The Administration of Director Kieft in Particular.
Sufficient has been said of what Director Kieft did in regard to the church and its affairs, and in regard to the state, such as buildings and taxes or revenue. It remains for us to proceed to the council-house and produce thence some examples, as we promised. We will, in doing so, endeavor to be brief.
The Council then consisted of Director Kieft and Monsieur la Montagne. The Director had two votes, and Monsieur la Montagne one; and it was a high crime to appeal from their judgments. Cornelis vander Hoykens sat with them as fiscaal,(1) and Cornelis van Tienhoven as secretary,(2) and whenever any thing extraordinary occurred, the Director allowed some, whom it pleased him—officers of the company for the most part—to be summoned in addition, but that seldom happened. Nevertheless it gave discontent. The Twelve Men, and afterwards the Eight,(3) had in court matters neither vote nor advice; but were chosen in view of the war and some other occurrences, to serve as cloaks and cats-paws. Otherwise they received no consideration and were little respected if they opposed at all the views of the Director, who himself imagined, or certainly wished to make others believe, that he was sovereign, and that it was absolutely in his power to do or refuse to do anything. He little regarded the safety of the people as the supreme law, as clearly appeared in the war, although when the spit was turned in the ashes, it was sought by cunning and numerous certificates and petitions to shift the blame upon others. But that happened so because the war was carried too far, and because every one laid the damage and the blood which was shed to his account. La Montagne said that he had protested against it, but that it was begun against his will and to his great regret, and that afterwards, when it was entered upon, he had helped to excuse it to the best of his ability. The secretary, Cornelius van Tienhoven, also said that he had no hand in the matter, and nothing had been done by him in regard to it except by the express orders of the Director. But this was not believed, for there are those who have heard La Montagne say that if the secretary had not brought false reports the affair would never have happened.(4) There are others also who know this, and every one believes it to be so; and indeed it has plausability. Fiscal van der Hoytgens was not trusted on account of his drinking, wherein all his science consists. He had also no experience here, and in the beginning frequently denounced the war as being against his will. So that the blame rests, and must rest only upon the Director and Secretary Tienhoven. The Director was entrusted with the highest authority, and if any body advised him to the land's ruin, he was not bound to follow the advice and afterwards endeavor to shift the burden from his own neck upon the people, who however excuse themselves although in our judgment they are not all entirely innocent. The cause of this war we conceive to have been the exacting of the contribution, (for which the Director said he had the order of the Managers,)(5) and his own ungovernable passions, which showed themselves principally in private. But there are friends whom this business intimately concerns, and as they have already undertaken it, we will leave the matter with them and proceed to cite one or two instances disclosing the aspiration after sovereignty. Passing by many cases for the sake of brevity, we have that of one Francis Doughty, an English minister, and of Arnoldus van Herdenberch, a free merchant. But as both these cases appear likely to come before Their High Mightinesses at full length, we will merely give a summary of them. This minister, Francis Doughty, during the first troubles in England, in order to escape them, came to New England.(6) But he found that he might, in conformity with the Dutch reformation, have freedom of conscience, which, contrary to his expectation, he missed in New England, he betook himself to the protection of the Dutch. An absolute ground-brief(7) with the privileges allowed to a colony was granted to him by the Director. He had strengthened his settlement in the course of one year by the addition of several families, but the war coming on, they were driven from their lands with the loss of some men and many cattle, besides almost all their houses and what other property they had. They afterwards returned and remained a while, but consuming more than they were able to raise, they came to the Manathans where all the fugitives sojourned at that time, and there Master Doughty officiated as a minister. After the flame of war was out and the peace was concluded—but in such a manner that no one much relied upon it—some of the people again returned to their lands. The Director would have been glad, in order that all things should be completely restored, if it had pleased this man likewise to go back upon his land; but inasmuch as the peace was doubtful, and he had not wherewith to begin, Master Doughty was in no haste. He went however, some time afterwards, and dwelt there half a year, but again left it. As peace was made, and in hope that some others would make a village there, a suit was brought against the minister, and carried on so far that his land was confiscated. Master Doughty, feeling himself aggrieved, appealed from the sentence. The Director answered, his sentence could not be appealed from, but must prevail absolutely; and caused the minister for that remark to be imprisoned twenty-four hours and then to pay 25 guilders. We have always considered this an act of tyranny and regarded It as a token of sovereignty. The matter of Arnoldus van Herdenberch was very like it in its termination. After Zeger Theunisz was murdered by the Indians in the Beregat,(8) and the yacht had returned to the Manathans, Arnoldus van Hardenbergh was with two others appointed by the Director and Council curators over the estate, and the yacht was searched. Some goods were found in it which were not entered, whereupon the fiscaal went to law with the curators, and claimed that the goods were confiscable to the Company. The curators resisted and gave Herdenberch charge of the matter. After some proceedings the goods were condemned. As he found himself now aggrieved in behalf of the common owners, he appealed to such judges as they should choose for the purpose. The same game was then played over again. It was a high crime. The fiscaal made great pretensions and a sentence was passed, whereof the contents read thus: "Having seen the written complaint of the Fiscaal vander Hoytgens against Arnoldus van Hardenberch in relation to appealing from our sentence dated the 28th April last past, as appears by the signature of the before-named Sr. A. van Hardenberch, from which sentence no appeal can be had, as is proven to him by the States General and His Highness of Orange: Therefore the Director General and Council of New Netherland, regarding the dangerous consequences tending to injure the supreme authority of this land's magistracy, condemn the before-named Arnold van Herdenberch to pay forthwith a fine of 25 guilders, or to be imprisoned until the penalty be paid; as an example to others." Now, if one know the lion from his paw, he can see that these people do not spare the name of Their High Mightinesses, His Highness of Orange, the honor of the magistrates, nor the words, "dangerous consequences," "an example to others," and other such words, to play their own parts therewith. We have therefore placed this act by the side of that which was committed against the minister Doughty. Many more similar cases would be found in the record, if other things were always rightly inserted in it, which is very doubtful, the contrary sometimes being observed. It appears then sufficiently that everything has gone on rather strangely. And with this we will leave the subject and pass on to the government of Director Stuyvesant, with a single word, however, touching the sinister proviso incorporated in the ground-briefs, as the consequences may thence be very well understood. Absolute grants were made to the people by the ground-briefs, and when they thought that everything was right, and that they were masters of their own possessions, the ground-briefs were demanded from them again upon pretence that there was something forgotten in them; but that was not it. They thought they had incommoded themselves in giving them, and therefore a proviso was added at the end of the ground-brief, and it was signed anew; which proviso directly conflicts with the ground-brief, so that in one and the same ground-brief is a contradiction without chance of agreement, for it reads thus in the old briefs: "and take in possession the land and the valleys appertaining of old thereto," and the proviso says, "no valley to be used before the Company," all which could well enough be used, and the Company have a competency. In the ground-briefs is contained also another provision, which is usually inserted and sticks in the bosom of every one: to wit, that they must submit themselves to all taxes which the council has made or shall make.(9) These impositions can be continued in infinitum, and have already been enforced against several inhabitants. Others also are discouraged from undertaking anything on such terms.
(1) Cornelis van der Huygens was schout-fiscaal (sheriff and
public prosecutor) of New Netherland from 1639 to 1645. He
was drowned in the wreck of the Princess in 1647, along with
Kieft.
(2) Cornelis van Tienhoven was a figure of much importance
in New Netherland history. An Utrecht man, he came out as
book-Keeper in 1633, and served in that capacity under Van
Twiller. In 1638, at the beginning of Kieft's
administration, he was made provincial secretary, and
continued in that office under Stuyvesant, supporting with
much shrewdness and industry the measures of the
administration. His endeavors to counteract this
Representation of the commonalty of New Netherland are
described in the introduction, and are exhibited in the
piece which follows.
(3) The Twelve Men were representatives chosen at the
request of Kieft, to advise respecting war against the
Weckquasgeeks, by an assembly of heads of families convened
in August, 1641. They counselled delay, but finally, in
January, 1642, consented to war. When they proceeded to
demand reforms, especially popular representation in the
Council, Kieft dissolved them. After the Indian outbreak of
August, 1643, the Eight Men were elected, also at the
instance of Kieft, and did their part in the management of
the ensuing warfare; but they also, in the autumns of 1643
and 1644, protested to the West India Company and the States
General against Kieft's misgovernment, and demanded his
recall.
(4) This is intended to connect Kieft's massacre of the
refugee Tappaans at Pavonia, February 25-26, 1643, with a
previous reconnaissance of their position by Van Tienhoven.
(5) Demand of tribute which Kieft made of the river Indians
in 1639 and 1640.
(6) Reverend Francis Doughty, Adriaen van der Donck's
father-in-law, came to Massachusetts in 1637, but was forced
to depart on account of heresies respecting baptism. He is
reputed one of the first, if not the first, Presbyterian
ministers in America. Further details regarding him, from
an unfriendly pen, may be seen in Van Tienhoven's reply,
post. The conditions on which he and his associates settled
at Mespath (Newtown) may be seen in N.Y. Col. Doc., XIII.
8; the Patent, in O'Callaghan's History of New Netherland,
I. 425.
(7) Conveyance.
(8) Shrewsbury Inlet.
(9) Mr. Murphy cites the clause, from a ground-brief or
patent issued in 1639. After describing the land conveyed,
it is declared to be "upon the express condition and
stipulation that the said A.B. and his assigns shall
acknowledge the Nobel Lords Managers aforesaid as their
masters and patroons under the sovereignty of the High and
Mighty Lord States General, and shall be obedient to the
Director and Council here, as all good citizens are bound to
be, submitting themselves to all such taxes and imposts as
have been or may be, hereafter, imposed by the Noble Lords."