USA > New York > Bronx County > The Bronx and its people; a history, 1609-1927, Volume I > Part 11
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
Things did not turn out exactly according to plan. When the patroons really began to comply with the conditions imposed on them and sent colonizing parties to occupy the land confirmed to them, the trade in furs, the forbidden fruit, proved most attractive, while agriculture, which was the main object of the establishments of the patroonships, was comparatively neglected, because its returns were so small and slow compared with the profits that might be obtained from the sale of pelt- ries. A conflict with the directors of the West India Company was therefore inevitable, and as a result the Assembly of the XIX seriously amended the charter of 1629, rescinding some of the most important exemptions. Van Rensselaer and the others thereupon appeared with a paper of complaints before the States-General, claiming that it was entirely illegal for the company to rescind what they had so recently granted, and that on the strength of the privileges promised the petition- ers had fitted out expensive expeditions. It was urged too that the Swanendael colony had been exterminated by the Indians, because the company, contrary to its engagement, had no sufficient force in the vicinity, Fort Nassau having been abandoned. The principal result of this controversy seems to have been that the States-General examined the nature of these grants of land, leading them to conclude that they were excessive and burdened with other objectionable features. As Minuit, the director-general, had countenanced and confirmed them, they further exercised their stipulated authority over the governors in the service of the company, by ordering his recall. But perhaps there had been a too liberal interpretation of the privileges to be extended. Secretary de Rasieres had already been dismissed a few years before, having fallen into disgrace on account of these same factions, as Gover- nor Bradford writes, and now, early in the year 1632, Minuit, accom- panied by the schout-fiscal, Lampe, embarked for Holland, in the ship "Eendracht," and the administration of the first director-general came to a close.
Minuit's connection with the development of American colonization did not cease with his directorship of New Netherland. Among the ambitious views entertained by Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden was included a design of establishing a colonial empire in North America. When, about the year 1624, William Usselinx left Holland despairing of success in inducing the Dutch merchants and statesmen to adopt his plans of West Indian trade, he proceeded to Sweden and succeeded in interesting the talented king in his schemes. Gustavus granted a charter
88
THE BRONX AND ITS PEOPLE
to a New South Company, which was modeled after the Dutch West India Company, and was to include participants both in Sweden and Germany. But the king's active part in the Thirty Years' War prevented Swedish operations in American waters. After his death in the battle of Lutzen, in 1632, however, Chancellor Oxenstiern, under whom Sweden maintained the exalted position won by the "Lion of the North," prose- cuted the king's ideas with regard to American trade and colonization, and under his auspices an expedition was sent out early in the year 1638 to establish a colony on the Delaware River. It was placed under the direction of Peter Minuit. A large tract of land was purchased from the Red Men on the west side of the river and defensive works begun, which were eventually designated by the name of Fort Christina. Hav- ing inaugurated this settlement and established an active trade in furs in defiance of the protests of William Kieft, Minuit returned to Europe, according to some authorities, while he is represented as dying at his post, at Fort Christina, in 1641.
Van Twiller and De Vries-Inasmuch as the troubles arising out of the aggressiveness of the patroons constituted the cause of the retire- ment of Peter Minuit, it is a little curious that his successor should have been so closely allied, both by blood and marriage, with Van Rensselaer, the most energetic of the patroons in pressing his privileges. Probably the interference of the States-General in dismissing their chief officer in New Netherland produced a reaction in the councils of the West India Company and placed the influence of the patroons once more in the ascendant. So it came about that Walter Van Twiller, one of the clerks in the company's offices in Amsterdam, was elevated to the posi- tion of Director-General of the Dutch province in North America. He is usually described as born at Nieuwerkerk, a village near Amsterdam. Van Twiller, it would appear, had been in New Netherland some years before his appointment to office. He was sent as agent to select a territory for his relative's patroonship, and for this purpose is supposed to have been here in 1629. It has also been stated that he remained for about a year and was ordered to act as a kind of spy upon the colonial government, it being due to his information that cause for dismissal was found against Minuit. Van Twiller's official connection with the history of New Netherland begins with his arrival as successor to Minuit in April, 1633, a year after Minuit's departure. He was accompanied by a force of one hundred and four soldiers. A month later Captain De Vries arrived. He was an active partner in the patroonship of Swan- endael on the Delaware, and thus in close alliance with a number of the directors of the West India Company, but the beginning of his re- lations with the company had not been altogether agreeable. As far
89
SETTLEMENT BY EUROPEANS
back as 1624 there was lodged a complaint before the States-General against the West India Company on the part of a sea-captain and part owner of a vessel lying in the port of Hoorn and bound for New France. The West India Company had then newly entered upon its career of enterprise, and it imagined that here was an infringement of its charter privileges. Accordingly the captain was arrested at the instance of the company by the magistrates of Hoorn; but this resolute person was not to be so summarily dealt with. He at once served an attach- ment on the agents of the company, who were thereby compelled to send for instructions to the Assembly of the XIX. The captain went beyond this body to a still higher authority, and sent a petition for re- dress to the States-General, the result being that the States-General sent a communication to the West India people, showing that the vessel in question was not interfering with their rights, inasmuch as the fish- eries of Canada were distinctly under the jurisdiction of France, and that it was owned or chartered by French merchants; and at the same time their High Mightinesses took occasion to rebuke the company for risking, at the very commencement of its operations, a quarrel with a friendly power. This formidable sea-captain was David Pieters, or David Pietersen De Vries. He had gained a victory over the powerful West India Company, but the inevitable delay in sailing was fatal to the projected enterprise, and it was necessarily abandoned, De Vries losing a large sum of money. When the patroons consented to receive partners in the management and profits of the colonies in America, the captain, instead of contributing capital, placed at the disposal of the patentees of Swanendael his skill and experience as a mariner and ex- plorer. In February, 1632, he sailed with two ships to plant a colony on the Delaware, to succeed the one which the copartners had sent in 1630, but which had been massacred in the preceding year. He succeeded in conciliating the Indians, but no one ventured to settle in the vicinity of the doomed plantation, and the whale-fishery also furnishing an un- satisfactory return, De Vries sailed down the coast, paid a brief visit to Sir John Harvey, Governor of Virginia, at Jamestown, and on April 16, 1633, arrived in New York bay, to make the acquaintance of the new director-general.
A couple of days later, as De Vries was at dinner with Van Twiller, an English ship passed in between the Narrows and came to anchor before the fort. A boat put off for the shore and the vessel's errand was soon told. Her name was "William," sent out by a company of Lon- don merchants to carry on a trade in furs upon "Hudson's" river. There was significance in that very name; therein lay the claim which was stated in so many words, that Hudson's nationality gave to England all
90
THE BRONX AND ITS PEOPLE
the rights derived from his discovery. The person sent to communicate this mission, and to assert these rights, in the instance dealt with, was Jacob Eelkens. Honorably identified as he had been with the beginning of the history of New Netherland, he appears now in a less favorable light. Shortly before the arrival of the ship "New Netherland," in 1623, with the first Walloon families, Eelkens had seized the person of Seguin, or Sequin, an Indian chief, on one of his trading expeditions, in the course of which he had penetrated to the vicinity of the Connecticut. He demanded an exorbitant ransom of over a hundred fathoms of wam- pum for the release of Seguin. As a consequence, the Indians of that region became suspicious of the Dutch, a long time intervened before confidence was restored, and the fur trade suffered greatly. Hence Eelkens, who had so long commanded at Fort Nassau, was dismissed from the service of the West India Company, before Fort Orange was substituted for the former. The English, coveting a foothold in the territories about the Hudson, were not slow to avail themselves of the undoubted capacity and experience possessed by the disgraced Indian trader, while they rightly counted on his disaffection towards his pre- vious employers as an important element in securing their ends. He stoutly maintained the right of the "William" to proceed up the river, and quoted the ideas of his new masters in regard to the English title and proprietorship based on Hudson's exploration. Van Twiller, with as much determination, repudiated those claims, and refused permission to the "William" to proceed. The river was not the "Hudson's River," but the "Mauritius"; all the surrounding regions owed allegiance to no other potentate than their High Mightinesses and the Prince of Orange as their Stadholder. In practical support of that declaration the Commander-in-chief of Fort Amsterdam ordered the Orange colors, or the Orange, White and Blue of the West India Company to be un- furled from the flagstaff of the fort and three shots to be fired in honor of the prince. Eelkens was not at all overawed by this display of author- ity ; returning to his ship, the English ensign was run to the masthead, and three shots in defiance of. Van Twiller and in honor of King Charles boomed over the water; the "William" weighing her anchor and sailing up the river.
Van Twiller was naturally indignant at the truculence of the Dutch renegade, and called on all the denizens of the fort to assemble on the river bank and drain a bumper of wine to the glory of their Prince and Fatherland. An appeal of this character to their patriotism was answered with enthusiasm by the large assemblage and with their eyes on the receding ship they drank to the confusion of their enemies and the success of their flag and country. However, De Vries, as the more
1
91
SETTLEMENT BY EUROPEANS
practical man, saw that this sort of thing would not do. The man-of-war which had conveyed De Vries to his seat of government was yet in port, and a force of a hundred soldiers was at his command. Why not dispatch the armed ship upon the errand of arrest? A few days after- wards an expedition was fitted out to carry out this project. The man- of-war was kept behind, however, and a pinnace, a caravel, and a boy, conveying a portion of the troops, were sent up the river to arrest Eel- kens and bring back the English ship. The former commissary had already established himself upon the island in the river near Fort Orange and was trading successfully with the Indians. His previous intercourse with them was remembered, and his facility in dealing with them was of great service to his English employers. The settlers at Fort Orange sought to interfere with his transactions but they did so by beating the Indians who came to trade, instead of attacking Eelkens and his party. A large quantity of furs had already been collected when the soldiers arrived from Fort Amsterdam. They soon compelled Eelkens to desist, forced the English sailors to carry the peltries on board the "William" and convoyed the foreigner to Manhattan Island. Here Eel- kens was made to give up his cargo and with his crew was sent back empty-handed to England.
The Title to New Netherland-The affair had the result of exciting anew the dispute as to the title to New Netherland. The owners of the "William" complained to the English government of the treatment their vessel had received and a claim for damages was transmitted to Holland by the Dutch ambassadors, and referred by the States-General to the West India Company. The latter defended the title of the Repub- lic and sought to refute the arguments of the English, the question of damages depending upon this alone. Yet the company had already performed this same fruitless task hardly more than a year before, when the English had, on the strength of their claim to New Netherland, ventured upon a much more serious violation of international comity than that of which they then complained against the Dutch. The ship "Union," conveying Director Minuit to Holland, was driven by stress of weather to take refuge in the harbor of Plymouth. She was at once seized upon by the English authorities as coming from a region covered by grants of the crown to English subjects. Minuit hastened to London to inform the Dutch ambassadors of the outrage, and these appealed for redress directly to the king. Little sympathy was to be expected in such a quarter; insisting on royal prerogative to his own ruin in England, Charles I was not inclined to yield any of his sovereignity in America. The matter was referred for decision to the Privy Council, with the result that the ministers but reiterated and emphasized a claim
92
THE BRONX AND ITS PEOPLE
so frequently advanced before. However, in anticipation of this the Dutch ambassadors had urged upon the States-General the necessity of a clear statement of the Dutch title, which was accordingly prepared by the West India Company. This paper showed that there was no settlement by the English, nor any kind of occupation near the territories named till 1620; while the Dutch had been trading without interruption from 1610 to the year in which they were, and had built forts there. Referring moreover to the question of grants, there had always been an extensive region between 38 and 41 degrees north latitude, which had been distinctly left open, and New Netherland lay within these geo- graphical limits. But lastly, and more conclusive than all, they advanced the argument that inasmuch as the inhabitants of those countries were freemen, and neither "his Britannic Majesty's" nor "your High Mighti- nesses' subjects," they were free to trade with whomsoever they pleased. They were for this reason also perfectly at liberty to sell their land as they had done to the Dutch, and to convey title thereto by such sale. Further it was contended that "his Majesty may likewise in all justice grant his subjects, by charter, the right to trade with any people, to the exclusion of all others, his subjects, as your High Mightinesses have a right to do with yours. But that it is directly contrary to all right and reason for one potentate to prevent the subjects of another to trade in countries whereof his people have not taken, nor obtained actual pos- session from the right owners, either by contract or purchase."
These arguments, however, prevailed little with men who had already made up their minds and who had decided that they wanted the land of the Hollanders and were going to press their claims against them. The Dutch ship was indeed released, because Charles did not wish at the time to provoke foreign quarrels when the contention with Parlia- ment was already taking up a good deal of his energy. The release was made unwillingly and with the deliberate threat that the act of restora- tion was no warrant against similar interference in the future. For these reasons it was that the case of the "William" was actively pressed as a complaint against the Dutch. The West India Company on its side, while repeating the former arguments, sought to arrive at a prac- tical and permanent solution of the question by the appointment of a commission to fix upon the exact boundaries between New England and New Netherland. In the expectation that this would be accom- plished, they directed Van Twiller to buy large tracts of land on the Connecticut, for although this river had been discovered by a Dutchman, it was deemed safer to fortify the title of discovery by one of purchase. Therefore, in compliance with the company's orders, he sent an agent to the Connecticut River, in the course of the summer of 1633, to arrange
93
SETTLEMENT BY EUROPEANS
a purchase of land from the Indian owners. A large tract situated about sixty miles from Long Island Sound, including the site of the present city of Hartford, was thus secured, and another at its mouth, called Kieviet's Hoeck by the Dutch and Saybrook Point by the English. A redoubt, to which was given the name of "Good Hope," was built near the site of Hartford, and the arms of the States-General affixed to a tree at Kieviet's Hoeck. But it seemed as if these honorable measures to secure formal possession only provoked the English colonists instead of acting as a restraint on their encroachments.
A vessel belonging to the New Plymouth settlers, having brought the news from Manhattan of the Dutch activities in the Connecticut valley, Governor Winslow and Governor Bradford at once proceeded to Boston to see what the two colonies combined could do to circumvent the Dutch, proposing among other things to erect a trading-house upon the very land which the latter had purchased; but Governor Winslow refused to participate in the scheme. He felt uncertain whether the patent of Massachusetts permitted an extension of trade to Connecticut, and he knew that the territory had been conveyed by royal grant to the Earl of Warwick. In view of this, while taking no active part against Van Twiller, he addressed a letter to him. The King of England, the Puritan governor wrote, had granted the river and country of Connec- ticut to his own subjects. A courteous reply was returned on the part . of the director-general, bidding the English colonists to forbear entering into disputes about territory, before the English and Dutch governments should arrive at some understanding regarding boundaries; and though no Puritan himself he inculcated the Christian duty of living together as good neighbors in "these heathenish countries." The commentary of the settlers at New Plymouth upon this exhortation was an immediate preparation for occupying the Dutch territory. A house was constructed and placed in sections upon a large boat and a number of men under the command of William Holmes were ordered to convey the boat to a position above Fort Good Hope. As the expedition passed the fort they were challenged by the Dutch garrison and the two pieces of ord- nance upon the walls were leveled against the intruders. The English kept on their way, however, and the threat was not fulfilled, as it was forbidden to the West India Company to employ its forces against the representatives of a nation with whom the Republic was at peace. Van Twiller, however, when he learned of the circumstances, addressed a formal protest to Holmes, which was as little heeded as the challenge from the fort. The house was placed some miles above Good Hope, and thus was founded the town of Windsor, in Connecticut. The ex- ample of the Plymouth colonists was not lost upon the settlers of
94
THE BRONX AND ITS PEOPLE
Massachusetts, in spite of Governor Winthrop's previous abstention from any positive move. An exploring party having reported upon the excellence of the territory about the Connecticut, families from Watertown, Roxbury, Dorchester, and Newton, exhorted to the enter- prise by sermons of their clergy, crossed the intervening wilderness and settled on the banks of the river. Later, John Winthrop, the son of the governor, led a party to the mouth of the Connecticut, tore down the arms of the States-General at Kieviet's Hoeck, and founded Say- brook. Van Twiller was in a difficult situation; he could not use force against Englishmen without danger of compromising the West India Company ; yet these people were taking advantage of his helplessness, justifying their conduct on the ground of the illegal grants of a monarch who in other respects was already discrowned in their eyes, deserving no obedience. The director appealed to the Assembly of the XIX and advised its members to obtain permission from the States-General to employ their troops and ships against the English, but such permission was never transmitted to him, and doubtless was not even applied for. In view of all these circumstances, therefore, one act of Van Twiller's stands out in strong contrast to whatever features of a less favorable kind may be discovered in his character. When, a few years later, the colony at Saybrook, was massacred by the Pequods, and two English girls were carried away captives, the director at once sent out an expedi- tion to recover them. By the promptness and address of the Dutch the captives were restored to their families.
Trouble with the Indians-In 1636, the Pequods fell upon the English settlers along the Connecticut, and a destructive war was waged against them by the Puritans. An Indian war was therefore a thing to be looked for in New Netherland. The treaty of Tawassgunshee stood as a per- petual and irrefragable barrier against a calamity of that sort in the valley of the upper Hudson. By an ill-judged interference with a dis- pute between the Mohawks and the Mohicans, a few Dutchmen under Kriekenbeeck had lost their lives there, but it reflected no dishonor what- ever upon the Mohawks, who were a party to the peace of 1618. The Indians near the mouth of the Hudson, however, took no part in the council on the Tawasentha; indeed, they were distinctly hostile to the nations who had entered into it; and the war that seemed inevitable at length began, in all the horrors that characterized it in other portions of the country, under the administration of Director Kieft. But the originating cause dated back sixteen years and is to be traced to an in- cident that took place immediately after Peter Minuit's arrival, while isolated cases of trouble with the Indians marked also the period of Van Twiller's incumbency.
95
SETTLEMENT BY EUROPEANS
In 1626, when the fort was being constructed and the farm laborers were set at work upon the virgin soil, three men in the employ of Direc- tor Minuit-all, according to some writers, negroes-were one day plowing and clearing the land bordering on the pond or stream called the Kolk, or Collect. While they were thus busy an Indian, accompanied by his nephew, about twelve years of age, came to this secluded spot, carrying some beaver skins to the fort. The cupidity of the laborers was excited by the sight of the valuable peltry and they forthwith set upon the defenseless natives. The boy escaped, but his companion was slain. No punishment was meted out to the murderers, and it is doubt- ful if the murder ever came to the knowledge of the colonial authorities. but the nephew of the murdered man, true to his Indian traditions, vowed vengeance, and fulfilled his vow sixteen years later by a murder which became the signal for a general Indian war. It was also during Minuit's term that the massacre occurred at Swanendael, referred to above. As De Vries was leaving Holland in order to conduct a second party of settlers to that colony the news came that the first colonists had all been murdered by the Indians. When he reached the scene the details were told him by a friendly native. Gillis Hoosset had been placed in charge of affairs at Swanendael, and as an evidence of propri- etorship the arms of the States-General, displayed on a piece of tin, were affixed to a tree. The shining metal attracted the attention of the Indians, and one of them mnade bold to take down the tin plate, and con- verted it into a tobacco pipe. Hoosset, conveying by means of signs the impropriety of the act, was understood by the natives to express a much more violent resentment than he felt; they imagined that he demanded the death of the offender and acted accordingly. But his execution aroused the vengeance of the tribe to which he belonged and it was visited upon the strangers who were supposed to have de- manded the sacrifice of their relative. While the colonists to the number of thirty were at work in the fields and woods at some distance from one another, the Indians despatched them all. Another party surprised Hoosset and a sick man who had remained in the house and killed them also. De Vries on his arrival refrained from measures of retaliation, as the blame was hard to fix, and it would appear that his moderation gained for him the confidence of the aborigines, displayed on various occasions. These occurrences made a sore spot in memories and brought about a state in which later violence was to be apprehended.
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.