V.

1654.

BOOK allowed their own government, on acknowledging the sovereignty of the States General and the Company, on payment to the latter of such rents, either in tenths or other royalties, as may be agreed on. Foreseeing, however, that it would, after the Hartford treaty, be impossible to obtain such favorable terms as these, it was proposed finally to start from the mouth of the Delaware, and run thence north along the coast so as to include the whole of Long Island, and terminate at Stamford, "which would be divided by a stream from Greenwich," " in which case the little villages of South Hampton and Southold might be conveyed to this state." Fort Good Hope and the lands on Fresh River might, then, be held by agreement as a manor," together with the plain which lies eastward from the hill to the river." As the Connecticut, by this arrangement, would fall to the English, it was further advised that the navigation of that stream should be free to both nations. "But it may, at the same time, be understood that no vessels from Fatherland should have free access to that river, except those having a permit from the Directors, or commissioned by the authorities of New Netherland."

Nov. 27.

These papers were forwarded to the Dutch ambassadors at London, with instructions to negotiate a boundary line. But this they found impracticable. They were unprovided with any argument or facts, so necessary in negotiations "with this nation." First occupation and possession, with sometimes the purchase of the land, were merely assumed, but no proofs, either of one or the other, were placed in their hands. That the Dutch had neither patent nor evidence of purchase had, they remarked, been already objected by the English, who now, as far as they could learn, denied that they had any title, either by acquisition or prior possession. Reference had been made by Stuyvesant in his letters to a provisional treaty concluded at Hartford in 1650, but to prove its existence they had no document, nor authentic paper, the production of which would, in a matter of such importance, be of absolute ne

Hol. Doc. viii. 63-96; Verbael van Beverninck, (4to. Hague, 1725,) 606.

III.

cessity. In the discussion on the Thirty-six Articles, the CHAP. English had already pretended total ignorance of their High Mightinesses having any colonies in America, and 1654. had refused to consider in any way this boundary question. And as nothing would be concluded on the subject in Britain, without the consent of the people of New England, the ambassadors gave it as their opinion, that it would be better to treat for a joint commission empowering the authorities in America to settle the matter on the spot. With this view they prepared a draft of certain propositions to that effect, which, with the approbation of the States General, they would submit, at a proper season, to the British Court.' The Company considered that arrangements could best be made in England, on the basis of the uti possidetis; yet they would not object to the reference of the question back to America. As they had not in their possession the papers demanded by the ambassadors, nor, indeed, any copy of the Hartford treaty, they were un able to proceed further in the negotiation. They, therefore, were forced to content themselves with sending in another long statement, compiled from various sources, re-urging priority of discovery and occupancy of the terri tories in question, and reiterating "the violent and unexampled usurpations of the English on lands within the Company's jurisdiction." This document was transmitted to London, but no satisfaction could be obtained. New England had not communicated any information on the subject, and the Lord Protector, having no knowledge of these matters, could not be expected to decide thereon positively, on the mere allegations of one party."

Hol. Doc. vii., 122–125.

Alb. Rec. iv., 177.

2

3 Hol. Doc. vii., 105, 114-126, 129-150, 169, 170, 177; Verbael van Beverninck, 612, 688, 693, 694; Thurloe, iii., 477.

BOOK

CHAPTER V.

Baxter proceeds to New England-Returns to Gravesend and proclaims Cromwell-Is arrested with Hubbard-Progress of affairs at Gravesend-Further encroachments on Long Island-Pell's settlement at Westchester-Steps taken by the Directors to recover the South River-Result of Stuyvesant's visit to Barbadoes-The Dutch expedition to the South River-Expulsion of the Swedes-Agreement with Governor Rysingh-The Indians unexpectedly invade New Amsterdam-Collision between them and the Dutch-Massacre at Pavonia and Staten Island-Stuyvesant returns from the South River-Negotiates with the Indians-Rysingh arrives at New Amsterdam-Protests against Stuyvesant-The latter's reply-Rysingh's rejoinder-Memorial sent by the Dutch to Holland-Deliberations of the Council-Excise increasedTreaty with the Long Island Indians.

SMARTING under his personal grievances, Baxter, on being dismissed the magistracy, repaired to New England, 1655. whence, crossing the East River on the ice, he proceeded Jan. to Long Island, and circulated, everywhere, the report

that the English fleet had returned victorious from Acadia, and that the Protector had given orders to the Governors of the English colonies to take Long Island from the Dutch, willingly or unwillingly, before the ensuing month of May. The Council at Fort Amsterdam sent Burgomaster Anthony and Van Tienhoven to the English villages, at the opening of the navigation, to allay the threatened ferment. They Mar. 9. arrived at Gravesend to witness the hoisting of the British ensign by Baxter, Hubbard, and James Grover, the last of whom accompanied the act by reading, three times in succession, the following declaration :

"WE, individuals of the English nation here present, do, for divers reasons and motives, as free-born British subjects, claim and assume to ourselves the laws of our nation and Republic of England over this place, as to our persons and property, in love and harmony, according to the general peace between the two states in Europe and this country. God Almighty preserve the Republic of Eng

V.

land and His Highness the Lord Protector, and also the CHAP. continuance of peace between the two countries. Amen."

This act of sedition was too flagrant to be passed over in silence. Baxter and Hubbard were immediately arrested and transferred to the keep at Fort Amsterdam, and their property seized. The public mind was now in too agitated a state to permit a calm election. "The loyal inhabitants" of the village petitioned that it may be further postponed, "until it shall please God Almighty to bless our Mar. 23. Governor, the Director-general, with a safe return." It

was not until the summer that circumstances justified the holding of this election. The sheriff, and Lady Moody, "as the oldest and first patentee," were then ordered to June 18. nominate, with the other inhabitants, proper persons to act as magistrates of their town. This nomination was accord- July 8. ingly sent in, but it was accompanied by a strong protest July 9. on the part of the Dutch settlers, who demanded that the new officers be not confirmed, on the grounds, 1st, that the order for the election was never communicated to them; 2d, that persons were admitted to vote who had conspired against the state, or had fled the country, "tortured by their consciences," or had been imprisoned for high crimes; 3d, that no hired Dutchman was allowed to vote in the absence of his master; 4th, that several persons had publicly stated that no Dutchman should be chosen a magistrate, or if this happened, they would quit the country; and lastly, because it is required that the orders of the patentees, "who were continually the magistrates, though many of them had been actually exiled or imprisoned for their malversations," shall be punctually obeyed, which the Dutch settlers averred they could promise no further than it comported with the welfare of the state in which they lived. Public policy and the ends of justice overruled these objections, and the magistrates, having been chosen "by a majority of the inhabitants," were duly confirmed.'

1 Alb. Rec. ix., 287; x., 8, 9, 29, 31, 67, 68, 71-74, 76; xi., 6, 12-17, 21; Hol. Doc. ix., 165, 232, 233. The Hon. Silas Wood, in noticing the case of Baxter and Hubbard, (Sketch of the Settlement of the Several Towns on Long Island,

BOOK

V.

Meanwhile a party of Englishmen from Sandwich, taking advantage of the troubles which distracted the 1655. country, purchased in 1653 a tract of land adjoining Oyster Bay on Long Island from the Indians, whereon they commenced a settlement, and applied for incorporation into the colony of New Haven.' Complaints of this infraction of the treaty of Hartford were transmitted to the authorities of New England in the fall of 1654, but without being Mar. 23. productive of any result. A protest was then served on the leaders of the settlement, who were threatened with prosecution should they persist in their trespass. Oyster Bay was a disputed territory. The Dutch maintained that it was within their lines; the English pretended the contrary; and as the point was not worth fighting about, the newcomers were left almost entirely to themselves.'

It was not on Long Island alone that the Dutch territory was invaded. Regardless of the title already acquired by purchase both by Kieft and Stuyvesant, Thomas Pell, of Fairfield, laid claim to the Vreedlant tract in Westchester,

40, 41,) has committed a number of mistakes. He first represents that "the Governor refused to confirm their election." This was not so. He removed them from office for a violation of the patent. He next states that he conceded to Lady Moody at his visit to Gravesend, 23d Nov. 1654," the nomination of the magistrates that year, and her popularity reconciled the people to the measure, and produced submission to the arbitrary act of the Governor." This may be a very gallant version of the matter, but it is not a true one. Stuyvesant proposed then that the people should elect new magistrates, but this was declined, and we have shown that the election was again postponed in the spring of 1655, at the request of the settlers themselves, out of respect to Stuyvesant's absence in the West Indies. The Director-general did not concede "the nomination of the magistrates" to her ladyship at any time. By the charter, such nomination was vested in the inhabitants, and he would have been acting illegally, had he conceded that nomination to any individual. She was called on as one of the patentees, "with the other inhabitants," to send in a nomination, as was always done. All this was according to law, and not for the purpose which Mr. Wood represents. Mr. Thompson has been led into error also by Mr. Wood.

1 Rec. Gen. Court of New Hav. 63, 96. The consideration paid for this tract was six coats, six kettles, six fathoms of wampum, six hoes, six hatchets, three pairs of stockings, thirty awl-blades, twenty knives, three shirts," and as much peague as will amount to £4 stg." The purchasers were Samuel Mayo, Peter Wright, William Leveridge, Washborne, Charles Armitage, Daniel Whitehead, Anthony Wright, Robert Williams, John Washborne, Richard Holbrooke. Oyster Bay Rec.

Alb. Rec. ix., 256; x., 9, 10, 32; Hol. Doc. ix., 261.