The history of the Province of New-York, Vol. 2 9780674403215, 9780674599895

Citation preview

The John Harvard Library

The History of the Province of New-York Volume One

oWTe : . shad

William Smith, Jr.,in 1751

:.

: ; , _. 2S a; —

i7

The - ean aseal

SS ae sale

a? 1

34 - Fa9 ; a 5 oe: ;.Ss.CAS “

5 . \ ; q 2 ., oe al ;

Ne ‘ woe Pee a asae er br he \ Se a, . : ia Ke . a”xMe: ~t\‘ There is surely a touch of playfulness and irony in Adams’ final phrase; nonetheless, he lucidly put one of the central problems in the career of our subject. William Smith, Jr., regarded himself first as a jurist, and secondarily as a historian. As a historian, for the most part, he simply tried to present a narrative. But occasionally he did “give facts the mold of a theory,” and in doing so aroused the ire of his critics. On balance Smith must be rated an excellent lawyer and a very good historian. The two interlocked in his life’s work; but significantly, his most enduring contribution rests not in his work at the bar or on the bench, but in his History of the Province of New-York and in his Historical Memoirs.

“> Herbert Agar, ed., The Formative Years: A History of the United

States During the Administrations of Jefferson and Madison by

Henry Adams (Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 1947), I, 302.

A Note on the Text

Between 1757, when the first edition of Smith’s History appeared in London, and 1830, when the last was published in New York, various printings and editions became available. They may be cited as follows:

1. The History of the Province of New-York, from the First Discovery to the Year MDCCXXXII. To which is annexed, A Description of the Country, with a short Account of the Inhabitants, their Trade, Religious and Political State, and the Constttution of the Courts of Justice in that Colony (London: Printed for Thomas Wilcox, 1757), 4to, pp. xii, 255. It included a folded

engraving entitled “The South View of Oswego on Lake Ontario.” Most copies had a leaf measurement of 11 by 8% inches, with an inner margin 7% of an inch in width. A few copies were printed on larger and thicker paper, with wider inner margins. Examples of the latter will be found in the Yale University Library and in the Huntington Library, San Marino, California.

2. Histoire de la Nouvelle-York, depuis la découverte de cette

province jusqua notre siécle, dans laquelle on rapporte les démelés qu’elle a eus avec les Canadiens & les Indiens; les guerres quelle a soutenues contre ces peuples; les traités & les alliances quelle a faits avec eux, &c. On y a joint une description geographique du pays, & une histoire abrégée de ses habitans,

de leur religion, de leur gouvernement civil & ecclésiastique. Gc... traduite de lAnglois par M. E. [Marc-Antoine Eidous], (London, 1767), 12 mo., pp. vii-xvi, 415.

lxxui A Note onthe Text 3. A printing with essentially the same title as the first (London: John Almon, 1776), 8vo, pp. viii, 334.

4. A printing, called the second edition, with essentially the same title as the first (Philadelphia: Mathew Carey, 1792), Svo, pp. 276.

5. An edition with essentially the same title as the first, to which is added: With a Continuation, From the Year 17832, to the Commencement of the Year 1814 (Albany: Ryer Schermerhorn, 1814), 8vo, pp. 511. The “Continuation” covers the years 1732-1747, and was prepared by John Van Ness Yates (17791839). 6. Continuation of the History of New-York. Collections of the New-York Historical Society, for the Year 1826. Vol. IV (New

York: J. Seymour, 1826), 8vo, pp. 308. This is the first full printing of the continuation (1732-1762) prepared by Smith’s son from his father’s manuscript. 7. The History of the late Province of New-York, from Its Discovery, to the Appointment of Governor Colden in 1762 (New York: New-York Historical Society, 1829), 2 vols., 8vo, pp. xvi, 320, 308. [Collections of the New-York Historical Society for the

Year 1829 (1830), vols. IV-V.] Volume I of this set is based upon the 1757 first edition, but has interpolated into the text and notes about two-thirds of Smith’s marginalia from his own interleaved copy of the first edition. Many of Smith’s marginal comments were not printed, especially in the latter part of the book where whole passages were ignored.

8. A printing with the same title as the last previous (New York: New-York Historical Society, 1829 [1830], 2 vols., 8vo, pp. xvi, 390; (8), 390. These are printed from a larger size of type than the preceding edition. Many of the longer footnotes have been taken from the text and placed at the end. In most cases the paper of both volumes is thicker than in any previous edition.

The text of Volume One in this edition follows that of the first edition, except that capitalization, swash s’s, excessive use of italics, and use of quotation marks at the beginning of every

quoted line have been brought into accordance with modern

A Note onthe Text Ixxvii usage. Obvious typographical errors in the original have been corrected.

Smith’s personal, annotated copy of Volume One survives, and is located in the Philip H. and A. S. W. Rosenbach Founda-

tion in Philadelphia. In the endpapers of that copy Smith inscribed the following note.

Manor of Livingston 6 Dec. 1777 Twenty years are elapsed since this work was published; in all which time I have had no leisure to read it. Some years ago I had this volume interleaved, with a view of correcting the impression, and making additions. When the MSS was sent home in 1756, I trusted the examination of the proofs, to my friend Doctor Avery of Guy’s Hospital, London, who changed the orthography to his own taste. In running over it within two days past, I have corrected it in some places. If there is a Continuation of the History, it should precede the chapters beginning at page 183 [where the descriptive supplementary chapters commence]; but I am surprised at the great alterations, which the changes since the publication will render necessary. I have materials for a detail of our transactions to the present time; and last winter put it into form from 1731 to 1762. From that period, I have the materials in two books of memoirs, and letters of correspondence, with a collection of political MSS. What is prior to 1762, I propose to finish in draft this winter for a fair copy. The subsequent matters would carry me into a prodigious extent, and I do not mean to reduce them to the form of a narrative like the former published and unpublished part of the History.

Rosenbach purchased the volume at auction (The Anderson

Galleries, 489 Park Avenue, New York; sale no. 1490) in 1920. It had been in the library of Henry F. DePuy, and before that owned by a descendant of Smith’s in Warwickshire, England. Among the extra leaves, 41 have neatly written notes and additions; 42 pages of the printed text have marginal notes for interlineations.

Because the annotations in Smith’s copy are extensive, they presented a problem in preparing this edition. Should they be integrated into the text, appear as footnotes to the text, or be

set as endnotes along with my own annotations? I rejected the first alternative because the marginalia are often discursive

and quote at length from documentary sources, and also because Smith was often second-guessing himself or his critics.

Ixxvitt A Note onthe Text I rejected the second alternative because the original work had footnotes of its own—two simultaneous sets of footnotes seemed

burdensome to me—and because of the extreme length of many of Smith’s annotations. I have, therefore, adopted the third alternative, with the result that in the endnotes to Volume One my own comments, citations, references, and translations are set in square brackets; all other endnotes are Smith’s 1777 marginalia from his own copy. In transcribing Smith’s marginalia I have tried to make them consistent in spelling and capitalization (but not always punc-

tuation) with the text of Volume One. I have expanded abbreviations, changed many dashes to periods, and eliminated dashes following periods. Where Smith changed or added a word in the text proper, I have made the replacement or insertion silently. Beginning with p. 229 of the original, Smith started to make a brief, marginal index to the text; I have omitted these running references. (I have also omitted Smith's brief references to the dates and locations of commissions of high officials (see pp. 2, 28, 46, 65, 95, 129, 168 in Smith’s copy ). Some of Smith’s secondary and tertiary observations (his comments on the commentary ) have been placed in parentheses. Chapter V of the descriptive appendixes—“The Political State” —has especially heavy annotations. Smith obviously wished to do a considerable amount of updating. On the whole it is clear that he combed through the entire volume with scrupulous care, even rechecking his statistics.

Preparation of Volume Two for this edition also presented numerous challenges. Smith’s son, William, who himself wrote

a History of Canada (1815), prepared the Continuation in 1824 from his father’s manuscript. That manuscript survives as

an atlas folio volume in the Manuscript Division of the New York Public Library.1 A close comparison of Smith’s manuscript

with the son’s published version (1826, 1829, 1830) revealed a great many discrepancies and changes.” The son italicized 1The elephantine volume covers the years between 1732 and

1758. The years from 1759 through 1762 are continued in Volume

Two of Smith’s MSS, pp. 421-475, New York Public Library.

2Cf. the totally erroneous comments in Joseph Sabin, Wilber-

force Eames, and R. W. G. Vail, Bibliotheca Americana: A Dictionary of Books Relating to America, from Its Discovery to the Present

Time (New York, William E. Rudge, 1929-31), XXI, 110: “The

A Note onthe Text Ixxix many words for emphasis; changed “I” to “the author” throughout; substituted words (for example, “request” for “instances” ): inserted pronouns where they did not appear; altered phrasing (from “for that object” to “to promote the design”); inserted a surfeit of commas; misread words (“divided” for “delivered” ) often in ways subversive to his father’s meaning (“require” for “acquire” ); changed the wording in primary sources quoted by his father; reversed footnotes carelessly so that each explained the wrong subject; omitted negatives such as “not’—thereby re-

versing the meaning of a passage; misread dates; and, worst

: of all, omitted various passages often running to four or five sentences. The majority of these aberrations occur in the last 70 pages of Volume Two.

The son’s errors and bowdlerizations may be partially explained by the fact that his father’s manuscript was not left in a condition suitable for publication. It is written in a tiny hand, often virtually unreadable. Except for occasional periods and

dashes, there is very little punctuation. Numerous sentences and even paragraphs of substantive import are scratched out. Titles are consistently abbreviated. Much too often Smith summarized lengthy documents without quoting directly. Consequently, there are many sentences and even paragraphs with

overlong series of clauses: “that... , that... , that...” On the one hand Smith was working closely with primary sources; but on the other his sense of writing gracefully for an audience seems to have been sadly diminished. Perhaps he who literally writes in isolation, as Smith did in 1776—77 at Haverstraw and Livingston Manor, also writes figuratively in isolation: for himself rather than for others. I have prepared Volume Two of this edition directly from Smith’s own manuscript. Those sentences which the author himself deleted have been omitted. I have occasionally combined sentences in order to make a proper paragraph. Punctuation and capitalization have for the most part been made consistent with Volume One. Ampersands are written “and,” and abbreviated titles expanded. Occasionally Smith slips into the present tense, even when writing about the 1730's; I have conprinted text is, almost without exception, a verbatim copy of that in the original manuscript as corrected, only a very few verbal

changes having been made. Nothing is omitted or added except the five paragraphs omitted at the end.” Those five paragraphs merely discuss Smith’s very conception of himself as a historian!

lxxx A Note onthe Text sistently changed these to the past tense. All of the footnotes in Volume Two are Smith’s own; my own comments and references appear as endnotes.

The original manuscript of Volume Two has no internal organization. It runs continuously with occasional small space breaks. Smith’s son divided the Continuation arbitrarily into seven long chapters. On pp. 67—68 of the 1826 edition, for example, the son decided to end chapter I and begin chapter II. There is nothing in the manuscript, however, to indicate that Smith regarded this as a breaking point. Moreover, the son’s descriptive table of contents for the seven chapters is misleading—if not positively confusing. The “contents” give the reader no clear notion whatever of what is included in each chapter. I have, therefore, restructured the Continuation into eleven

somewhat briefer chapters. My divisions are often equally arbitrary, but I have tried to follow Smith’s space breaks and have tried to stop and start at logical points of division. Essentially I have organized these eleven chapters by gubernatorial

administrations, or phases thereof in the cases of longer administrations, because Volume Two is very much a political his-

tory which emphasizes relations between governors and _ assemblies, between governors and their English connections, and the prosecution of wars against the French.?

I have not been faithful to one of Smith’s desires. He left instructions on the endpapers of his copy of Volume One that, “if there is a continuation of the History, it should precede” the appendixes descriptive of New York in 1756. It seems to me that the original edition, running to 1732 and including these invaluable appendixes, stands as a unit, prepared for publica-

tion by the author, revised by him at one long “sitting,” and eliciting an important response from Smith’s contemporaries. Volume Two, on the other hand, was not prepared for publication by the author, lacks the grace, pace, and cohesion of Volume One, and in fact caused the author considerable anxiety

because it treated controversial events in which he and his father had been participants. It is a less judicious volume than the first, and appeared fully seventy years after it. For these reasons I have decided not to honor Smith’s request to insert 37 have also prepared for the reader’s convenience two appendixes placed at the end of Volume Two: “The Governors of Colonial New

York to 1762: A Chronology of Their Administrations” and “A Biographical Directory to William Smith's New-York.”

A Note onthe Text Ixxxi the Continuation directly following Part V of Volume One. I have kept the two volumes separate because each was composed separately and has a discrete identity.

In summary, neither of the 1829-30 volumes bears a close resemblance to what Smith originally wrote. I therefore have prepared a new Volume One from the first edition (1757) and Smith’s marginalia in his personal copy, and a new Volume Two from Smith’s original manuscript of the Continuation.

< Le , L4

> Or th PROVINCE of

NE W-9 0 eK FROM Ff 3 &

Firft Difcovery to the Year M.DCC.XXXII. To which is annexed,

A Deicription of the Country, with a fhort Account of the Inhabitants, their Trade, Religious and Political State, and the Conftitution of the Courts of Juftice in that Colony.

npn aestheticians Lo! fwarming o'er the new difcover'd World, Gay Colonies extend; the calm Retreat

Of undeferv'd Difire/s. ————————

———— Bound by focial Freedom, firm they rife;

Of Britain's Empire the Support and Strength. THoMson,

Nec minor eft Virtus, quam quarere, parta tuert.

SY WihLiAM @m ii HH, A.M, & O NPA Ns

Printed for Tuomas Wiicox, Bookéeller at Virgil's Head, oppofite the New Church in the Strand.

M.DCC.LVH,

To the Right Honourable GEORGE

Earl of Hallifax, Viscount SUNBURY, First Lord Commissioner of Trade and Plantations, &c. &c.

My Lorp,

I beg your favourable acceptance of this short account of the ancient and present state of the Province of New-York.

It is not presented for your Lordship’s information.—All the world knows, that the affairs of the British colonies, have been,

for several years past, under your principal direction; and the wisdom of the measures pursued for their prosperity and defence, are indisputable arguments of your acquaintance with their condition.

Nor am I induced to inscribe these pages to your Lordship, by interest, the common motive to addresses of this kind.— Being therefore uninfluenced by the principle, I shall not follow the example of dedicators; but suppress those sentiments concerning your Lordship, which would, nevertheless, give offence only to yourself, and to those who envy your talents and your virtues, and are enemies to their effects, your reputation and your power.

My Lord, your ardent attention to the American plantations,

and assiduous labours for their protection and growth, have laid us under the most indispensible obligations to gratitude. Your Lordship will therefore excuse me for embracing this opportunity to make a publick declaration of the deep sense I have of your kind offices to my country, and to do myself the honour of testifying, that

Iam, My Lorp, Your Lordship’s, most obedient, and most humble Servant, William Smith. New-York

15 June, 1756.

a

The Preface

Whoever considers the number and extent of the British colonies, on this continent; their climates, soil, ports, rivers, riches,

and numberless advantages, must be convinced of their vast importance to Great-Britain; and be at a loss to account for the ignorance concerning them, which prevails in those kingdoms, whence their inhabitants originally sprang. The merchants indeed, by profitable experience, have not been altogether unacquainted with our trade and our growth; and some gentlemen

of an inquisitive turn, by the help of their correspondents, have obtained the knowledge of many other particulars equally important. But the main body of the people conceive of these plantations, under the idea of wild, boundless, inhospitable, uncultivated deserts; and hence the punishment of a transportation hither, in the judgement of most, is thought not much less

severe, than an infamous death. Nay, appealing to facts, we may safely assert, that even the publick boards, to whose care these extensive dominions have been more especially commited,

attained, but lately, any tolerable acquaintance with their condition. This is the more to be wondered at, as it is natural to imagine, that the King’s Governours have statedly transmited full accounts of their respective provinces. The case has been quite otherwise. Governments were heretofore too often bestowed upon men of mean parts, and indigent circumstances. The former were incapable of the task, and the latter too deeply engrossed by the sordid views of private interest, either to pursue or study our common weal. The worst consequences have

4 The History of the Province of New-York resulted from these measures. Perpetual animosities being engendered between the governours, and the people subjected to their authority; all attempts for conciliating the friendship of the Indians, promoting the fur trade, securing the command of the lakes, protecting the frontiers, and extending our possessions far into the inland country, have too often given place to

party projects and contracted schemes, equally useless and shameful. The conduct of the French has been just the reverse: in spite of all the disadvantages of a cold climate, a long and dangerous navigation up the River of St. Lawrence, a rough, barren, unsettled* country, locked up from all communication

with the ocean, the greatest part of the year; I say, notwithstanding these difficulties, they have seized all the advantages,

which we have neglected. The continent, for many hundred leagues, has been thoroughly explored, the main passes fortified, innumerable tribes of Indians, either won over to their interest,t subdued or bridled, the fur trade engrossed, a communication

maintained between the extremes of New-France, the British colonies restricted to scant limits along the sea shore, and noth-

ing left remaining for the establishment of a vast empire, but to open a free water passage to the ocean, by the conquest of the province of New-York.

If the governours of these plantations had formerly been animated by the same generous and extensive views, which inspired Mr. Burnet;! the long projected designs of our common enemy might, with the aid of Great-Britain, have been many years ago supplanted, or at least defeated, at a trifling expence.

But alas! little, too little, attention has been had to these important affairs, till the late encroachments on the River Ohio, in the Province of Pennsylvania, gave the alarm, and the ministry

were apprised of the French machinations, by the seasonable representations of General Shirley; and if the colonies have now

attracted the notice of his Majesty and his Parliament, their grateful acknowledgements are due principally to the noble Lord, to whom these sheets are dedicated, for his laudable enquiries into their state, and his indefatigable zeal and industry for their defence and prosperity. At present our affairs begin to wear a more smiling aspect. We are under the guardianship of a sovereign, who delights in * i| ey eeaepee NOS] Mee! ‘i i} ae Ne a: Hee

#cass eS SS Mw i ace oeik 2 .; | i re ae | | _ tf,Sa ar; iee HUN|) » 7/7) | Hl i ees ' \ j ‘ ‘ iybt ' if

we ee |! | |ieSty Tyle: Reaa sf DN ||| NN Ba) SE ON) ee ) | aeuN oe Ni Wh iS) |® o : -)> ibHN i)ReStee | aay iF ‘ Ak ners Met 4 RG ith {| Ss > : =

eee ae el RR Wie ie a aa) OE z all mi) i) Pg Hi h | — hi i} . =

SAN ih S02 Na ad @ Hy) ili) if } Bi = | \ eee) Ve j my Vid |: mhuate a tM=fNG * | | eae | i! WW 279 com H 1 a ,

5 a i iY i aN ese | & hha hirake) (Kh a ie he OYyi ||| i

es ; + ‘yj t =| i - -s Sy isl i AP . th if

\&i *a 3MM i WyBtKsQa a aeti iY, \! ie aves&Sate

12 The History of the Province of New-York chased the lands on both sides of that river in 1632, before the English were settled in those parts; and that they discovered a little fresh river, farther to the East, called Varsche Riviertie, to distinguish it from Connecticut River, known among them, by the name of Varsche Rivier, which Vanderdonk also claims for the Dutch. Determined upon the settlement of a colony, the States Gen-

eral made a grant of the country, in 1621, to the West-India Company. Wouter Van Twiller, arrived at Fort-Amsterdam, now New-York, and took upon himself the government in June 1629. His style, in the Patents granted by him, was thus, “We Director

and Council, residing in New-Netherland on the Island Manhattans, under the Government of their High Mightinesses, the Lords States General of the United Netherlands, and the Privileged West-India Company.” In his time the New-England plant-

ers extended their possession westward as far as Connecticut River. Jacob Van Curler, the Commissary there, protested against

it, and in the second year of the succeeding administration, under William Kieft,* who appears first in 1638, a prohibition was issued, forbidding the English Trade at Fort Good-Hope; and shortly after, on complaint of the insolence of the English, an Order of Council was made for sending more forces there, to maintain the Dutch territories. Dr. Mather confesses, that the New-England men first formed their design of settling Connecticut River in 1635, before which time, they esteemed that river, at least 100 miles from any English settlement; and that they

first seated themselves there in 1636, at Hartford, near Fort Good-Hope, at Weathersfield, Windsor, and Springfield. Four

years after, they seized the Dutch garrison, and drove them from the banks of the river, having first settled New Haven in 1638, regardless of Kieft’s protest against it.° The extent of New-Netherland was to Delaware, then called

South River, and beyond it; for I find, in the Dutch records, a copy of a letter from William Kieft, May 6, 1638, directed to Peter Minuit,t who seems, by the tenour of it, to be the Swedish Megapolensis, jun. a Dutch Minister residing here, is annexed to that part of the pamphlet concerning New-Netherland. * We have no books among our Dutch records remaining in the Secretary’s office, relating to state matters, before Kieft’s time, nor any enrolment of Patents, till a year after Van Twiller arrived here. Mr. Jacob Goelet supplied us with several extracts from the Dutch

records.

+The anonymous Dutch author of the Description of New-

From the Discovery to the Surrender in 1664 18 Governour of New-Sweden, asserting, “that the whole South River of New-Netherlands, had been in the Dutch possession many years above and below, beset with Forts, and sealed with their blood.” Which Kieft adds, has happened even during your administration “in New-Netherland, and so well known to you.” The Dutch writers are not agreed in the extent of Nova Belgia, or New-Netherland; some describe it to be from Virginia to Canada; and others inform us, that the arms of the States General were erected at Cape Cod, Connecticut, and Hudson’s River,

and on the West side of the entrance into Delaware Bay. The authour of the pamphlet mentioned in the notes gives Canada

River for a boundary on the North, and calls the country, North-west from Albany, Terra Incognita. In 1640, the English, who had overspread the Eastern part of Long Island, advanced to Oysterbay. Kieft broke up their settlement in 1642, and fitted out two sloops to drive the English out

of Schuylkill, of which the Marylanders had lately possessed themselves. The instructions, dated May 22, to Jan Jansen Alpen-

dam, who commanded in that enterprise, are upon record, and strongly assert the right of the Dutch, both to the soil and trade there. The English from the eastward shortly after sent deputies to New-Amsterdam, for the accommodation of their disputes about limits, to whom the Dutch offered the following conditions, entered in their books exactly in these words: Conditiones a D. Directore Gen. senatuys Novi Belgii, Domi-

nis Weytingh atque Hill, Delegatis a nobili Senatu Hartfordiensi, oblatae: Pro Agro nostro Hartfordiensi, annuo persolvent Praepotentiss. D. D. Ordinibus Foed. Provinciarum Belgicarum aut eorum Vicariis, decimam Partem Reventiis Agrorum, tum Aratro, tum Ligone, aliove Cultorum medio; Pomariis, Hortisq; Oleribus dicatis, Jugerum Hollandium non excedentibus Netherland in 1649, calls him Minnewits: and adds, that in 1638 he arrived at Delaware with two vessels, pretending that he touched

for refreshment in his way to the West-Indies: but that he soon threw off the disguise, by employing his men in erecting a fort. The same historian informs us, of the murder of several Dutch men, at South River, by the Indians, occasioned by a quarrel, concerning the taking away the States Arms, which the former had erected at the

first discovery of that country; in resenting which, an Indian had been killed. If Kieft’s letter alludes to this affair, then Minuit preceded Van Twiller, in the chief command here; and being perhaps ja bliged by the Dutch, entered into the service of the Queen of

14 The History of the Province of New-York exceptis; aut Decimarum Loco, Pretium nobile postea constituendum, tam diu quam diu possessores ejusdem Agri futuri erunt. Actum in Arce Amstelodamensi in novo Belgio Die Julii 9 Anno Christi 1642.4

We have no account that the English acceded to these proposals, nor is it probable, considering their superior strength, that they ever did: on the contrary, they daily extended their possessions, and in 1643 the colonies of the Massachuset’s Bay, Plymouth, Connecticut, and New-Haven, entered into a League both against the Dutch and Indians, and grew so powerful as to meet shortly after, upon a design of extirpating the former. The Massachuset’s Bay declined this enterprise, which occasioned a letter to Oliver Cromwell from William Hooke, dated at NewHaven, November 3, 1653, in which he complains of the Dutch,

for supplying the natives with arms and ammunition, begs his assistance with two or three frigates, and that letters might be sent to the Eastern colonies, commanding them to join in an expedition against the Dutch colony. Oliver's affairs would not admit of so distant an attempt,* but Richard Cromwell afterwards drew up instructions to his commanders for subduing the Dutch here, and wrote letters to the English American governments for their aid; copies of which are preserved in Thurloe’s Collection, vol. I. p. 721, &c.

Peter Stuyvesant was the last Dutch Governour, and tho’ he had a Commission in 1646, he did not begin his administration till May 27, 1647. The inroads and claims upon his government, kept him constantly employed. New-England on the East, and

* The war between him and the States, which began in July 1652, was concluded by a peace on the fifth of April 1654. The Treaty makes no particular mention of this country. If any part of it can be considered as relating to the American possessions, it is to be found in the two first articles, which are in these words: Imprimis, It is agreed and concluded, that, from this Day forwards, there be a true, firm, and inviolable Peace, a sincere, intimate and

close Friendship, Affinity, Confederacy, and Union, betwixt the Republic of England and the States General of the United Provinces

of the Netherlands, and the Lands, Countries, Cities, and Towns, under the Dominions of each, without Destinction of Places, together with their People and Inhabitants of whatsoever Degree.” “IJ. That hereafter all Fnmity, Hostility, Discord, and Contention,

betwixt the said Republics, and their People and Subjects, shall cease, and both Parties shall henceforwards abstain from the commiting all Manner of Mischief, Plunder, and Injuries, by Land, by Sea, and on the fresh Waters, in all their Lands, Countries, Dominions, Places, and Governments whatsoever.”

==.

a

x , . — oo +. its, ge ? ee ee A A ES ER ES ee ae 4 ey igs 4: ae Hh ph ae i,———‘ _— =, ee fe 4 ,* p7 aa se Yee (ie Ne

iei aimma | ttosWay *?,ee‘ ey. aanfe> fed oodCees — oe - Bh + fe Nes ww ~ " ee - 2BA ; fi ;Yi ’ hi. I }a

wall, ei — meee ee) I | a »y 5s ae YS ; ™_ le ag. \ ite ¥) |t¥||ii\5;aiog . wks | : a == a We m 5’ ‘ae>, .Was : . gee l= = “2 rs ) Nill, x . ’ ae a =. % Vi ee ooh 2 We ce ae = Z ) \A/r oh Se » ii ee” s : od Ni ; ate 4 lb Re 222: _— A. ab FE: ; : ‘ cere LIE _ ji ee et Ay \ ; \ | i]’ Nit ;7>bul ‘ Wh A = -* . ; ]4 a ee ” LL Za, = 4 he A iv / ms =»:}z:ae » >} ieF: .' BL a : 4 /i aisae ly “2 ! |ea: iy, ‘ _ Ze a ) ae 4 Ao a. ; A SS eS = : ; * > 7 2 on y “A[7 & . ——— —— a 7 7 4 “We Be bids ‘ —" = = 4 D % ‘ihyy 97‘ ~ ‘ 7iy ty hy SinsVy as aeid ; 1E = -; §i \i77: tq oo | po . Pe) —S ae ao ~ ) e my per LETT * r Yh, | . A]

) Be te eer

\j , aa “ellae. aOe - "Be 3 whe } 4' ;/ ae o= _9 ;a4Siki.=. hl ) oe Aae=ae

;i‘: ee :pay Pepe :XZ ond \ ; 7~¥ k ~w \ \aees tag itsi yy AWY oeGi | \ Wii Bape ” tyoe aey 4 y+3} i Br, ‘S H\

.+foS ,= ;= Fy , \eh Ai ’, 7VJ y|ah7;LA % 3: Bs : CY) 7. é/P\3 5 ‘ 7 Z s ,‘\fwT i'i hy ,\a- 4 a” Peas i% Bi Ay a) 7§ Fes en —_ aa?) x ia? = , 7% eS Ry O {h4|! cea g& Le Bhat Vee) > ae > &=S | ko. eih O | ee : = re ; ;OE 4ae i -|Sa ry Lf nemee , Aan, * ‘ ‘~ > “3 ,== iy>eS ).| ee i he a & SY oe -. eS ee) |=6all oe a See eR a eee We ~= 5 ' ~~ !4;y .Bt aoS : ag | es : —~ = \ Se ' ;*| yoR ‘ rr ie :ey’ i Ww =IRS y ws 4 F a q TS ~ NAT ot Rs | = 4 : : Cy r exe Ag % lS / ie SuesWes a aZao! 6 asVR BX

i ee

; - t 7ihe : po=. Tcl PAD | 7iy.bi Enc |TS : '’=~re RY 2)| dL: :“en es sty és Cee Nin ee, % aan i = 4} a ee =e | Te! =aoe! f ea ft : aS ah) “; |Tay aSe h ~2 Tey iy iVkee, RL ae: |a>~ i < trate ancBEe rsa — Re, £> ||}

! | (eae PT4 AF ast =\ oo it '¥,cca iA 453nl . Ni :& : -]==We i,Fa‘ .: 1a he Zz. at — oo Ay.; 5 - \se Ta --\)a ae *pee ) \ WY ' iL>. a7

Pe Pee ~~ 7=Ste i fA me 2a TAN \; \»Ses ~ a.1aee A ‘ag ii | ee Soo a~ = or Sr iy ae NP & ry > Pe eeaadty BT>-4aA W ieneAsee,

a? ass Be h = a, Fe a os Ms | ah wey ) : => oa Je i~ wy oe — : =n J os ot / i.

i. \¢ ~ " ’/ yr? ee > ~ow *‘ io ~~» 2a‘ ~laye “ee ~= Se : ?: }{ ~VL tdpy h=|‘«= : .: ae aeS” ” rTA 4fe ,ad r |~~. :“e

*, 6a ahs ial fees : | ce .: éA5,eP=" , ee ’ ot 3 ! Bf4~ Bc? tr NEN | x : AS ee ee A xy tes oa 1 St Y ) — vi ss 5 eve . ; » ; Fa beans) freen* “sete : ee oe x * ae |te as :,aJig ee:58‘PR eae ‘e. iOG. fs | ;1 }a A) CO. kesaes a |pe BP xine eet ineee ak» aa \oo >cat ated -= . 5,“eS ————— ‘ ee Se=ine *:os opie —5 ¢ . +4 a ORE Lp | aap 4. ~ ane i ¥ * My = oF Ae ¢ 2 La MS 4 % ;

‘ "$ 34ae eee ae i POTS wii — = an ‘>ae ae ee, Fes ry or ae : ee eee . ~ SPE. — >>> ane gale :a7:|.3s ; | SRew ns re ae Ss \ sae —— 4 4 : ~~ oD . . tS ~+ x ¢ > wx — oS ian \COR gaa aLoos C— ft r;‘pa {i- a} : -=, 4 2 -;soe) w wk, id t See on ee“~~

RR i+ te =. r. a ; 6 e .. -~ . Lg ~ - i. 4 ——

: mh ;—s ‘ . 7aaae r we %ds: x - }‘a.nat - ”< * .“* . ogP. = —eal ae Ny , pepe = e: =iea“ rte i eA > = _—" et Bees pan” r ~* . at ss “ _— Y , ia SS wht ta pet EE ra) 54 °>’ *‘2: igF :>s 2: a:i qa :=MiSah a4 4¥:, : ‘ > . a L ne y wd: §;Bent x¢* wet 3 1 _— oF ~~ tm= TF5Sr x*>we xs S$ 'S See F ~ . i Sa e+ hy , ~~ — F :.‘}\252 ee " 7 a y te » ae) . : . : 7 , me, 4 5 cae ee * ;. . ep

od ” gy a aaa ;2)*oe"$ri€-_=ig :.»Fy ae bemeg ie ae, .ie “eS ye ou un ye -ae a*| =:q ae ;,~ > ae Sve ff a Se * ‘ = , — . aa ae ? . = Aes — SSS _; ‘> . aS“at* * 4~> + - ~~ _ % ~ marr f9 Py qne ’ “4 4Pe 4, a.4\*. -aX “e\a 2. _at yi ~~4-—°& .-- ‘< *=“oe Ssgt ec > a . » ;:sol) +SS * : “44 ¥ aw. i +) ga ¢ oa wh. ee , a..0

f Noa: “= e.. aa .2.—ae eee ah . ao .* .‘ ¥onl “ /Py . aw. - *),"% \ ~\ w oes ,> ia* * oa" Q + j ~ | se ' . P= PSClan.) . ¥, 7::‘ee“A .. ie :cs%xaoe.a4ag ~ . ce = . 5 > " < i ; aa! AY “\ ‘ SP = ~ a . -rT: % - au ss i ee 'S , , | - i ea mi Ye~ab “AAD } iarty ST. mis :;& SG ;’ee— i=a:. Pe .i‘4*>.~.we mi v ~ _ ~ er STS is _ = = %‘fy = : = * ; e, — Sy) 4 : » . > 3 at) S35. cai |~s i }J| NY ?: j7feS. BOS 3ygDy fby’ YS tfv: :. Pi ~ || a FS S rit gerV ety He ye 7™ fff? ) Soe .Ye *= ‘ee ¥ i ws ‘, < a 2 ¥ -~? 2 . ‘ s. ‘ : petmace TERY Setar iie|>Siemens Beisel jeRy A. Ye Lf pais | te dS | a xX ney Na its ¥ See 3) i oO +, ee 3 yh J ee oe on | hae yee 1) ae : a i? SQ f-/ 7 rs ie ek * ~~SBS Ss os - Ho DiSL = 7FEM na “iy ; ‘ || Pas he te aMfats WaT Tey4 \a2° E //¢v%

pind 3 a ETS | iH) 3 . he 4 a we a > “a . a > ihe a ) aa :‘| ?fat a aBE ils ieNY Rae’ Ay NN. ele > i; ;\a2a hy 3TRE akey

bap .. , , ' ; + j t . : Z ~ ND’ em : } ‘e 7 the r mt ¢ ir Mh *) a io) : | : i \ ’ f ' vA a i w . ef ‘4 Oo

Bic < Yo | the SS , at — SCRE AS Ce " ars. | 7 Rs e ae i ~f) fein Ub) te Mi lady ea ing i. ‘ if vee Pei cwooues Ae, A e) . ~;

:RTRS Ne ha Wilks atm thy — Y> a5;ie i}Sa )Bes ,.tbe ¥4,be rat etic me i_Pe :Fe;JCo es | 7"ae -tnik eat !Be eynN ‘ ihe '¢ ee‘ad 4fs| S) ‘~ 3 #8 5 ne ‘ a : i Pon Sar : : 4! a tal ia ee : ae Te? . : Ce eae hyRe ‘ ime*. ~ neUg . aia rs AM ; Aah e ) ab . $¢| v:¢rai ‘. ~ ee ah.yiSV Pa ak ff pe Wain ee, os, ~= eiaeesYs iyi;=tsPe /*== ” 4*&iNe .; .tv,tr? Raa i af =a.e) Are eae Va! a ' , a : “ . i : As o us fe n Bs! ke ' émeeps “: , J 1fh K om &, -fh ' : Pay | } WY ee 1 2 Ye © Hin 4 2=|, 27 e |~ti: wip ~ if {rerfefenh tars’ , 4 ia ;" ss ot ~a s_“.— ;a 'Yel ‘me me Ti,d’;ot ::7)“iwe vSd $Ri ,Pos ;,Ps ef ‘— 7wis ’vs4. mar :-| "4 h§Cieteee 5||:,be | :-Pn ¥+ Sa i | a iws eae ; ree. ~ee. :aT. ‘ Ny » Ba eae iS tii44% a oY ie

ht es ee i ae me =

Hii, Re Pe : ' f ‘ ,