USA > New Jersey > Passaic County > Paterson > History of the city of Paterson and the County of Passaic, New Jersey > Part 14
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105 | Part 106 | Part 107 | Part 108 | Part 109 | Part 110 | Part 111 | Part 112 | Part 113
1 N. Y. Doc. Hist., IV., 6-7 ; N. Y. Col. Docs., I., 150-151 ; XIII., 10 ..
47
THE HACKENSACK INDIANS.
come ashore but caused both old and young to be drowned. Some children of from 5 to 6 years of age, as also some old infirm persons, who had managed to hide them- selves in the bushes and reeds, came out in the morning to beg for a piece of bread and for permission to warm themselves, but were all murdered in cold blood and thrown into the fire or water."1 As the total result of the night's butchery, about eighty Indians were killed and thirty made prisoners. 2 Eleven tribes arose to avenge this cruel slaughter, but were no match for the well-armed whites, and a thou- sand Indians were slain.3 Peace was concluded April 22, 1643, "Oratamin, Sachem of the savages living at Achkinhes hacky, who declared himself commissioned by the savages of Tappaen, Rechgawawanc, Richtawanc [Sleepy Hollow] and Sintsinck," answering for the Indians.4 The ink was scarcely dry on this paper before Pachem, "a crafty man" of the Hackensacks, was running through all the villages, urging the Indians to a general massacre.5 More trouble followed, but in 1645 another treaty was made between the whites and tlie savages, Oratamy, chicf of Achkinkehacky, making his mark thereto. Pacham and Pennekeck joined in its execution. In 1649 a number of leading Indians made further propositions for a lasting peace, the principal speaker being Pennekeck, "the Chief behind the Col," in the neighborhood of Communipaw-probably a considerable village of the Hackensacks. The Chief Oratamin was pres- ent but said nothing. However, his superiority was recog- nized by the gift of some tobacco and a gun, while the "" common savages " received only "a small present worth about twenty guilders."6 During the ten years, 1645-55, there were occasional encounters between Indians and whites, ten or fourteen of the latter being killed in that period in the vicinity of New Amsterdam. The whites were continually encroaching on the natives, and in the neighbor- hood of Pavonia a considerable settlement of Dutch had grown up. The Indians became restive as they saw their lands slip- ping away from them, and finally seem to have planned the extirpation of the invaders. Very early on the morning of September 15, 1655, sixty-four canoes, filled with five hun- dred armed savages, landed on Manhattan island, and the warriors speedily scattered through the village. Many al- tercations occurred between them and the Dutch during the day. Toward evening they were joined by two hundred more savages. Three Dutchmen and as many Indians were killed. The savages then crossed over to Pavonia and to Staten Island, and in the course of three days destroyed build- ings and cattle, killed about fifty whites and carried off eighty men, women and children into captivity. In this outbreak the Indians of Hackensack and Ahasimus were conspicuous actors. It was the last expiring effort of the na-
tives near New York to check the resistless advance of the S wannekins, as they called the Dutch. 1 However, for a time the Indians believed they had the advantage, and proceeded to profit by it with great shrewdness. They brought some of their prisoners to Pavonia, and treated with the whites for their ransom, demanding cloth, powder, lead, wampum, knives, hatchets, pipes and other supplies. Pennekeck, chief of the Indians of Achkinkeshaky, finally sent fourteen of his prisoners over to the Dutch authorities, and asked for powder and lead in return ; he got what he wanted, and two Indian prisoners besides. The negotiations con- tinued, until Pennekeck had secured an ample supply of ammunition, and the Dutch had received most of their people back again. To the credit of the savages it should be said that no complaint was made of the treatment of their captives, and they kept all their promises .? The authorities of New Netherland were greatly disturbed by this brief but destructive war, and as a precaution against the recurrence of such an event advised the erection of a block- house of logs, in sight of the Indians, near Achkinheshaky. 3 Affairs seem to have gone smoothly between the Dutch and the Hackensacks thereafter.
On March 6, 1660, the treaty of peace was renewed with the Indians on the west side of the Hudson, Oratamy, chief of the Hackinkasacky, taking part in the negotiations. He was also present May 18, 1660, when peace was concluded with the Wappings, and a few weeks later interceded for the Esopus Indians, and had the satisfaction of attending at the conclusion of a peace with them, on which occasion he was accompanied by Carstangh, another Hackensack chief. 4 Naturally enough, the Esopus Indians looked upon him as their friend, and when, a year later, some of their people who had been sent to Curacao, had now been recalled, they asked that they "might be delivered at their arrival to Oratam."5 On March 30, 1662, Oratam, chief of Hacking- hesaky, complained to the Dutch authorities of the illicit sale of brandy to the savages in their country, and there- upon he and Metano were empowered to seize the brandy so offered for sale, and the traders having it.6 On June 27, 1663, these two chiefs were called to a conference with the whites, who were then at war with the Esopus Indians, and agreed to keep the peace, but declined to accede to some dishonorable proposals made by the authorities. "Oratam said, he was very glad, that we would keep quiet here and that the war would only be made at the Esopus ; he had not a single spark in his heart, that was bad."7 All the accounts we have of him go to prove the truth of this sim- ple declaration. Two weeks later, the chiefs of several
1 Breeden-Raedt, printed at Antwerp in 1649; reprinted in N. Y. Doc. Hist., IV., 65 et seqq.
2 N. Y. Doc. Hist., IV., 7.
3 N. Y. Col. Docs., I., 151.
4 N. Y. Col. Docs., XIII., 14.
5 N. Y. Doc. Hist., IV., 8.
6 N. Y. Col. Docs., XIII., 25.
1 A Brief and True Narrative of the Hostile Conduct of the Barbarous Natives towards the Dutch Nation, translated by Dr. E. B. O'Callaghan, Albany, 1863 ; N. Y. Col. Docs., XIII., 49, 55.
2 N. Y. Col. Docs., XIII., 45-48.
3 Ib., 53.
4 Ib., 148, 167, 171, 180.
5 Ib., 202.
6 Ib., 218.
7 Ib., 262.
.
.
48
HISTORY OF PATERSON.
tribes north of the Hackensacks came to New Amsterdam, at the summons of Oratam, who was again accompanied by Karstangh. The new comers ratified all that had been said and done by the aged chief of the Hackensacks, thereby manifesting the respect and confidence in which he was held by his neighbors.1 The whites were still crowding the Indians, but in view of former experiences the authorities preferred to acquire the land of the Indians peaceably, if possible, and so urged the Hackensacks to sell the hook of land behind the Kil van Kol. Oratam gave the politic reply that "most of the young men of the tribe were out hunting, so that he had not been able to speak with them, but he had talked with the old warriors, who said that they would not like to sell, preferring to keep a portion of it to plant, for they dared not go further inland for fear of being robbed by their enemies." " He said further, that there was land enough both for the Dutch and the Indians, divided by the Kil, and that it was as good as the land on the Esopus." 2 The reference is probably to the land west of the Passaic river, for which some New England people had been nego- tiating since 1661, with a view to settling on the site of the present city of Newark.3 In his office of peacemaker, Ora- tamy again appeared at Fort Amsterdam the following month (Angust 15, 1663), with three Minisink chiefs, who protested their wish to live quietly.4 In November of the same year he asked for peace with the Wappings and the Esopus savages, with whom the whites were at war.5 The treaty was delayed, however, by the failure of the Esopus Indians, on one pretext or another, to release their Christian captives. With Kastangh, Hans and others, he was again at Fort Amsterdam on February 23, 1664, in relation to the peace with the Esopus Indians. "He presents an otterskin as a sign that his heart is good, but he does not know yet, how the heart of our [the Dutch] Sachems is. " He evi- dently felt the burden of his great age, for "he gives an- other otterskin and says Hans shall be sachem after him over the Hackingkesack and Staten Island savages. If after his, Oratamy's death, we had anything to say to the savages, we should send for Hans, as we now send for Oratam. He asks for a small piece of ordnance, to be used in his castle against his enemies. "6 His " castle " was doubtless a pali- saded hut, on the banks of the Hackensack river. The long-wished-for peace with the Esopus Indians was at length concluded, May 16, 1664, and Oratamy, chief of Hackingke- sacky and Tappaen, and Matteno, chief of the Staten Island and Nayack savages, became securities for the peace,-and pledged themselves and their men to go to war with either party who should violate it .?
When the English conquered New Netherland, in 1664, they were careful to cultivate the friendship of the Hacken-
1 Ib., 276.
2 Ib., 280.
3 Ib., 281.
4 Ib., 290.
5 Ib., 305, 314, 320-323.
6 Ib. , 361.
7 Ib., 377, 386. The Nayack Indians referred to were on Long Island, opposite Staten Island.
sack chief, and Gov. Philip Carteret wrote two letters in 1666 to Oraton, as he called him, in relation to the proposed purchase of the site of Newark.1 The Hackensack chief was very old at this time, and unable to travel from Hack- ensack to Newark, to attend the conference between the whites and the natives. 2 And so fades from our view this striking figure in the Indian history of New Jersey. Pru- dent and sagacious in counsel, he was prompt, energetic and decisive in war, as the Dutch found to their cost when they recklessly provoked him to vengeance. The few glimpses we are afforded of this Indian Chieftaiu clearly show him to have been a notable man among mnen in his day, and that he was recognized as such not only by the aborig- ines of New Jersey, but by the Dutch rulers with whom he came in contact. The name of such a man is surely worthy of commemoration, even two centuries after his spirit has joined his kindred in the happy hunting grounds of his race.
The Indian deed for Newark, July II, 1667, is from " Wapamuck, the Sakamaker, and Wamesane, Peter Cap- tamin, Wecaprokikan, Napeam, Perawae, Sessom, Mamus- tome, Cacanakque, and Hairish, Indians belonging now to Hakinsack,"3 from which it is to be inferred that Oratamin had died during the year,4 and had been succeeded by Wapamuck, instead of by Hans, as he had anticipated.
Among the witnesses to this instrument was Pierwim, "ye Sachem of Pau," or Pavonia-probably one of the com- mon chiefs, the head of a family at or near the latter place. In August, 1669, Perewyz-doubtless the same person-is mentioned as having been "lately chosen Sachem of ye Hackingsack, Tappau and Staten Island Indians," and called on the Governor at New York "to renew & ack- nowledge ye peace between them & ye Xtians" there.5
When the Dutch reconquered New Netherland, in 1673, " the Sachems and Chiefs of the Hackensack Indians with. about twenty savages " came forward and asked " that they might continue to live in peace with the Dutch, as they had done in former times, " to which the authorities cordially agreed, and presents were exchanged in confirmation of the treaty. 6
An Indian named Knatsciosan wounded a Dutchman at Bergen, April 11, 1678 ; Governor Carteret and his Council met there April 24, with the Sakamakers of the Hacken- sacks : Manoky, Mandenark, Hamahem, Tanteguas and Capeteham, and the assault was settled on a pecuniary
1 N. J. Archives, I., 55-56.
2 Affidavit of Col. Robert Treat, in Elizabethtown Bill in Cbancery, New York, 1747, P. 118.
3 East Jersey Records, in the office of the Secretary of State, at Tren- ton, Liber No. 1, fol. 69. The deed is printed in Records of the Town of Newark, New Jersey, Newark, 1864, 278-80.
4 In that excellent work, History of the Indian Tribes of Hudson's River, by E. M. Ruttenber, Albany, 1872, the author says Oritany " is spoken of in 1687, as very aged, and as delegating his authority in a meas- ure to Perro." This statement is evidently based on a careless reading of Col. Robert Treat's affidavit, cited above, wherein the deponent says. that in 1666 Oritany was very old.
5 N. Y. Col. Docs., XIII., 428.
6 Ib., 476 ; N. J. Archives, I., 131-2.
49
THE INDIAN TITLE TO THE SOIL.
basis. 1 This last named chief was one of the witnesses to the deed for Newark, in 1667. He joined in a deed for land near Lodi in 1671.2 It was from this same Sachem that the first purchases of lands within the present county of Passaic were made, in 1678, and in 1679. In the former deed he is described as Captehan Peeters,8 Indian Sachem; in the latter as Captahem, "Indian Sachem and Chief. "4 In a deed for .. land in 1678, Manschy, Mendawack, Hanrapen, Tanteguas and Capesteham (a variant for Capteham) are mentioned as " Sackamakers of Hackensack, "5 and are the last of whom record has been found.
The Saddle River tract, from Lodi north to Big Rock, in Bergen county, which was doubtless part of the territory of the Hackensacks, was sold April 9, 1679, by Arrorickan, claiming to be the Sachem of the tract, and who was joined in the conveyance by Mogquack and Woggermahameck. 6
With the increase of the white settlements the Indians were crowded back into the interior-among the mountains of Northern New Jersey, into the Minisink country, and gradually beyond the Alleghanies. In 1679 there was but a single Indian family in the whole territory embraced within the limits of Passaic, Clifton and Paterson south of the Pas- saic river.7 In 1688 a prominent resident of the present Hud- son county declared that he had seen no Indians in a long time. 8 True, in 1693 the Hackensack and Tappan Indians were said to be threatening an attack on the whites, 9 but they were then far removed from their former hunting grounds.
In I710 Memerescum claimed to be the " sole Sachem of all the nations of Indians on Remopuck River and on the west and East branches thereof on Saddle River Pasqueck River Narashunk River Hackinsack River and Tapaan, " and joined with Waparent, Sipham, Rawantaques, Maskainapu- lig, Taphome and Ayamanngh (a squaw) in conveying the upper or northwestern parts of the present Bergen and Passaic counties. 10
Wappings, Pomptons, Pequannocks .- North of the Hack- insacks were the Tappans, and then the Esopus Indians. The Wappingers occupied the east side of the Hudson river and the northern shores of Long Island Sound. 11 They were frequently at war with the whites, especially the Dutch. Oratamy was repeatedly called on to intercede for them
1 East Jersey Records, Liber 3, fol. 144.
2 Liber B of East Jersey Deeds, in Secretary of State's office, Tren- ton, fol. 79.
3 Liber A of Deeds, in Secretary of State's office, Trenton, fol. 242.
4 Liber No. I of East Jersey Deeds, in Secretary of State's office, Trenton, fol. 128.
5 Liber No. 3 of East Jersey Deeds, fol. 143.
6 Liber No. 1 of E. J. Deeds, fol. 129.
7 Dankers and Sluyter, as cited, 269.
8 Elizabethtown Bill in Chancery, 117.
9 Calendar N. Y. Hist. MSS., II., 233.
10. East Jersey Deeds, Book I, f. 317.
11 Ruttenber, 83-84. 7
with the authorities at Fort Amsterdam. 1 It is prob- able that in time they were driven west, and occupied the country about Pompton, for at the treaty of Easton, in 1758, the "Wapings, Opings or Pomptons" are mentioned. 2 The name is evidently derived from the root wab, east, and indicates their eastern origin. The Indian names affixed to every mountain, hill and stream, and to every striking fea- ture in the landscape for miles about Paterson indicate that the country had been peopled by the aborigines for cen- turies. If the Wappings or Opings who were apparently identified with the Pomptons in 1758 were the remnants of the warlike Wappingers of a century earlier, they were doubtless welcomed by the Pompton Indians when driven west of the Hudson. We have no account of the Sachems of the Pomptons in the seventeenth century. The earliest mention of them is in a deed in 1695 for lands at Pomp- ton, conveyed by Tapgan, Oragnap, Mansiem, Wick- wam Rookham, Paakek Siekaak (or Paakch Sehaak), Wa- weiagin, Onageponk, Neskilanitt (Mek:quam or Neskeglat), Peykqueneck and Ponton-that is, Pequannock and Pomp- ton Indians-and Iaiapogh, Sachem of Minissing.3 This instrument indicates that the Pequannock and Pompton Indians recognized the supremacy of the Minsi tribe, to which they and all the other sub-tribes of Northern New Jersey belonged.
THE INDIAN TITLE TO THE SOIL.
Since mention has been made of Indian deeds for land, it may be well to say something of the practice in New Jersey in extinguishing the Indian title to the soil. When the Swedes settled in West Jersey in 1638 "a purchase of land was immediately made from the Indians," a deed was drawn up and signed by the grantors and " was sent home to Sweden to be preserved in the royal archives. " That the Dutch recognized the Indian title is evidenced also by an ordinance of the Director General and Council of New Netherlands, passed July 1, 1652, wherein it was set out that many of the inhabitants, "covetous and greedy of land, " had bought directly from the Indians, whereby the price had been raised "far above the rate at which the Director General and Council could heretofore obtain them from the natives ; yea-(and here, we fear, is the real gravamen of the offence aimed at) yea, some malicious and evil disposed persons have not scrupled to inform and acquaint the Indians what sum and price the Dutch or whites are giving each other for small lots !" The implied keenness of the Indians in taking advantage of the current rates for land corroborates the declaration of the early traveler al- ready quoted, " that there were no fools or lunatics among them. " In 1664 King Charles II. granted to his brother, the Duke of York, afterwards King James II., the territory embracing New Jersey, with full powers of government, but the grant apparently implies that only the subjects of the
1 N. Y. Col. Docs., XIII., 46, 167, 180, 364, 375.
2 Smith's N. J., 479.
3 East Jersey Deeds, Liber E, f. 306.
50
HISTORY OF PATERSON.
King and adventurers seeking the new country were included under this authority, and not the aborigines. As evidence of what the understanding really was we may refer to the purchases made from the Indians of the site of Elizabeth- town in 1664 ; of the site of Newark in 1666-7 ; New Barba- does Neck in 1668 ; lands on the Raritan in 1669, and many other like instances. In 1674, Sir George Carteret, then owner of East Jersey, pledged himself to purchase the land from the Indians for the settlers from time to time, as re- quired. It was not until 1676 that William Penn became interested in New Jersey, his first real estate venture on this side of the Atlantic, and it was six years later ere he set foot in America. He then found the practice of acquiring title in the first place from the Indians an old-established custom in this part of the new world. The subsequent Proprietors of New Jersey from time to time urged upon their agents here the importance of securing the Indians' title to the whole province, and in 1682 the Legislature passed an act "to regulate treaties with the Indians," providing that no person should buy lands from the Indians without a written authorization under the seal of the Province ; the grant was to be to the Proprietors, who promised to reimburse the purchaser, and the deed was to be duly registered.1 In practice, however, the Indian deeds appear to have been al- ways to the buyer, who on presentation thereof to the Proprietors could then purchase the title of the latter to the land. The actual title to the soil, however, was de- rived from the English sovereign, who claimed it by right of discovery and conquest. The Indian title was a legal nulli- ty, being merely that of occupancy, and was not to the fee. 2
Among the Indians themselves, there was no ownership in severalty. The land occupied by a tribe was owned by the tribe in common, although the cultivation of maize and plants
1 Leaming and Spicer, 182, 196.
2 " The title acquired hy the grant from the Indians [for the site of Newark] was a nullity. As a conveyance of lands it was null and void. By the law of nations, established by the consensus of all civilized na- tions, and hy the common law, title to the soil is obtained hy discovery or conquest. By the English common law the title to lands in this State was vested in the English Crown ; and it is a fundamental principle in English colonial jurisprudence that all titles to lands within this colony passed to individuals from the Crown, through the colonial or proprietary authorities." See charge of the Hon. David A. Depue, of the New Jer- sey Supreme Court, in the case of The Mayor and Common Council of the city of Newark vs. George Watson et al., in the N. J. Supreme Court, Essex Circuit, May term, 1892, p. 258 of printed case. In the case of Martin et als. vs. Waddell, in the Supreme Court of the United States, the validity of the Indian title to the soil of New Jersey was also in ques- tion, and Chief Justice Taney held (January Term, 1842): "The English possessions in America were not claimed by right of conquest, but hy right of discovery. According to the principles of international law, as tben understood by the civilized powers of Europe, the Indian tribes in the new world were regarded as mere temporary occupants of the soil ; and the absolute rights of property and dominion were held to be- long to the European nations hy which any portion of the country was first discovered. "-16 Peters, U. S. Reports, 367. The first case raising this question in the Supreme Court of the United States was that of Fletcher vs. Peck, February, 1810, wben Chief Justice Marshall said : " The majority of the court is of opinion that the nature of the Indian title, which is certainly to be respected by all courts, until it be legitimate- ly extinguisbed, is not such as to be absolutely repugnant to seisin in fee on the part of the State. "-6 Cranch, 142-3. See also Vattel's Law of Nations, Chap. 18.
tended to introduce individual proprietorship in cultivated land.1 Each nation had its own particular boundaries, subdi- vided between each tribe.2 These boundaries were generally marked by mountains, lakes, rivers and brooks, and encroach- ments by neighboring tribes were strictly resented, whether on their lands or on their fishing or hunting rights. 3 At the same time, there were common highways-Indian paths-through the territory of the several tribes and sub-tribes, and which in later years were widened into the public roads of the whites. The Indians had free access by these paths from the ocean to the interior, and the routes pursued from the sea to the ancient Council Fire at Easton figure numerously in the early records as the " Minisink paths."
With the gradual disappearance of the red man from Scheyechbi, the few who were left became more and more helpless. The saintly David Brainerd gave his life in his efforts to improve the spiritual and moral condition of the remnants of the Lenâpe in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, but was hindered by the prejudice and suspicions of the whites on the one hand, and the evil example they set on the other.4 Although the early Proprietors professed a solici- tude for the religious welfare of the natives, it was not until Brainerd began his mission in 1742, that any effort was made in that direction. It is not to the credit of American Chris- tianity that he was set apart for this work by the Society in Scotland for Propagating Christian Knowledge. He gathered the scattered Indian families together at Crossweeksung (Crosswicks-house of separation), 5 where he established a little church and school, with a view to getting the natives set- tled in one body, 6 but in 1746 they removed to Cranbury. He also formed a congregation at Bethel. When he left his beloved Indians in the spring of 1747, to go home to die, his work was taken up by his brother John. The title of the Indians to the lands at Crosswicks was attacked by Chief Justice Robert Hunter Morris, and although the Brainerds raised money to perfect the title, the natives were discour- aged. In 1754 an effort was made, doubtless through Brainerd, to secure a tract of 4,000 acres in New Jersey, for the permanent settlement of the Indians. In 1756 a tract of 3,000 acres was selected, and arrangements made for its purchase by the Scotch Society supporting Brainerd. In "The New Jersey Association for Helping the 1757,
1 Morgan, Ancient Society, 530.
2 Guy Jobnson to Dr. William Robertson in 1775, in Magazine Ameri- can History, XXVIII., 376.
3 Heckewelder, 30, 129; I Penn. Archives, III., 344; Loskiel, 129; Douglass, I., 155 ; Penn. Col. Records, VII., 325.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.