much dislike and resentment in the

breasts of the men over whom he held sway. These feelings were greatly intensified by his

invariably acting on the assumption that he knew best about their interests, and had

absolute authority to decide upon them. He always proceeded on the theory that it was

harmful to allow the colonists any real measure of self-government. Whatever was given

them was given as a matter of grace, not as an act of right. Hence, though he was a just

man of sternly upright character, he utterly failed to awaken in the hearts of the settlers

any real loyalty to himself or to the government he represented. They felt no desire to stand

by him when he needed their help.

Peter Stuyvesant showed his temper in the first speech he made to the citizens. He

addressed them in the tone of an absolute ruler. He assured them that he would govern

them “as a father does his children.”

. 28

1. Which of the following best describes Peter Stuyvesant’s personality?

a. plain

b. angry

c. easygoing

d. bossy

2. Which of the following least describes Peter Stuyvesant’s physical appearance?

a. strong

b. well-dressed

c. fair-skinned

d. strong facial features

3. Peter Stuyvesant was not well-liked because he

a. was handicapped.

b. had a strong character.

c. treated people like they were children.

d. made unjust laws.

4. What famous person does Peter Stuyvesant remind you of? Why?

29 .

. 30

NEW AMSTERDAM’S POPULATION

Under Peter Stuyvesant, New Amsterdam became a firmly established Dutch colonial

town, instead of an Indian-harried village outpost of civilization. Only in his time did the

Dutch life take on a fixed and definite shape. The first comers were generally poor

adventurers. When it became plainly seen that the colony would be permanent, many wellto-

do people of good families came over. They were burghers who were proud of their coatsof-

arms. They traced their lineage to the great worthies of the ancient Netherlands.

The Dutch formed the ruling and the most numerous class of inhabitants. Then, as now,

the population of the city was very mixed. A great many English, both from old and New

England, had come. The French Huguenots were still more plentiful. There were numbers

of Walloons and not a few Germans. No less than eighteen different languages and dialects

were spoken in the streets. An ominous feature was the abundance of black slaves, brought

by slave-traders and pirates from the “Gold Coast” of Africa.

The population was diverse in more ways than just those of speech and race. The

Europeans who came to this city during its first forty years of life represented almost every

grade of old-world society. Many of these pioneers were men of as high character and

standing as ever took part in founding a new settlement. On the other hand, there were

plenty of vicious and worthless immigrants, too. Many imported bond-servants and

apprentices, both English and Irish—of criminal or semi-criminal tendencies—escaped to

Manhattan from Virginia and New England. Once here, they found congenial associates

from half the countries of continental Europe.

The sharp and strong contrasts in social position, the great differences in moral and

material well-being, and the variety in race, language, and religion, all combined to make

life in New Amsterdam much different than life in the other cities of New England. Those

cities had an orderly uniformity of condition and theocratic democracy.

Society in the New Netherlands was distinctly aristocratic. The highest rank was composed

of the great patroons, with their feudal privileges and vast landed estates. Next in order

came the well-to-do merchant burghers of the town, whose ships went to Europe and Africa,

carrying in their holds now furs or rum, now ivory or slaves. Then came the great bulk of

the population. They were thrifty souls of small means, who worked hard and strove more

or less successfully to live up to the law. Near the bottom came the shifting and

intermingled strata of the lowest class of criminally-minded. Finally, on the bottom rung,

were the slaves.

1. Which of the following nationalities formed the ruling class of New Amsterdam?

a. the English

b. the French Huguenots

c. the Dutch

d. the Walloons

31 .

2. The author describes escaped bond-servants from Virginia and New England as

a. men of high character.

b. distinctly aristocratic.

c. thrifty souls of small means.

d. people of criminal or semi-criminal tendencies.

3. In New Netherlands society, which group held the highest position?

a. patroons

b. burghers

c. middle class

d. criminals

4. Is your community more or less diverse than New Amsterdam was? Explain your

answer.

. 32

33 .

NEW AMSTERDAM’S BUILDINGS

The struggling days of pioneer squalor were over. New Amsterdam had taken on the look

of a quaint little Dutch seaport town. There was always the menace of attack. Not only

the Indians but also the New Englanders might attack. The city needed a barrier for

defense on the landward side. On the present site of Wall Street, a high, strong stockade of

upright timbers stretched across the island. There were occasional blockhouses as

bastions. Where Canal Street is now, the settlers had dug a canal to connect the marshes

on either side of the neck. There were many clear pools and rivulets of water. On one of the

banks, girls spread the house linen they had washed. The path where they walked gave its

name to the street that is still called Maiden Lane.

Manhattan Island was then, for the most part, a tangled wilderness. The wolves caused

great havoc among the cattle, as they grazed loose in the woods. A special reward was

given for their scalps, if taken on the island.

Peter Stuyvesant’s own roomy and picturesque house was built of stone. It was known far

and near as the “Whitehall.” It gave its name to the street on which it stood. The poorest

people lived in huts on the outskirts of town. The houses that lined the streets of the town

itself had a neat and respectable appearance. They were made of wood. Their corners were

checkered with little black and yellow bricks. Their roofs were covered with tiles or

shingles, and surmounted by weathercocks. The doors were adorned with burnished brass

knockers.

Groceries, hardware, and the like were sold in the shops. The shops also displayed every

kind of rich stuff brought from the wealthy cities of Holland. The shops generally occupied

the ground floors of the houses. There was a large, bare church and a good public

schoolhouse. The great tavern had a neatly sanded floor, and heavy chairs and tables. In

the tavern, beds for travelers were hidden in cupboards in the thick walls. Here and there

windmills thrust their arms into the air. The half-moon of wharves jutted out into the

river.

1. Which street was named after the fortifications built to defend the city from attack?

a. Wall Street

b. Canal Street

c. Maiden Lane

d. Whitehall Street

2. Which of the following is evidence that Manhattan was still a wild place?

a. the number of crimes committed

b. wolves attacking the cattle

c. the canal dug by the settlers

d. the use of windmills

. 34

3. Which of the following buildings did not exist in New Amsterdam during Peter

Stuyvesant’s time?

a. a church

b. a tavern

c. a schoolhouse

d. a hospital

4. Would you have liked living in New Amsterdam during the time Peter Stuyvesant

was governor? Why or why not?

35 .

NEW AMSTERDAM LIFE

In New Amsterdam in the early 1600s, the houses of the rich were quaint and comfortable.

They had steeply sloping roofs and crow-step gables. A wide hall led through the middle,

from door to door, with rooms on either side. Everything was solid and substantial. There

were huge, canopied, four-post bedsteads. The rooms had heavy cabinets, chairs, tables,

stools, and settees. There were stores of massive silver plate, each piece a rich heirloom,

engraved with the coats of arms of the owners. There were rugs on the floors, and curtains

and leather hangings on the walls. There were tall eight-day clocks and stiff portraits of

ancestors.

Clumsy carriages—with fat geldings to draw them—stood in a few of the stables. The trim

gardens were filled with shrubbery, fruit trees, and a wealth of flowers. The plants were

laid out in prim sweet-smelling beds, divided by neatly-kept paths.

The poorer men wore blouses or jackets, and wide, baggy breeches. The women wore

bodices and short skirts. Office holders wore their black gowns of office. The gentry wore

the same rich clothing as did their brethren of the Old World. Both ladies and gentlemen

had clothes of every fabric and color.

The ladies’ hair was frizzed and powdered. They wore lots of jewelry. Their gowns were

open in front to show rich petticoats. Their feet were thrust into high-heeled shoes. On

their heads they wore silk hoods instead of bonnets.

The long coats of the gentlemen were finished with silver lace and silver buttons, as were

their velvet doublets. They wore knee breeches, black silk stockings, and low shoes with

silver buckles. They were fond of free and joyous living. They caroused often, drinking

deeply and eating heavily.

The young men and maidens loved dancing parties, picnics, and long sleigh rides in winter.

There were great festivals, especially at Christmas and New Year’s. Christmas was then,

as now, the chief day of the year for the children, devoted to the special service of Santa

Claus. On New Year’s Day, every man called on all his friends.

1. According to the passage above, which of the following items could have been found

in a rich person’s house in New Amsterdam?

a. spiral staircases

b. eight-day clocks

c. showers

d. glass doors and walls

. 36

2. Which of the following did the poorer men of New Amsterdam wear?

a. baggy breeches

b. black gowns

c. long coats

d. black stockings

3. All of the following materials except ________ were used to make clothing worn in

New Amsterdam.

a. silk

b. lace

c. velvet

d. denim

4. One example of the “free and joyous living” of the inhabitants of New Amsterdam

was their

a. barbecues.

b. musical performances.

c. dancing and parties.

d. sporting events.

5. Do you think life in New York has changed much since the early 1600s? Why or why

not?

37 .

. 38

FORT NECK, LONG ISLAND

The most ancient fortification on Long Island is one on Fort Neck. The Indians garrisoned

it in 1653. The English, under the command of Capt. John Underhill, took it from them the

same year. Underhill was a famous woodland fighter. He had previously led New England

mercenaries against the Algonquin Indian towns on behalf of the Dutch. The storming of

this fort was the only battle between the English and Indians on Long Island. On the

subject of this fortification, or these fortifications, for there were more than one of them,

Samuel Jones of Oyster Bay South addressed a letter in the year 1812:

When this part of Long Island was first settled by the Europeans they found two

fortifications in the neighborhood. They were upon a neck of land, ever since called from that

circumstance, Fort Neck. One of them, the remains of which are yet very conspicuous, is on

the southernmost point of land on the neck, adjoining the salt meadow. It is nearly, if not

exactly square, each side of which is about thirty yards in length. The breastwork or parapet

is of earth. There is a ditch on the outside which appears to have been about six feet wide.

The other was on the southernmost point of the Salt Meadow, adjoining the Bay. It consisted

of palisades set in the meadow. The tide has worn away the meadow where the fort stood.

The place is now part of the bay and covered with water. My father has often told me, that

in his memory, part of the palisades were standing.

1. Long Island beyond Brooklyn and Queens was first settled by the

a. French.

b. Spanish.

c. Dutch.

d. English.

2. The conquest of Long Island required taking a fort built and defended by

a. Native Americans.

b. Spanish.

c. Dutch.

d. English.

3. The conquest of Long Island occurred in

a. 1653.

b. 1654.

c. 1688.

d. 1812.

39 .

PETER STUYVESANT’S RULE

Peter Stuyvesant was a decisive man. In 1655, Peter Stuyvesant finished the long

bickering with the Swedes at the mouth of the Delaware. Stuyvesant marched a large force

thither. He captured their forts and took possession of the country. He thereby put an end

to all chance for the establishment of a Scandinavian state on American soil.

The New Englanders on Long Island began to plan a revolt. One of the leaders was the

Indian fighter, Underhill. He promptly seized the leaders. He fined, imprisoned, or

banished them, and secured temporary tranquillity.

From the outset, Stuyvesant’s imperious nature kept him embroiled with the colonists. He

threw his political opponents into jail without trial, or banished them after a trial in which

he himself sat as the judge. He announced that he deemed it treason to complain of the

chief magistrate, whether with or without cause. This naturally threw into a perfect

ferment the citizens of the popular party. They were striving for more freedom with an

obstinacy as great as his own.

He abandoned the policy of complete religious toleration. He not only persecuted the

Baptists and Quakers, but even the Lutherans. He established impost and excise duties

by proclamation, drawing forth a most determined popular protest against taxation

without representation.

He was in perpetual conflict with the council. The “Nine Men,” as they were termed, stood

up stoutly for popular rights. They sent memorial after memorial to Holland, protesting

against the course that was being pursued. The inhabitants also joined in public meetings,

and in other popular manifestations, to denounce the author of their grievances. The

Dutch settlers made common cause with their turbulent New England neighbors of the city

and of Long Island. Stuyvesant himself sent counter-protests. He also made repeated

demands for more men and more money. He wanted to put into good condition the

crumbling and ill-manned fortifications. He wrote home that they would be of no avail at

all to resist any strong attack that might be made by the ever-threatening English. But

the home government cared for its colonies mainly because they were profitable. This

Stuyvesant’s province was not. So the appeals for help were disregarded. The director and

the colonists were left to settle their quarrels as best they might.

Thus, with ceaseless wrangling, with much of petty tyranny on the one hand, and much of

sullen grumbling and discontent on the other, the years went by. Stuyvesant rarely did

serious injustice to any particular man. By his energy, resolution, and executive capacity

he preserved order at home. The colony grew and prospered as it never had done before.

However, the sturdy and resolute freemen over whom he ruled resented bitterly all his

overbearing ways and his deeds of small oppression. They felt only a lukewarm loyalty to

a government that evidently deemed them valuable only in so far as they added to the

wealth of the men who had stayed at home. When the hour of trial came, they naturally

showed an almost apathetic indifference to the overthrow of the rule of Holland.

. 40

1. Peter Stuyvesant and his army conquered the

a. New Englanders on the Delaware.

b. Swedes on the Delaware.

c. Swedes in New England.

d. New Englanders on Long Island.

2. Peter Stuyvesant declared it treason to

a. criticize him.

b. impose taxation without representation.

c. throw political opponents in jail without a trial.

d. persecute Baptists, Quakers, and Lutherans.

3. The city council did all of the following to complain of Stuyvesant’s abuses except

a. hold public protest meetings.

b. complain to the home government in Holland.

c. ally themselves with the New Englanders in Long Island.

d. ally themselves with the New Englanders in Connecticut.

4. Peter Stuyvesant could not

a. preserve order at home.

b. permit the colony to grow and prosper.

c. get the Dutch to repair his fortifications.

d. avoid doing serious injustice to many individuals.

5. Why did Stuyvesant fail to inspire loyalty and enthusiasm among New Amsterdam’s

residents?

41 .

. 42

FALL OF NEW AMSTERDAM

Whenever the English and Dutch were at war, New Amsterdam was in a flutter over the

always-dreaded attack of some English squadron. At last, in 1664, the blow really fell.

There was peace at the time between the two nations. This did not deter the England of the

Stuarts from seizing so helpless a prize as the province of the New Netherlands.

The English government knew well how defenseless the country was. The king and his

ministers determined to take it by a sudden stroke of perfectly cold-blooded treachery. They

made all their preparations in secret. Meanwhile, they did everything they could to deceive

the friendly power at which the blow was aimed.

Stuyvesant had continued without cessation to beseech the home government that he

might be given the means to defend the province. His appeals went unheeded by his profitloving,

money-getting superiors in Holland. He was left with insignificant defenses. They

were guarded by an utterly insufficient force of troops. The unblushing treachery and

deceit by which the English took the city made the victory of small credit to them. The

Dutch, by their supine, short-sighted selfishness and greed, were put in an even less

enviable light.

In September 1664, three or four English frigates and a force of several hundred land

troops under Colonel Richard Nicolls suddenly appeared in the harbor. They were speedily

joined by levies of the already insurgent New Englanders of Long Island. Nicolls had an

overpowering force and was known to be a man of decision. He forthwith demanded the

immediate surrender of the city and province. Stuyvesant wished to fight, even against

such odds. The citizens refused to stand by him. New Amsterdam passed into the hands of

the English without a gun being fired in its defense.

1. The author characterizes the English capture of New Amsterdam as “treacherous”

because the English

a. outnumbered the Dutch.

b. were feared by the Dutch.

c. were at peace with the Dutch at the time.

d. took advantage of the poor Dutch defenses.

2. The reason Peter Stuyvesant had insignificant defenses to defend the city is because

a. the Dutch could not afford to pay the soldiers.

b. nobody was willing to serve in the army.

c. the Dutch were unwilling to spend enough money to defend the city.

d. they had to be brought in by boat.

43 .

3. What do you think would have happened if New Amsterdam had remained a Dutch

colony?

. 44

45 .

. 46

ENGLAND TAKES OVER, 1664

New Amsterdam passed into the hands of the English in 1664 without a gun being fired in

its defense. The conquered province had been patented to the Duke of York. Now it was

named in his honor. Colonel Richard Nicolls, leader of the English invasion, acted as his

agent. Nicolls made the necessary changes with cautious slowness and tact. Vested rights

were interfered with as little as possible. The patroons were turned into manorial lords.

The Dutch and Huguenots were allowed the free exercise of their religion. Indeed, the

feeling was so friendly that for some time the Anglican service was held in the Dutch

Church in the afternoons. No attempt was made to interfere with the language or with the

social and business customs and relations of the citizens. Nicolls showed himself far more

liberal than Stuyvesant in questions of creed. One of the first things he did was to allow

the Lutherans to build a church and install therein a pastor of their own.

Nicolls established a fairly good system of justice, including trial by jury. He granted the

citizens a considerable measure of self-government. However, the fact remained that the

colony had not gained its freedom by changing its condition. It had simply exchanged the

rule of a company for the rule of a duke. Nicolls himself nominated all the new officers of

the city. He chose them from among both the Dutch and the English. He returned a polite

but firm negative to the request of the citizens that they might themselves elect their

representatives. He pursued the same course with the Puritan Long Islanders. The latter

resented his action even more bitterly than did the Dutch.

However, his tact, generosity, and unfailing good temper, and the skill with which he kept

order and secured prosperity endeared him to the colonists, even though at times they did

just realize that there was an iron hand beneath the velvet glove. He completely pacified

the Indians. During his term of command they remained almost absolutely tranquil, for the

first time in a quarter of a century. He put down all criminals. He sternly repressed the

licentiousness of his own soldiery, forcing them to behave well to the citizens. His honesty

in financial matters was so great that he actually impoverished himself during his

administration of the province. Meanwhile, the city flourished. There was free trade with

England and the English possessions. There was even, for some time, a restricted right to

trade with certain of the Dutch ports.

Nicolls soon wearied of his position. He sought leave to resign. However, he was too valuable

a servant for the duke to permit this until the war with Holland—which had been largely

brought on by the treacherous seizure of New Amsterdam—at length came to a close. The

Peace of Breda left New York in the hands of the English. On both sides the combatants had

warred for the purpose of getting possessions which should benefit their own pockets. They

had no desire to found states of free men of their own race. They sought to establish tradingposts

from where they could bring spices and jewels and precious metals, rather than to

plant commonwealths of their children on the continents that were waiting to be conquered.

The Dutch regarded the loss of New Amsterdam as no great loss. They were more interested

in retaining their southern possessions. The English were inclined to grumble, and the

Dutch to rejoice, because the former received New York rather than Surinam. As for Nicolls,

when his hands were thus freed he returned home. He had shown himself a warm friend to

the colonists, especially the Dutch, who greatly mourned his going.

1. Col. Richard Nicolls was considered a more liberal ruler than Stuyvesant because of

his

a. cautiousness.

b. peace with the Indians.

c. religious tolerance.

d. treatment of criminals.

2. Some of the colonists resented Col. Nicolls because he would not allow them

a. religious freedom.

b. to elect their own representatives.

c. to speak freely.

d. to trade with the Indians.

3. The Dutch and English were most interested in

a. creating independent countries that could become trade partners.

b. establishing trading-posts where they could get rich.

c. founding commonwealths that would increase their populations.

d. capturing as much land as possible for agricultural activities.

4. The English were disappointed to receive New York because

a. it was Dutch.

b. it was too big.

c. it was hard to defend.

d. they would have preferred Surinam.

5. Why do you think Col. Nicolls decided to allow the citizens of New York more freedom

than Peter Stuyvesant had given them?

47 .

. 48

THE DUTCH WIN NEW YORK BACK

Francis Lovelace was a gallant, generous, and honest gentleman. Being fond of racing, he

gave prizes to be won by the swiftest horses on the Long Island racecourse. With the

Indians he kept on good terms.

Like his predecessor, Lovelace’s chief troubles were with the hardheaded and stiff-necked

children of the Puritans on Long Island. When he attempted to tax them to build up the

fort on Manhattan, they stoutly refused. They sent him an indignant protest. They were

not interested in paying to protect the English occupation of Manhattan.

Trade increased and ships were built. In addition to commerce, many of the seafaring folk

took to the cod and whale fisheries, which had just been started off the coasts. The whales

were very plentiful. Several were killed in the harbor itself. The merchants began to hold

weekly meetings. That laid the foundation for the New York Exchange. Wealth increased

among all classes, bringing comfort and even some attempt at luxury.

However, in July 1673, a Dutch squadron appeared in the lower bay. England and Holland

were at war again. The Dutch residents, members of the militia, would not fight against

their countrymen. The other citizens were not inclined to run any risk in a contest that

concerned them so little. Dutch frigates sailed up to within musket-shot of the fort. Firing

began on both sides. After receiving a couple of broadsides that killed and wounded several

of the garrison, the English flag was struck. The fort was surrendered to the Dutch troops,

who had already landed, under the command of Capt. Anthony Colve. So ended the first

nine years of English supremacy at the mouth of the Hudson.

The victors at once proceeded to undo the work of the men they had ousted. Dutch was once

more made the formal official language. Colve became the director of the province. Colve

was a rough, imperious, resolute man, a good soldier, but with no great regard for civil

liberty. The whole province was speedily reduced. The Dutch towns along the Hudson

submitted gladly. The Puritan villages on Long Island, appealing to Connecticut for help,

were sullen and showed symptoms of defiance. However, trained soldiers and a wellequipped

squadron backed Colve up. He gave notice to the Long Islanders that unless they

were prepared to stand the chances of war they must submit at once. Submit they did,

Connecticut not daring to interfere. The New Englanders had been willing enough to defy

and to threaten the conquest of the New Netherlands while the province was weakly held

by an insufficient force. They were too prudent to provoke a contest with men of such

fighting temper and undoubted capacity as Colve and his war-hardened troops and seamen.

The second period of Dutch supremacy on Manhattan Island lasted for just a year and a

quarter. Then in November 1674, the city was again given up to the English. It was done

so in accordance with the terms of peace between the belligerent powers. The treaty

provided for the mutual restitution of all conquered territory. With this second transfer

New Amsterdam definitely assumed the name of “New York.” The province now simply

became one of the English colonies in America.

49 .

1. Francis Lovelace had problems with the Long Island Puritans because they

a. spoke a different language.

b. practiced a different religion.

c. didn’t want to pay taxes.

d. hated the Indians.

2. One of the reasons the English lost New York in 1673 was because the

a. English soldiers were busy fighting Indians on Long Island.

b. defenders ran out of supplies because of the Dutch naval blockade.

c. Dutch militia would not fight against other Dutch soldiers.

d. English had no ships to defend the harbor.

3. When the Dutch recaptured New York, the Long Island Puritans

a. happily submitted to Dutch rule.

b. unhappily submitted to Dutch rule.

c. declared their independence.

d. joined with Connecticut.

4. The New Englanders were unwilling to attack New Netherlands because

a. it was well defended.

b. they were too busy fighting the French.

c. were at peace with the Dutch.

d. they lacked a navy.

5. What do you think life was like for the citizens of New Amsterdam/New York as they

switched back and forth from Dutch to British rule twice? Tell three ways you think

this affected the city’s inhabitants.

. 50

51 .

BRITISH RULE UNDER SIR EDMUND ANDROS

The Dutch, who had lost New Amsterdam to the English and then reconquered it, now had

to give it up by treaty. Sir Edmund Andros was appointed by the English king as the

governor who was to receive New York from the hands of Director Colve. This he did

formally and in state. Many courtesies were exchanged between the outgoing and

incoming rulers. Colve presented Andros with his own stagecoach and the three horses

that drew it. Andros at once reinstated the English form of government in both province

and city. Once more—and this time finally—he made English the official language. New

York was still considered a proprietary colony of King James. New Jersey was severed from

it and became a distinct province. The city itself, which had numbered some fifteen

hundred inhabitants at the date of the original conquest from the Dutch, included about

three thousand when English rule was established for the second time.

The new English governor of New York, Sir Edmund Andros, began a series of high-handed

proceedings. They roused ill feeling among the poor but independent-minded citizens of all

nationalities. He clashed less with the Manhattaners than with the Long Islanders. Under

his rule, moreover, New York’s attitude as regards the Puritan commonwealths of New

England continued to be as hostile as ever. Toward them Andros adopted the exact tone of

his Dutch predecessors. He asserted the right of his colony to all land west of the

Connecticut. He actually assembled a large body of troops with which to subdue the New

England towns on its banks. He also led a force against New London on Long Island

Sound. He only halted when it became evident that such a proceeding would be

desperately resisted, and would surely bring on an inter-colonial war.

Andros was certainly true to his master. Yet King James became suspicious of him. Andros

had been governor for over six years. Then the king suddenly summoned him home. King

James sent over a special agent, or spy, to examine the affairs of the colony. Early in

January 1681, Andros left for London. There he speedily cleared his name of all suspicion,

and came into high favor once more.

New York meanwhile was left under the charge of Lieutenant-Governor Brockholls. He

was an inefficient man, utterly unable to cope with the situation. He was hampered rather

than aided by the duke’s special agents, who bungled everything. They soon became the

laughingstock of the population. In consequence, the province speedily fell into a condition

not very far removed from anarchy. The traders refused to pay customs duties. Brockholls

was too timid to try to collect them. Taxes generally fell into arrears. Disorderly meetings

were held in various places. Mob violence was threatened. The stoppage of the collections

of taxes caused the colony to become a drain instead of a source of revenue to King James.

. 52

1. Which of the following changes occurred when Sir Edmund Andros took control of

New York?

a. Dutch was made the official language.

b. The citizens were allowed to form their own representative government.

c. New Jersey was separated from New York.

d. Taxes were doubled.

2. The source of the dispute between New York and New England was

a. religious freedom.

b. the land west of the Connecticut River.

c. Long Island.

d. taxes.

3. After his recall to London, Sir Edmund Andros was

a. cleared of any wrongdoing.

b. found guilty but pardoned.

c. found guilty and executed.

d. immediately sent back to New York.

4. Which of the following best describes Brockholls’ leadership?

a. high-handed

b. weak

c. bold

d. creative

5. What would your school be like if Lieutenant-Governor Brockholls became the

principal?

53 .

. 54

A CHARTER OF LIBERTIES AND PRIVILEGES

In order to regain control, James, Duke of York, granted New York the right to elect an

assembly. He also appointed a new governor. The assembly consisted of eighteen members.

The majority were Dutch. They promptly passed a number of acts. By far the most

important was the special “charter of Liberties and Privileges.” In it the right of selftaxation

was reserved to the colonists, except that certain specific duties on importations

were allowed to the duke and his heirs.

The main features of self-government, so long and earnestly desired by the people, were

also secured. Entire liberty of conscience and religion was guaranteed to all. This charter

was sent over to the duke. He suggested several small amendments. They were made. He

then signed and sealed it in 1683. However, he did not deliver it. Thus it never formally

went into effect. Yet the government of the colony of New York was carried on under its

provisions for several years.

James did grant the city itself a charter of special rights and privileges. The instrument

confirmed the city in the possession of the privileges it already possessed. It also granted

the city a large quantity of real estate.

One of the acts of this first assembly was well in line with the policy of extreme liberality

toward all foreign-born citizens that New York has always consistently followed. It

conferred full rights of citizenship upon all white foreigners who should take the oath of

allegiance. The especial purpose of passing the act was to benefit the Huguenots. They

were French Protestants. They were being expelled from France by tens of thousands,

thanks to the cruel bigotry of the Catholic French king, Louis XIV.

With the return of order and the dawn of liberty, the city once more began to flourish.

Trade increased. The fisheries did well. New buildings were put up. Taxes were paid

without grumbling. Addresses of gratitude were sent to the duke. The citizens were

fervent in their praise of Dongan, the governor.

Even the religious animosities were for the moment softened. The old church in the fort

was used every Sunday by the representatives of all three of the leading creeds. The

services were held in as many different languages. There was Dutch in the morning,

French at midday, and English, by the Episcopalians, in the afternoon. The governor, a

Roman Catholic, and his few fellow-religionists worshiped in a little chapel. Jews had been

in New Amsterdam since 1654. They were refugees from the Portuguese conquest of Dutch

Brazil.

1. James, Duke of York, did not in effect grant New York’s

a. right of most taxation to the colonists.

b. complete liberty of conscience.

c. right to elect an assembly.

d. right for women to vote.

55 .

2. James gave the city valuable

a. water rights.

b. trade rights.

c. real estate.

d. gems.

3. The city welcomed foreign-born citizens, especially

a. African Americans.

b. Native Americans.

c. Inuit.

d. French Huguenots.

4. Why do you think New York was so tolerant of religious diversity when so few other

places were?

. 56

GOVERNMENTS OVERTHROWN

No sooner had James, the Duke of York, become king than he dropped the mask of

liberality. In 1688 Dongan himself was deprived of the control of the province he had ruled

so faithfully and wisely. The king was bent upon being absolute master of the colonies no

less than of the home country. In the spring of that year he threw New England, New York,

and New Jersey into one province. He abolished all the different charters. He put the

colonists under the direct control of the royal governor. Dongan was too liberal a man to be

entrusted with the carrying out of such a policy. Sir Edmund Andros was sent over in his

stead. Andros was to act as the instrument for depriving the people of such measure of

freedom as they possessed.

The mass of the people in both New York and New England speedily became welded into

one in opposition to the absolutism of the Stuart king. Hollander and Puritan were knit

together by the bond of a common hatred to the common oppressor. They were outraged

because of the loss of their political rights. They feared greatly lest they should soon also

lose their religious freedom. Moreover, the colonies were already jealous of one another, and

deeply imbued with the Separatist feeling. They counted the loss of their special charters

and the obliteration of their boundary lines that they might be put under one government

as intolerable grievances.

They did not have to bear them long. That very year William of Orange landed in England.

He drove the last Stuart king from his throne. The news reached America early in 1689.

Andros was in Boston. The New Englanders rose instantly and threw him into prison.

The accession of the Dutch prince to the throne of England added another to the forces that

were tending to make the various ethnic elements of New York fuse together. All New

Yorkers could be loyal to the Dutch prince, who wore an English crown and was their

special champion against a hostile creed and race. For the next eighty years Holland was

England’s ally, so that the Hollanders in America saw nothing at work in European politics

that should make them unfriendly to their fellow English citizens. The one great enemy of

both races was France. Their interests and enmities were the same. They were also

identical with those of the Huguenots, who formed the third great element in the

population.

1. King James wanted New England, New York, and New Jersey to

a. have more political freedom.

b. have more religious freedom.

c. preserve their separate identities.

d. become one royal colony under his absolute control.

57 .

2. King James appointed as royal governor

a. the incumbent governor, Dongan.

b. Sir Edmond Andros.

c. William of Orange.

d. Patroon DeVries.

3. King James was overthrown in the Glorious Revolution of 1688 by

a. the incumbent governor, Dongan.

b. Sir Edmond Andros.

c. William of Orange.

d. Patroon DeVries.

4. What united the English, Dutch and French Huguenot residents of New York?

. 58

FRONTENAC

Frontenac’s task was to make war on the English and their Iroquois allies. He had before

him the king’s instructions as to the means for effecting this. The king aimed at nothing

less than the conquest of the English colonies in America. In 1664, the English, by a

sudden blow in time of peace, had captured New Netherland, the Dutch colony on the

Hudson, which then became New York. Now, a quarter of a century later, France thought

to strike a similar blow against the English. Louis XIV was resolved that the conquest

should be complete.

The Dutch power had fallen before a meager naval force. The English now would have to

face one much more formidable. Two French ships were to cross the sea. They were to lie

in wait near New York. Meanwhile from Canada, sixteen hundred armed men, a thousand

of them French regular troops, were to advance by land into the heart of the colony. They

were to seize Albany and all the boats there available. Then they were to descend by the

Hudson to New York. The warships, hovering off the coast, would then enter New York

harbor at the same time that the land forces made their attack.

The village, for it was hardly more than this, contained, as the French believed, only some

two hundred houses and four hundred fighting men. It was thought that a month would

suffice to complete this whole work of conquest. Once victors, the French were to show no

pity. All private property, except that of Catholics, was to be confiscated. Catholics,

whether English or Dutch, were to be left undisturbed if not too numerous and if they

would take the oath of allegiance to Louis XIV and show some promise of keeping it. Rich

Protestants were to be held for ransom. All the other inhabitants, except those whom the

French might find useful for their own purposes, were to be driven out of the colony,

homeless wanderers. They were to be scattered far so that they could not combine to

recover what they had lost. With New York taken, New England would be so weakened

that in time it too would fall. Such was the plan of conquest that came from the brilliant

chambers at Versailles.

New York did not fall. The expedition so carefully planned came to nothing. Frontenac had

never shown much faith in the enterprise. At Quebec, on his arrival in the autumn of 1689,

he was planning something less ideally perfect, but certain to produce results. The scarred

old courtier intended so to terrorize the English that they should make no aggressive

advance. He hoped to encourage the French to believe themselves superior to their rivals.

Above all, he wanted to prove to the Indian tribes that prudence dictated alliance with the

French and not with the English.

Frontenac wrote a tale of blood. There were three war parties. One set out from Montreal

against New York. One from Three Rivers and one from Quebec set out against the frontier

settlements of New Hampshire and Maine. To describe one is to describe all. A band of one

hundred sixty Frenchmen, with nearly as many Indians, gathered at Montreal in midwinter.

The ground is deep with snow and they troop on snowshoes across the white

wastes. Dragging on sleds the needed supplies, they march up the Richelieu River and over

the frozen surface of Lake Champlain. As they advance with caution into the colony of New

York they suffer terribly, now from bitter cold, now from thaws which make the soft trail

59 .

almost impassable. On a February night their scouts tell them that they are near

Schenectady, on the English frontier. There are young members of the Canadian noblesse

in the party. In the dead of night they creep up to the paling which surrounds the village.

The signal is given and the village is awakened by the terrible war-whoop. Axes and

hatchets smash doors. Women and children are killed as they lie in bed, or kneel, shrieking

for mercy. Houses are set on fire and living human beings are thrown into the flames. By

midday the assailants have finished their dread work and are retreating along the forest

paths dragging with them a few miserable captives. In this winter of 1689–1690, raiding

parties also came back from the borders of New Hampshire and of Maine with news of

similar exploits, and Quebec and Montreal glowed with the joy of victory.

1. Louis XIV wanted France to capture New York just as the ________ had captured

New York previously.

a. Dutch

b. French

c. English

d. Canadians

2. The French planned to attack New York City

a. only by sea.

b. by land and by sea.

c. with the help of rich Protestants.

d. only by land.

3. Instead of attacking New York City, Frontenac attacked ________ frontier settlements

from ________.

a. New York . . . Montreal

b. New Hampshire . . . Montreal

c. Maine . . . Montreal

d. New York . . . Quebec

. 60

4. Describe the French attack on Schenectady. Who participated? Do you think that

this was an appropriate tactic of war?

61 .

. 62

JACOB LEISLER

The leader of the popular party in New York at the time of Andros’ overthrow was a man

named Jacob Leisler. Leisler was a merchant of property and a deacon in the Dutch

Reformed Church. He was also a captain of one of the six militia trainbands. He was a

zealous Protestant and Republican, a fanatical hater of the Roman Catholic Church, and

only a little less opposed to the episcopacy of the English. Leisler had imported a cargo of

wine from Europe. He refused to pay the duties on the grounds that the collector of the port

was a Catholic. The council sided with the collector. High words passed between them and

Leisler, ending with a furious quarrel and the interchange of threats. The common folk at

once made the cause of the recalcitrant wine merchant their own, and adopted him as their

champion. It was a position for which he was well-fitted by his truculent daring and energy.

Many wild stories were afloat as to the plots that were being concocted by the

governmental officers, whom most of the citizens firmly believed to be under the influence

of the Catholics and in secret league with the fallen monarch. It was rumored, now that

they were about to surrender the city to the French, now that they were plotting to procure

an uprising of the Catholics and massacre of the Protestants. As the Protestants

outnumbered the Catholics twenty to one, this fear shows the state of foolish panic to which

the people had been wrought. Foolish or not, their excitement kept rising. They became

more and more angry and uneasy.

At noon on May 31, 1689, Leisler summoned the citizens to arms by beat of drum,

mustering his own trainband before his house. The suddenness of the movement, and

Leisler’s energy, paralyzed the opposition. The lieutenant governor yielded up the fort, no

time being given him to prepare for resistance. The militia, who marched into their

presence as they sat in City Hall, speedily overawed the city council. The popular party for

the first time was in complete control of the city.

Leisler treated the city as under martial law. Yet in certain matters he showed his leaning

toward democracy. Thus, instead of appointing a mayor, he allowed the freeholders to elect

one. This was the first and, until 1834, the last elective mayor of New York. The opposition

to his rule outside of Manhattan Island was very strong from the outset. Albany, under the

lead of Schuyler, refused to recognize his authority until forced to do so by the pressing

danger from the Canadian French and their savage allies.

In outside matters Leisler, the usurping governor, showed breadth of mind. Most notably

he called a congress of the colonies. It was the first of its kind. It met in New York in the

spring of 1690. The purpose of the meeting was to plan a joint attack on Canada. Count

Frontenac’s war parties were cruelly harassing the outlying settlements of both New York

and New England. A small army of Connecticut men and New Yorkers was assembled.

They marched to the head of Lake Champlain. Owing to mismanagement, they

accomplished nothing. The expedition was finally abandoned after a bitter quarrel

between Leisler and his New England allies.

Leisler’s New York privateers captured a number of French ships. Nothing else against

France was accomplished beyond a couple of brilliant raids made by Schuyler up to the

63 .

walls of Montreal. Yet, though this intercolonial congress produced such small results, it

marks an era in the growth of the provinces that afterward became the United States. It

was the first occasion on which the colonies ever showed the least tendency to act together.

Up to this time their several paths of development had been entirely separate, and their

interests independent and usually conflicting. After this date they had a certain loose

connection with one another.

The repeated petitions of the citizens unhappy with Leisler’s autocratic rule attracted the

attention of King William. To stop the disorders the king commissioned a governor and a

lieutenant governor. They were sent out to the colony with an adequate force of regular

troops. The ship carrying the governor was blown out of its course. When Ingoldsby, the

lieutenant governor, landed on Manhattan Island early in February 1691, Leisler refused

to recognize his authority. The mass of the citizens supported Ingoldsby. The militia stood

by Leisler. For six weeks the two parties remained under arms, threatening each other.

Ingoldsby’s headquarters were in City Hall. Leisler’s were in the fort. Then a skirmish

took place in which several of Ingoldsby’s regulars were killed or wounded. Leisler’s

militia, shielded by the fort, escaped unharmed. The very day after this, Governor

Sloughter’s ship appeared in the harbor. He immediately landed and took command. The

following morning Leisler’s militia deserted him. He and his chief officers were promptly

seized and imprisoned. They were tried for high treason. Leisler and Milborne, the two

ringleaders, were adjudged guilty. Most of the respectable citizens, including the

clergymen of every denomination, demanded their death as affording the only warrant for

the future safety of the colony. They were hanged.

1. Jacob Leisler was not a

a. merchant.

b. Catholic.

c. captain of the militia.

d. zealous Protestant.

2. Jacob Leisler had imported a cargo of

a. rum.

b. whiskey.

c. wine.

d. wool.

3. Leisler refused to pay duties on his cargo because the collector

a. had no legal right to collect it.

b. was English.

c. was Dutch.

d. was Catholic.

. 64

4. The Catholic king, James II, had just been overthrown in England, but the

Protestants of New York feared an

a. uprising of the Dutch.

b. uprising of the English.

c. uprising of the Catholics.

d. invasion by the French.

5. Jacob Leisler took over New York with

a. little bloodshed.

b. great bloodshed.

c. a show of power.

d. a massacre.

6. Albany refused to recognize Leisler as governor until

a. he marched to Albany with an army.

b. he captured Schuyler.

c. they needed his help to defend the area.

d. the French and Indians captured Albany.

7. Leisler called a congress of colonies to organize

a. a protest against England.

b. an attack on Canada.

c. an attack on New England.

d. a treaty with France.

8. Leisler’s rule ended when ________ appeared in New York.

a. Sloughter

b. Ingoldsby

c. Milborne

d. King William

65 .

9. In 1676 in Virginia, Nathaniel Bacon, with great popular support, had overthrown

the royal governor and taken power. He and his supporters acted out of fear and

resentment of the Indians. Compare Bacon’s Rebellion to Leisler’s.

. 66

67 .

PIRATES

Throughout the late seventeenth century, New York was a little seaport town. It was

without manufacturers. It was dependent upon ocean industries for its well-being. There

was little inland commerce. Everything was done by shipping along the waterways. The

merchants were engaged in the river trade with Albany and the interior, in the coast trade

with the neighboring colonies, in the fisheries, and in the sea trade with England, Africa,

and the East and West Indies.

Every few years there occurred a prolonged maritime war with either France or Spain, and

sometimes with both. Then the seas were scourged and the coasts vexed by the warships

and privateers of the hostile powers. The intervals of peace were troubled by the ravages

of pirates. Commerce was not a merely peaceful calling.

The seafaring folk, or those whose business was connected with theirs, formed the bulk of

New York’s population. The poor man went to sea in the vessel the richer man built or

owned or commanded. Where the one risked life and limb, the other at least risked his

fortune and future. Many of the ventures were attended with great danger even in times

of peace. Besides the common risks of storm and wreck, other and peculiar perils were

braved by the ships that sailed for the Guinea Coast. They went to take part in the

profitable, but hideously brutal and revolting, trade for slaves. The traffic with the strange

coast cities of the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean likewise had dangers all its own. Pirate

and sultan and savage chief had all to be guarded against, and sometimes outwitted, and

sometimes outfought.

Moreover, the New York merchants and seamen were themselves ready enough to risk their

lives and money in legal warfare or illegal plundering. In every war the people plunged into

the business of privateering with immense zest and eagerness. New York as a province

dreaded the Canadians and Indians. New York City feared only the fleets of France. Her

citizens warred, as well as traded, chiefly on the ocean. Privateering was a species of

gambling that combined the certainty of exciting adventure with the chance of enormous

profit. Many of the merchants who fitted out privateers lost heavily. Many others made

prizes so rich that the profits of ordinary voyages sank into insignificance by comparison.

Spanish treasure ships and French vessels laden with costly stuffs from the West Indies or

the Orient were brought into New York harbor again and again. When the prize was very

rich and the crew of the privateer large, the homecoming of the latter meant a riot. In such

a case the flushed privateersmen celebrated their victory with wild orgies and outrages, and

finally had to be put down by actual battle in the streets. The landowners were often

merchants as well. More than one of them was able to flank the gateway of his manor-house

with the carved prows and figureheads of the vessels his own privateers had captured.

There were plenty of adventurous young New Yorkers, of good blood, who were themselves

privateersmen, Red-Sea men, or slavers. To the life of the growing town on Manhattan

Island, their presence added an air of dash and adventure. There was a suggestion of the

Orient and of hazardous fortunes, ill made and lightly lost, in the costly goods with which

the rich burghers and manorial lords decked their roomy houses, and clothed themselves

. 68

and their wives. The dress of the time was picturesque. The small social world of New York

looked leniently on the men whose deeds had made it possible to go clad in rich raiment.

More than one sea-chief of doubtful antecedents held his head high among the New York

people of position, on the infrequent occasions when he landed. While he celebrated and

lived at ease his black-hulled, rakish craft was discharging her cargo at the wharves, or

refitting for another mysterious voyage. The grim-visaged pirate captain, in his laced cap,

rich jacket, and short white knee-trunks, with heavy gold chains round his neck, and jewelhilted

dagger in belt, was a striking and characteristic feature of New York life at the close

of the seventeenth century.

1. In the late seventeenth century, on which of the following industries was New York

most dependent?

a. manufacturing

b. trade and shipping

c. farming

d. entertainment

2. One of the common risks faced by New York’s seafaring folk was

a. sea monsters.

b. shipwreck.

c. unemployment.

d. bankruptcy.

3. Privateering was all of the following except

a. exciting.

b. potentially profitable.

c. risky.

d. a reliable source of income.

4. When privateers returned to New York with treasure they often

a. went to church.

b. went home and slept.

c. caused riots.

d. went to the bank.

5. New Yorkers viewed pirates with

a. acceptance.

b. caution.

c. jealousy.

d. anger.

69 .

6. What career or profession of today do you think is most similar to that of the pirates

or privateers of 17th-century New York. Why?

. 70

EARL OF BELLOMONT and CAPTAIN KIDD

Early in 1698, the Earl of Bellomont was appointed governor. He was a man of pure life

and strict honor. He was a far nobler type than the average colonial governor. Bellomont

at once espoused the cause of the common people. During his three years’ rule in New York

the popular party was uppermost.

From the outset he was forced into an unrelenting war on many public officials. They were

given over to financial dishonesty and bribery. There was corrupt collusion with the

merchants, pirates, and smugglers. Bellomont enforced the laws of trade with rigid

severity. He put down smuggling. In every way he fought the unscrupulous greed of the

great merchants. He also hunted away the pirates. He hung in chains those whom he

caught on the different headlands of the coast.

Captain Kidd was a daring seaman. He had a good character, as seafaring characters went.

He agreed to assist the Earl of Bellomont’s plans for pirate hunting. The earl offered to fit

out Kidd for a cruise against the pirates, whose haunts he well knew. Other investors in

the project included several other English noblemen and one New Yorker, Livingston.

Livingston was the founder of a line of manorial lords. All were to get shares in whatever

plunder might be obtained from the ships of the captured freebooters.

Kidd’s proposed enterprise attracted much attention. He was given a fine bark. He found

no difficulty in manning her with a crew better fitted for warlike than for peaceful pursuits.

He cruised after pirates for some time, but with indifferent success.

Kidd then turned pirate himself. He became one of the scourges of the ocean. He haunted

the New York and New England coasts at times. He took to landing in out-of-the-way

havens and burying his bloodstained treasure on lonely beaches and islands. Finally the

earl caught his backsliding friend. Captain Kidd was hung in chains at Execution Dock.

The peculiar circumstances of Kidd’s turning pirate attracted widespread attention. He

was far from the most successful pirate. However, he became a favorite subject for ballads.

He gradually grew to be accepted in the popular mind as the archetype of his kind. The

search for his buried treasure was successful in one or two instances. It has become almost

a recognized industry among the more imaginative dwellers by the sea.

Bellomont died in 1701. There followed a period of the utmost confusion. The common and

aristocratic factions almost came to civil war. Two of the aristocratic leaders were tried for

alleged treason. A disorderly election followed for aldermen in New York. Both parties

claimed victory in this election. Voting in many of the precincts had been distinguished by

the most flagrant fraud. All the contending aldermen proceeded to try to take their seats

at the same time. The resulting riot was ended by a compromise.

71 .

1. The Earl of Bellomont fought against public officials because they

a. supported Captain Kidd.

b. had opposed the aristocrats.

c. were corrupt.

d. tried to stop smuggling.

2. The Earl of Bellomont hired Captain Kidd to

a. hunt pirates.

b. control the public officials.

c. defend the city harbor.

d. sail passenger ships to London.

3. The author most likely views Captain Kidd as

a. the greatest pirate that ever lived.

b. a somewhat successful pirate.

c. a highly unsuccessful pirate.

d. a little known pirate.

4. After the Earl of Bellomont died,

a. Captain Kidd took his place.

b. the public officials took over.

c. there was nearly a civil war.

d. New York became a democracy.

5. Why do you think Captain Kidd became a pirate? Write a letter from Captain Kidd

to his wife that explains why he decided to become a pirate.

. 72

73 .

. 74

LORD CORNBURY, 1702–1708

In 1702, Queen Anne ascended the throne. She appointed her nephew, Lord Cornbury,

governor of New York. He promptly restored order by putting down the common party. By

his influence the aristocracy were once more placed in power. To say the truth, the popular

party, by its violence and the corruption of some of its chiefs, had done much to forfeit the

good will of the respectable middle classes.

Cornbury, however, did democracy a good turn by drowning the memory of its

shortcomings. He was very nearly an ideal example of what a royal governor should not

be. He was both silly and wicked. He hated the popular party. In all the ways that he

could he curtailed the political rights of the people. He favored the manorial lords and rich

merchants against the common people, but he did all he could to wrong even these favorites

when it was for his own interest to do so. He took bribes, very thinly disguised as gifts. He

was always in debt and was given to debauchery of various kinds. One of his amusements

was to masquerade in women’s garments. He was inordinately proud that, when thus

dressed, he looked like Queen Anne.

Cornbury added bigotry to his other failings. He persecuted the Presbyterians, who were

endeavoring to get a foothold in the colony. He imprisoned their ministers and confiscated

their little meetinghouses. In this respect, however, he was just a shade worse than the

men he ruled over. The assembly had passed a law condemning all Catholic priests found

in the colony to death.

Lord Cornbury took for himself money furnished by the assembly to put New York harbor

into a state of defense. The result was that a French warship once entered the lower bay

and threw the whole city into terror.

Finally, the citizens of all parties became so exasperated against him as to demand his

removal. This was granted in 1708. Before he could leave the colony he was thrown into

prison for debt.

In dealing with Lord Cornbury the assembly took very high ground in regard to the right of

the colony to regulate its own affairs. It insisted on the right of the popular branch of the

government to fix the taxes, and to appoint most of the public officers and regulate their fees.

1. One of the reasons the middle classes did not like the popular party was because of

its

a. support of Lord Cornbury.

b. use of violence.

c. opposition to the Leislerians.

d. hatred of Catholics.

75 .

2. Lord Cornbury was probably best liked by the

a. popular party.

b. manorial lords.

c. Presbyterians.

d. Catholics.

3. Which of the following was not one of Lord Cornbury’s faults?

a. started wars

b. often in debt

c. took bribes

d. religious bigotry

4. Why were most New Yorkers happy when Lord Cornbury was removed from office?

Give at least three separate reasons.

. 76

77 .

SLAVE REVOLT

On April 7, 1712, between one and two o’clock in the morning, the house of Peter Van

Tilburgh in New York City was set on fire by blacks. This was evidently meant as a signal

for a general revolt.

The cry of “Fire!” roused the neighboring inhabitants. They rushed out through the

unpaved, muddy streets toward the blazing building. As they approached it, they saw to

their amazement, in the red light of the flames, a band of blacks standing in front, armed

with guns and long knives. The whites could hardly comprehend what the strange

apparition meant. The blacks fired and then rushed on them with their knives, killing

several on the spot.

The rest of the whites, leaving the building to the mercy of the flames, ran to the fort on

the Battery. There they roused the governor. Springing from his bed, he rushed out and

ordered a cannon to be fired from the ramparts to alarm the town. The heavy report

boomed over the bay and shook the buildings of the town. The inhabitants leaped from

their beds and, looking out of the windows, saw the sky lurid with flames. They heard the

heavy splash of soldiers through the mud. The next moment they saw bayonets gleam out

of the gloom, as they hurried forward towards the fire. In the meantime, other blacks had

rushed to the spot.

The rioters stood firm until they saw the bayonets flashing in the firelight. Then, giving

one volley, they fled into the darkness northward, towards what is now Wall Street. When

they met some scattered inhabitants who had been roused by the cannon and were

hastening to the fire, they attacked them with their knives, killing and wounding several.

Firing at random into the darkness, the soldiers followed after them, accompanied by a

crowd of people.

The blacks made for the woods and swamps nearby. They disappeared in the heavy

shadows of the forest. Knowing it would be vain to follow them into the thickets, the

soldiers and inhabitants surrounded them and kept watch till morning. Many of the blacks

buried themselves in the deeper, more extensive woods near Canal Street. Others were

taken prisoner. Some, finding themselves closely pressed and all avenues of escape cut off,

deliberately shot themselves, preferring such a death to the one they knew awaited them.

How many were killed and captured during the morning the historian does not tell us. We

can only infer that the number must have been great from the statement he incidentally

makes that “during the day nineteen more were taken, tried, and executed. Some that had

turned State’s evidence were transported . . . Eight or ten whites had been murdered” and

many more wounded.

. 78

1. According to the author, the reason Van Tilburgh’s house was set on fire was to

a. get revenge on Van Tilburgh.

b. scare the whites.

c. anger the governor.

d. start a revolt.

2. The soldiers did not follow the rioters into the woods because they

a. were afraid of being ambushed.

b. were too tired.

c. didn’t think they could find the rioters.

d. decided the riot was over.

3. The passage above does not explain

a. why the blacks were revolting.

b. the effects of firing the cannon.

c. what happened to the blacks who were captured.

d. whether any whites were injured or killed.

4. Retell the story of the revolt from the point of view of the rioters.

79 .

. 80

81 .

JOHN PETER ZENGER, 1735

The first newspaper published in the city was a small weekly. It started in 1725, under the

name of the New York Gazette. It represented the views of the governor and aristocratic or

court party. Nine years later a rival appeared in the shape of the Weekly Journal. A

German immigrant named John Peter Zenger edited it. From the start it was written from

the viewpoint of the popular party. The royal governor at the time was a very foolish

person named Cosby. He was appointed on the theory that a colonial governorship was to

be used as a place for pensioning off any court favorite otherwise unprovided for. He

possessed a genius for petty oppression, which marked him for the special hatred of the

people.

Zenger published a constant succession of lampoons, ballads, and attacks on all the Crown

officials, the governing class, and finally on Cosby himself. Zenger was arrested and

thrown into jail on the charge of libel. The trial, which occupied most of the summer of

1735, attracted great attention. The chief justice at the time was one of the Morrises. He

belonged to the popular party. Suspected of leaning to Zenger’s side, he was turned out of

office. He was replaced by one of the De Lanceys. They were the stoutest upholders of the

Crown. De Lancey went to the length of disbarring Zenger’s lawyers, so that he had to be

defended by one imported from Philadelphia. The people at large made Zenger’s cause

their own. They stood by him resolutely while every ounce of possible pressure and

influence from the Crown officials was brought to bear against him.

The defense was that the statements asserted to be libelous were true. The attorney

general for the Crown argued that, if true, the libel was only so much the greater. The

judges instructed the jury that this was the law. The jury refused to be bound and

acquitted Zenger.

The acquittal, which secured the complete liberty of the press, was hailed with clamorous

joy by the mass of the population. It gave an immense impetus to the growth of the spirit

of independence.

1. John Peter Zenger was arrested because he had

a. urged New Yorkers to overthrow the royal governor.

b. refused to pay a tax on his newspaper.

c. criticized government officials.

d. stolen confidential documents from the government.

2. The judge who was supposed to hear Zenger’s case was replaced because he

a. was too old.

b. may have supported Zenger.

c. was against the governor.

d. was from Philadelphia.

. 82

3. Zenger defended himself by arguing that he was innocent because

a. what he said was true.

b. he didn’t actually write the newspaper articles.

c. the first amendment protected his freedom of speech.

d. he did not intend to cause any harm.

4. Why is it important for the press to be allowed to criticize government officials?

83 .

NEW YORK CITY, 1741

It is impossible to stand amid the whirl and uproar of New York today, and imagine men

plowing, and sowing grain, and carting hay into barns, where the City Hall now stands.

Nearly all the buildings of the city were below Wall Street. Above, there were farms to

Canal Street. Beyond that were clearings where men were burning brush and logs to clear

away fields. Still farther on, towards Central Park, was an unbroken wilderness. It is so

dim and shadowy that we can hardly fix its outlines. Yet it was so in 1741. Where now

stands the Tombs, and cluster the crowded tenements of Five Points, was a pond or lakelet,

nearly two miles in circumference and fifty feet deep. It was encircled by a dense forest.

Its deep, sluggish outlet into the Hudson is now Canal Street. In wet weather there was

another water communication with the East River, near Peck Slip, cutting off the lower

part of the island, leaving another island, containing some eight hundred acres. Through

Broad Street, along which now rolls each day the stream of business and swells the tumult

of the Brokers’ Board, then swept a deep stream, up which boatmen rowed their boats to

sell oysters. The water that supplied these streams and ponds is now carried off through

immense sewers, deep underground, over which the unconscious population treads. Where

now stretch Front and Water Streets on the east side, and West Greenwich and Washington

on the west side, then were the East and Hudson Rivers, having smooth and pebbly

beaches. There was not a single sidewalk in the city and only some half dozen paved

streets. On the Battery stood the fort, in which were the governor’s and secretary’s houses,

and over which floated the British flag.

1. Which of the following happened when the weather was wet in Manhattan?

a. Wall Street became a river.

b. A big pond formed in the middle of city.

c. Water separated Manhattan into two islands.

d. Manhattan became connected by land to Long Island.

2. Which of the following streets in New York City was originally a deep stream?

a. Wall Street

b. Front Street

c. Water Street

d. Broad Street

. 84

3. Why do you think the streams and ponds described above no longer flow in

Manhattan?

85 .

AFTER THE 1741 FIRES

The conclusion became inevitable that some dark, mysterious plot lay at the bottom of it

all. The inhabitants thought the city was doomed, like Sodom. First, the more timorous

packed up their valuable articles and fled into the country, up toward Canal Street. This

increased the panic. It swelled until almost the entire population was seen hurrying

through the streets, fleeing for their lives. The announcement of an approaching army

would not have created a greater stampede. Every cart and vehicle that could be found was

engaged at any price, into which whole families were piled. They hurried away to the

farms beyond Chambers Street, in the neighborhood of Canal Street. It was a strange

spectacle. The farmers could hardly believe their senses, at this sudden inundation into

their quiet houses by the people of the city.

The town authorities were also swept away in the general excitement. Blacks of all ages

and sexes were arrested wholesale and hurried off to prison. The Supreme Court was to

sit in the latter part of April. The interval of a few days was spent in efforts to get at the

guilty parties. However, nothing definite could be ascertained. The conspirators, whoever

they were, kept their own secret. At length, despairing of getting at the truth in any other

way, the authorities offered a reward of a hundred pounds, and a full pardon to anyone who

would turn State’s evidence and reveal the names of the ringleaders. This was pretty sure

to bring out the facts, if there were any to disclose. It was almost equally sure to obtain a

fabricated story, if there was nothing to tell. A poor, ignorant slave, shaking with terror in

his cell, would hardly be proof against such an inducement as a free pardon. An almost

fabulous sum of money would increase the temptation to invent a tale that would secure

both liberty and money.

Among the first brought up for examination was Mary Burton. She was a black servant girl.

She belonged to John Hughson. He was the keeper of a low, dirty tavern over on the west

side of the city, near the Hudson River. This was a place of rendezvous for the worst of the

town. From some hints that Mary had dropped, it was suspected that it had been the

headquarters of the conspirators. When she was brought before the Grand Jury, she refused

to be sworn. They entreated her to take the oath and tell the whole truth, but she only shook

her head. They then threatened her, but with no better success. They promised she should

be protected from danger and shielded from prosecution, but she still maintained an

obstinate silence. They then showed her the reward and attempted to bribe her with the

wealth in store for her, but she almost spat on it in her scorn. In the presence of the jury

this poor black slave showed an independence and stubbornness that astonished them.

Finding all their efforts vain, they ordered her to be sent to jail. This terrified her. She

consented to be sworn. However, after taking the oath, she refused to say anything about

the fire. A theft had been traced to Hughson. She told all she knew about that. About the

fires she would neither deny nor affirm anything.

They then appealed to her conscience. They painted before her the terrors of the final

judgment and the torments of hell. At last she broke down, and proposed to make a clean

break of it. She commenced by saying that Hughson had threatened to take her life if she

. 86

told, and then again hesitated. At length, by persistent efforts, the following facts were

wrenched from her by piecemeal.

She said that three blacks—giving their names—had been in the habit of meeting at the

tavern, and talking about burning of the fort and city and murdering the people. Hughson

and his wife had promised to help them. Hughson was to be governor and Cuff Phillipse

king. She said, moreover, that but one white person beside her master and mistress was

in the conspiracy. That was an Irish girl known as Peggy, “the Newfoundland Beauty.” She

had several aliases. She was a prostitute. She was kept as a mistress by a bold, desperate

black named Caesar. This revelation of Mary’s fell on the Grand Jury like a bombshell.

The long-sought secret they now felt was out. They immediately informed the magistrates.

Of course the greatest excitement followed. Peggy was next examined. She denied Mary

Burton’s story in total. She swore that she knew nothing of any conspiracy or of the

burning of the stores. She said that if she should accuse anyone else it would be a lie.

On Saturday, May 9th, Peggy was brought in again. She underwent a searching

examination. Some of her statements seemed improbable. They, therefore, tested them in

every possible way. The examination lasted for several hours. It resulted in a long detailed

confession. Peggy asserted, among other things, that it was the same plot that failed in

1712, when the blacks designed to kill all the whites, in fact, to exterminate them from the

island. She implicated a great many blacks in the conspiracy. Everyone that she accused,

as each was brought before her, she identified as being present at the meetings of the

conspirators in Romme’s house.

Either from conscious guilt, or from some inkling of the charge to be brought against him,

Romme fled before he could be arrested. However, his wife and the blacks—whose names

Peggy had given—were sent to jail.

On the 11th of May, or twenty days after the court convened, the executions commenced.

On this day, Caesar and Prince, two of the three blacks Mary Burton testified against, were

hung, though not for conspiracy but for theft. Next Peggy and Hughson and his wife were

condemned. Peggy, finding that her confession did not—as had been promised—secure her

pardon, retracted all she had said. Peggy then said that the parties whose arrest she had

caused were innocent.

The day of execution appointed for Hughson, his wife, and Peggy was a solemn one. Almost

the entire population turned out to witness it. When the sad procession arrived at the place

of execution, the prisoners were helped to the ground. They stood exposed to the gaze of

the crowd. Hughson was firm and self-possessed. Peggy, pale, weeping, and terror-struck,

begged for life. Hughson’s wife, with the rope round her neck, leaned against a tree, silent

and composed, but colorless as marble. One after another they were launched into eternity.

Hughson was hung in chains. In a few days a slave was placed beside him. Here they

swung in the April air, in full view of the tranquil bay. It was a ghastly spectacle to the

fishermen as they plied their vocation nearby. For three weeks they dangled in sunshine

and storm, a terror to the passers-by. Under the increasing heat of the sun, they soon

87 .

began to drip, till at last the body of Hughson burst asunder, filling the air with such an

intolerable stench that the fishermen shunned the locality.

A simple hanging soon was thought not to be sufficient punishment. The convicts were then

condemned to be burned at the stake. Two blacks, named Quack and Cuffee, were the first

doomed to this horrible death. The announcement of this sentence created the greatest

excitement. It was a new thing to the colonists. This mode of torture had been

appropriated by the Indians for prisoners taken in war. Curious crowds gathered to see the

stake erected, or to stare at the loads of wood as they passed along the street, and were

unloaded at its base. It was a strange spectacle to behold: the workmen carefully piling up

the wood under the spring sun; the spectators looking on, some horrified, and others fierce

as savages; and over all the blue sky bending, while the gentle wind stole up from the bay

and whispered in the treetops overhead.

On the day of execution an immense crowd assembled. The two blacks were brought

forward, pale and terrified, and bound to the stake. As the men approached with the fire

to kindle the pile, they shrieked out in terror, confessed the conspiracy, and promised—if

released—to tell all about it. They were at once taken down. This was the signal for an

outbreak, and shouts of “Burn ‘em! Burn ‘em!” burst from the multitude. Mr. Moore then

asked the sheriff to delay the execution until he could see the governor and get a reprieve.

He hurried off. He soon returned with a conditional one. However, as he met the sheriff

on the common, the latter told him that it would be impossible to take the criminals

through the crowd without a strong guard, and before that could happen, they would be

murdered by the exasperated populace. Then they were tied up again and the torch

applied. The flames arose around the unhappy victims. The curling smoke soon hid their

dusky forms from view, while their shrieks and cries for mercy grew fainter and fainter, as

the fierce fire shriveled up their forms, till at last nothing but the crackling of the flames

was heard, and the shouting, savage crowd grew still. As the fire subsided, the two

wretched creatures, crisped to a cinder, remained to tell, for the hundredth time, to what

barbarous deeds terror and passion may lead men.

1. Why did so many people leave the city?

a. An army was approaching the city.

b. They were afraid of being arrested.

c. They thought there were going to be more fires.

d. It was too hot and crowded in the city.

2. All of the following measures were taken to try to catch the people who were setting

fires except

a. a reward was offered.

b. a pardon was offered to anyone who would reveal information.

c. suspects were arrested and imprisoned.

d. a trap was set to catch the conspirators.

. 88

3. Why did Mary Burton say she was unwilling to testify?

a. She expected to be paid.

b. She wanted her freedom.

c. She had been threatened.

d. She was afraid they would blame her.

4. Mary Burton finally testified about the fires when the court

a. offered her enough money.

b. threatened her with life in prison.

c. threatened her with eternal damnation.

d. promised not to prosecute her.

5. According to Mary Burton’s testimony, how many people were involved in the

conspiracy?

a. three or less

b. four

c. five

d. six or more

6. According to Peggy’s testimony, what was the conspirators’ goal?

a. for all slaves to escape from the island

b. to burn all of the government buildings on the island

c. to kill all whites on the island

d. to kidnap the governor and collect a large ransom

7. According to the passage, which of the following is a reason Romme may have fled?

a. to prove his innocence

b. because he was feeling guilty

c. to protect his wife

d. to get help

8. Which of the following best describes the mood of Peggy and the Hughsons’

executions?

a. cheerful

b. serious

c. festive

d. confused

89 .

9. Why did the courts decide to burn conspirators at the stake?

a. It was the only way of being sure they were dead.

b. It was the least painful method of execution.

c. It was less expensive than hanging.

d. It was more brutal than hanging.

10. Quack and Cuffee’s executions were delayed because

a. Quack and Cuffee promised to give more information about the conspiracy.

b. it was too crowded.

c. new evidence was found that they may have been innocent.

d. the crowd demanded that they be freed.

11. Mr. Moore and the sheriff decided to proceed with the execution because

a. the governor had ordered it.

b. they did not believe Quack and Cuffee were telling the truth.

c. the crowd would not allow them to cancel it.

d. they could not get a pardon or reprieve.

12. Why might an imprisoned slave be tempted to make up a story about who was

setting the fires?

. 90

13. Do you believe Mary Burton’s testimony? Why or why not? Use information from

the passage to support your response.

91 .

14. Why do you think Hughson’s body was left hanging for so long? Use information

from the passage to support your response.

. 92

15. What is the author’s opinion of the execution of Quack and Cuffee? Do you agree or

disagree with this opinion? Why?