USA > New York > New York City > History of the city of New York in the seventeenth century Vol. II > Part 33
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
Among the many things soon to be charged against Jacob Leisler was the enkindling of Long Island. In reality it had been effected by the Boston declaration, widely circulated in printed form. The revolution in England, said the four coun- cillors reporting on May 15 to the secretary of state and the Lords of Trade, proved how 'fatal' had been that consoli- dation of the colonies which if long continued would have wrought the 'total ruin' of New York. Actually, it was inter- fering even with the 'free course of justice'; that is, two of the New York judges, Palmer and Graham, were in jail with Andros. Sir Edward's subordinates on Manhattan, the councillors explained, lacked definite knowledge about the 'unparalleled' changes in England. Nevertheless their prov- ince would have remained quiet if the 'seeds of sedition' had not been 'blazed' from New England to some of its 'outward skirts.' In this they deceived themselves. When they added that they did not know how much longer they might be able to resist the efforts of some 'ill affected and restless spirits' to stir up the citizens to sedition and rebellion, they used words
382
HISTORY OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
[1689
which recall with exactness words that Governor Stuyvesant and the West India Company had spoken in 1649.
At the moment when the militia of the city were crying out for their pay alarming reports about the temper of the Indians were coming from Albany. Moreover, several of the mer- chants of Manhattan were disputing the payment of customs and other duties as being 'illegally established.' Therefore the convention decided that the whole of the public revenue accruing after the first of May should be applied to the works of fortification. Here Jacob Leisler comes visibly on the scene. He refused to pay the duties on a cargo of wines because the collector, being a papist, was not qualified to act for the Prince of Orange, but made the proper entries at the custom-house and promised to pay to such as should there- after be legally empowered to receive.
On May 10 the convention framed a resolution to defend the city against all foreign enemies and to suppress 'muti- nous persons nigh us,' Captain Leisler signing with his col- leagues. On the 11th they decided to ask all the counties to send representatives, two or three from each, to sit with the convention. To this, their first recognition of the people, apparently not one county responded. On the 18th the council received from Andros, who was not permitted to write, verbal instructions which his messenger delivered under oath. Two officials, he directed, should be sent to Boston to demand that he and his fellow-prisoners have liberty to come to New York. Both whom he named, Colonel William Smith of Long Island and Governor Hamilton of East Jersey, said that they dared not go lest rioting break out behind them, and that further action might throw New York into open revolt. The people of his own neighborhood, Smith explained, had already 'shook off this government.' Therefore, say the council minutes, it was decided to 'forbear acting in the prem- ises ' till the minds of the people should be 'better satisfied and quieted.'
. Wiser or less timid councillors might well have begun the
383
1689]
THE UPRISING IN NEW YORK
quieting by saying some word to show that they meant, at all events when duly instructed by the triumphant party in Eng- land, to accept the verdict that had there been passed upon James Stuart. The letter, already referred to, which was written in 1698 by some members of the Dutch church in New York to the classis of Amsterdam, giving a summary of what happened at this period, says that while the example of Bos- ton so inspired the New Yorkers that they 'could not be held back' the councillors exasperated them by refusing their re- quest to declare for the Prince of Orange, which would have been a more appropriate act on Manhattan than in New England as the ancestors of the prince had 'delivered our forefathers from the Spanish yoke.' To the official mind the delay was justified by the lack of orders and of news of any kind from an official source. But the excited minds of the people daily remembered, discovered, or imagined things old or new which turned impatience into suspicion and fear. All the councillors had been intimate with Andros, and Van Cortlandt was acting as his attorney for his affairs in New York. The correspondence with him looked as though some scheme for maintaining King James's authority were in hand. As Innis the Anglican chaplain was still praying that James might prevail over all his enemies he was no better than a 'mere papist.' Nicholson's words comparing William to Monmouth were cited to prove him also a papist. He had furthermore said, so Captain Lodwyck declared under oath, that as the New Yorkers were a conquered people they could not expect the same liberties as Englishmen. Papists too, it was affirmed, were the other councillors, although all were members of the Dutch church and two were deacons; even so farcical an incident as the burning of Van Cortlandt's wig in honor of the birth of a Catholic prince seemed a darkly confirmatory fact. Dread of popish plots increased to the point of unreason. It was believed that the Protestants on Staten Island were running about in the woods or sleeping in boats, afraid to go to their homes because their Catholic neighbors had threatened to cut their throats. Half a dozen
384
HISTORY OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
[1689
disbanded regulars from Boston being well received by the government, it was cried about the town that a band of their Irish-Catholic fellows were to follow and to be given control of the fort. Some of the militiamen petitioned that all Catho- lics be disarmed and that Colonel Dongan, who was then tarrying in East Jersey near Sandy Hook, should be brought back to the city and kept there, as a ship which he was prepar- ing to take him home was said to be meant for 'some warlike design.' In default of a printing-press all these rumors and suspicions were circulated by means of written 'pamphlets' as well as by a thousand eager tongues.
In Albany the papist Baxter who commanded the garrison was distrusted, and even the Iroquois suspected Nicholson. So Mayor Schuyler informed him, explaining that they had heard that his chief, Sir Edmund, had given the Canadians permission to extirpate them, an idea which, if not corrected, would work great mischief. On May 18 Captain John Bull of Connecticut arrived with commissioners from Massachusetts to aid the Albany officials in making a new league with the Iroquois. He brought papers telling of the course of events in England and at Boston. Baxter and Schuyler refused to publish them, saying that such news would make the people 'run all mad.' If the mayor did not disclose the news, Bull replied, he would give the people cause to doubt his faithful- ness; and so said one or more of the chief militia officers. Schuyler kept the papers, Bull spread the news, and the people vowed that no Catholic should be allowed to stay in the fort or to keep his arms. Major Baxter departed for New York, the other officers set twenty-five townsmen on guard in the fort, and then the people were 'much satisfied.' When Bax- ter reached New York his fellow-councillors, yielding to popu- lar sentiment, suspended him, permitted him to join Colonel Dongan in East Jersey, and also suspended the Catholic ensign.
Lieutenant-Governor Nicholson now supplied the touch that was needed to turn the currents of a hundred fears into
385
THE UPRISING IN NEW YORK
1689]
one tempestuous channel. Disputing with Henry Cuyler, a Dutchman and a lieutenant in De Peyster's militia company, about the placing of a sentinel in the fort he flourished a pistol, drove from the room a sergeant who had come to in- terpret for Cuyler, and, according to the affidavits of Cuyler, exclaimed
. . . that there were so many rogues in the town that he was not sure of his life nor to walk the streets, and that . . . before it would go longer after this manner he would set the town in fire.
These hasty words were everywhere repeated as meaning that Nicholson had actually threatened to burn the town. Soon it was rumored that he and his colleagues, papists in dis- guise, were preparing for the coming Sunday another Bartholo- mew's Day. Now for the first time Leisler's name was loudly spoken. Although many citizens continued to work on the fortifications under Colonel Bayard's orders, the streets were full of excited militiamen declaring that the flight of King James from England had destroyed the authority of his ap- pointees in New York, and calling for Captain Leisler to lead them. They had not intended, says the Dutch letter of 1698, to ignore the governor and the magistrates but only to get such control of affairs that if 'outside forces' should appear they might not be 'forced into any arrangement' against their will; but finding that 'nothing could be accomplished with the magistrates' they had 'looked earnestly about for a leader' and had at last induced Captain Leisler 'to begin operations among the citizens.'
On the morning of the following day, May 31, Nicholson informed the council that most of the militia were in rebellion, heeding no commands from himself or their colonel, and that some of their officers, he was credibly informed, were the in- stigators. At a meeting of the convention called for the after- noon of the same day three captains appeared, Minvielle, De Peyster, and De Bruyn. Leisler, it may be noted, had attended no meeting since the 20th of the month. Nicholson denied that he had spoken as Cuyler asserted. Cuyler repeated the VOL. II .- 2 c
386
HISTORY OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
[1689
story. Nicholson said he would cancel Cuyler's commission, and thereupon had such hot words with Cuyler's captain that De Peyster angrily left the room. Drums were beating outside and the town was full of noise. Then, says Van Cortlandt in a long journal-like letter which he sent to Andros some weeks later :
Seeing the people rise and run together in arms, Mr. Philipse and I went to Jacob Leisler's door where the people met, and endeavored to allay them but in vain; they marched to the fort where Henry Cuyler received them, and in a half hour's time the fort was full of men, armed and enraged; no word could be heard but that they were sold, betrayed, and to be murdered; it was time to look for themselves.
When the mayor reported this to the convention, say its minutes, it formally protested, upon motion of John Lawrence, another alderman, and Captain Minvielle, against such 'fac- tious and rebellious people,' and declared that to the utter- most of its powers it would stand up for the good of the gov- ernment and the crown of England. It did not say whether or not it considered this crown to be still on the head of James II. In the evening it met again; and the minutes of this session relate that 'the inhabitants of New York' had risen during the afternoon, taken possession of the fort, and dis- armed its little garrison of regulars. Cuyler was on guard at the time. Later in the day when Captain Lodwyck was on guard the people, forcing him to accompany them, had come to the City Hall 'with a squadron armed' and demanded that the keys of the fort be delivered to Lodwyck. The 'squadron,' it appears from other accounts, consisted of about twenty men led by Sergeant Joost Stoll of Leisler's company whom his antagonists always called the 'dram-man' or the ‘Dutch dram-man.' To quiet the fears of the people and to 'hinder and prevent bloodshed,' say the minutes, the convention thought best that Nicholson should give over the keys. Then he asked what means could be found 'to reduce this people from their rising' or otherwise bring them to their former obedience, and the convention replied :
387
THE UPRISING IN NEW YORK
1689]
This board are of opinion that there is no way to reduce them by force, but their advice is, since they are rise on their own heads with- out any aid, that they be let alone for some time.
The public money which had been deposited in the fort, said the board, should be removed to the house of Mr. Philipse. The new guardians of the fort would not surrender it. No officers, Nicholson urged, should head the rebellious militia- men. Nevertheless the captains agreed to take daily turns in defending the fort, and with most of their men signed a brief paper which, written in parts in imperfect English, has often been attributed to Leisler's pen but was more probably the work of another. It called itself A Declaration of the In- habitants Soldiers Belonging under the Several Companies of the Train-band of New York. Referring to the 'popish gov- ernor,' Dongan, and his 'wicked creatures and pensionaries'. now under Governor Nicholson's authority, and to Nichol- son's threats and his reception of Catholic soldiers from Bos- ton, it said that the signers had unanimously resolved to live no longer in such danger but better to secure, the fort, which had been done without resistance or bloodshed,
. .. and we declare to be entirely and openly opposed to Papists and their religion, and therefore, expecting orders from England, we shall keep and guard surely and faithfully the said fort in the behalf of the power that now governeth in England, to surrender to the person of the Protestant religion that shall be nominated or sent by the power abovesaid. These are our most sincere intentions that we are glad to manifest as well to the power abovesaid . . . as to other persons, to avoid their reproaches that they could otherwise unjustly lay upon the abovesaid inhabitants.
An endorsement on the declaration noted that it was signed by six captains and about four hundred men and that one of the same tenor was signed 'at Eastchester and thereabouts' by one captain and seventy men.
On the following day, June 1, the militiamen besought Colonel Bayard to take command of them against the lieuten-
388
HISTORY OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
[1689
ant-governor, in vain but somewhat to Captain Leisler's alarm. On the 2d, it being then Leisler's turn to stand guard, he entered the fort with forty-nine men and resolved not to leave it until he had brought all the train-bands 'fully to join with him.' This he wrote two days later to 'The Governor and Committee of Safety at Boston' in the first of his extant letters. On the 3d, when Captain Lodwyck brought alarm- ing news of suspicious-looking ships inside Sandy Hook, Leisler 'took occasion to alarm the town,' firing the guns of the fort and beating drums. Some of the captains urged Colonel Bayard to give orders. He answered, say the coun- cil minutes, that officers as well as men had often disobeyed him, the government could not support him while it had not control of the fort, and he did not think it 'safe to appear in arms' except as a private soldier. Nevertheless his col- leagues directed him to give 'suitable orders.' The most of the militiamen, he reported on the following day, disobeyed their officers and 'in a rebellious manner' went into the fort 'to side with Captain Leisler and committed insufferable in- solences.' And while he was about some business in the cus- tom-house Leisler came in, called him 'a colonel of a tyran- nical power,' used other 'filthy and scurrilous expressions,' and so excited the rabble because he would not take their part against the governor that he was 'in danger to be devoured and his house pulled down etc.'
In the Dutch letter of 1698 we read in regard to these same events that Leisler was 'compelled by the people' to enter the fort. The militia companies then gathered in front of the houses of their captains and, some of these being absent, 'led by certain inferior officers marched off to the park about the fort.' Colonel Bayard tried with threats to prevent them from joining Leisler. But one of the ensigns 'had the audacity to march into the fort with his company.' All the others followed and then the captains followed. 'Although some were rather reluctant' all the captains and about four hundred men had signed the declaration in favor of the Prince of Orange. Bayard refused to join with them although the militia 'very
389
THE UPRISING IN NEW YORK
1689]
courteously' entreated him, some of his personal friends tried to make him 'see his duty,' and he himself confessed that 'if he would but follow, all would follow.'
On June 3, the day of the alarm about the supposed French ships, Leisler and his adherents put forth a brief 'public proclamation' in order to prevent the 'rash judgment of the world' upon their 'just design.' As, it said, orders for the government of the country were daily expected from the Prince of Orange it was well to announce that
as soon as the bearer of the said orders shall have let us see his power, then and without any delay we shall execute the said orders punctually ; declaring that we do intend to submit and obey, not only the said orders, but also the bearer thereof committed for the execution of the same.
It is certain that these words, which were constantly re- peated with little variation for two years, faithfully expressed the temper and the intentions of the insurgent party and its leaders. It is less certain that at this early day the king's councillors, true Protestants though they also were, con- templated with real satisfaction the overthrow of the Catholic sovereign whose favor they had so conspicuously enjoyed. If they did, they were timid in action beyond the average of their fellow-Americans. This, indeed, seems the more plaus- ible supposition : they doubted whether William's success would be permanent. So says the Dutch letter of 1698: they were too timid to risk anything, thinking it might all be 'a Monmouth affair.' And so said Cadwallader Colden, writing before the middle of the eighteenth century :
. . . the gentlemen of the king's council, and some of the most con- siderable or richest people, either out of love, or what they thought duty, to King James, or rather from an opinion they had that the Prince of Orange could not succeed, refused to join in the declaration - the people made in favor of the Prince, and suffered the administra- tion to fall into different hands, who were more zealous for the Protes- tant interest, and who were joined by the far greatest number of the inhabitants.
390
HISTORY OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
[1689
Leisler wrote to New England that the second declaration, meaning the 'public proclamation' of June 3, discouraged the 'adverse party.' With the first, Cuyler's deposition about Nicholson's threat to burn the city, and sundry other papers it was sent to Boston to be put in print. Hourly the split between the two factions widened. Shut out from the offi- cial residence, the 'Great House' in the fort, Nicholson took up his abode with Frederick Philipse. Distrust of him and of his predecessors deepened when the people discovered the deplorable condition of the fort and of many of its guns and the uselessness of half of its small stock of powder. The next move of their leaders Leisler reported in his letter to Boston of June 4 which, although badly spelled and punctuated in the original, seems too well expressed to be accepted as his unassisted work :
The most part of the country have invited the rest to appear as a council of safety, two men out of each county, the 26th of this in- stant. In the mean time the fort is guarded by five companies, two watches, } company per night, and the captain whose watch it is is for that time captain of the fort. The collector in the custom house is a rank papist; I cannot get the captains to resolve to turn him out. The mayor meddles with no civil affairs and discourages constables to keep the peace expecting some sedition for to make the inhabitants odious. There is none acts others than in quality of a single cap- tain. . . .
The authorities at Boston should carefully preserve, Leisler asked, the public papers of New York, which Andros and his 'wicked crew' had carried away, until such time as the com- mittee of safety might take 'some prudent care' about them.
It was true that Mayor Van Cortlandt was finding little time to attend to ordinary civil affairs. For a while longer the mayor's court continued to sit, but as a common council the magistrates did not meet between the latter part of March and the latter part of September.
It was known in New York that there had been introduced in parliament an act to revive, in the colonies as in England,
391
THE UPRISING IN NEW YORK
1689]
all charters antedating the restoration of Charles II in 1660 - the act that King William eventually vetoed. And it is pos- sible that, as Nicholas Bayard affirmed, many people, believ- ing that the right of Holland to its province would thus be recognized, were expecting orders from William simply as the chief magistrate of the Republic. As soon, however, as the insurgents knew that William was king in England, with loyal enthusiasm they addressed him as such.
In a shape not to be questioned this news was brought on the afternoon of the eventful third of June by a ship from Barbadoes. In Barbadoes and in Virginia as well as in Eng- land the king and queen had been proclaimed; and also in Boston although so recently that the fact can hardly have been known in New York. Still the councillors in New York did nothing. They 'resolved to be passive,' Bayard soon afterwards wrote, because they saw the 'eminent danger' and the evident impossibility of 'stopping the fury and cur- rent of the rebellion' - a lame excuse beneath which may be divined a genuine fear that if William of Orange were driven from England all who had acclaimed his advent might suffer.
The popular leaders did not rest passive. Without delay they prepared an address to their Majesties - a verbose and in parts ill written paper which seems to show the work of several hands and at one point echoes words of the Boston declaration. As we have it, it bears no more exact date than 'June,' but Leisler mentioned it in a letter of June 16. In no way referring to William's connection with the Dutch Republic but expressing profound joy at his accession and that of 'our most gracious Queen Mary,' it explains that New York, like England, had long been oppressed by arbitrary and papistical rulers. It says that the militia would not have presumed to take possession of the fort but for 'most just fears' of being betrayed to the enemy, the 'most in command' being 'bitter papists' and Lieutenant-Governor Nicholson having uttered 'rash, hasty, and furious expressions and threats' which the address duly quoted. For these reasons the writers had felt it their bounden duty to take precautions against their Maj-
392
HISTORY OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
[1689
esties' enemies but now humbly awaited their orders, implor- ing their favor and protection, and praying that they might long and happily reign and leave 'a succeeding issue to sit on the throne of their ancestors whilst the world endureth."
This paper, entitled The Humble Address of the Militia and of the Inhabitants of the City of New York in America, was signed by five persons - five of the captains. The sixth, Gabriel Minvielle, refused to add his name and resigned his commission. With corroborative documents the address was sent to certain Dutch merchants in London for transmission to the king and queen. It was at this moment that some of the affidavits already quoted were secured. Evidently it was hard to find a New York justice who would take them, for one or more were attested by a justice from Easthampton, the Samuel Mulford who had been a delegate from Suffolk County to the assembly of 1683.
Two or three travellers now coming by land or sea were stopped by the sentries set by the insurgents and were brought to the fort where the letters they carried, some of them ad- dressed to Nicholson and his friends, were opened and read. One who came from Barbadoes brought a copy of the London Gazette of February 18 in which was printed the proclamation of the accession. This Nicholson with some difficulty ob- tained. Still he ordered no proclamation in New York. On the following day the council, declaring that the militia cap- tains were responsible for many 'insolencies and injuries' and illegal acts, including the seizure of the fort and the public moneys therein, summoned them before a court composed of the councillors themselves and the city magistrates. Min- vielle said that he would come were he not ill. Four made excuses or sent no reply. Leisler answered that he would not come before either councillors or magistrates 'nor had not anything to do with them.' Thereupon it was resolved that a protest be drawn up against all the captains excepting Min- vielle. And with this entry end the minutes of the general meeting or convention.
It had failed in the work it was created to do; it had not
. .. . . .
393
THE UPRISING IN NEW YORK
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.