New York City During the War for Independence With Special Reference to the Period of British Occupation 9780231887267

Citation preview

STUDIES IN HISTORY, ECONOMICS AND PUBLIC LAW Edited by the FACULTY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE O F COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

NUMBER S57

NEW YORK CITY DURING THE WAR FOR INDEPENDENCE WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE PERIOD OF BRITISH OCCUPATION BT OSCAR T H E O D O R E BARCK, J U N I O R

NEW YORK CITY DURING THE WAR FOR INDEPENDENCE W I T H SPECIAL REFERENCE TO T H E PERIOD OF BRITISH OCCUPATION

BY

OSCAR THEODORE BARCK, JUNIOR, PH.D.

NEW

YORK

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS I xjNnoN: P. S. KING & SON, LTD.

193 I

COPYRIGHT,

1931

BV COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

PRESS

PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMEKICA

5

INTRODUCTION THE Revolutionary British occupation of New York City has never been satisfactorily investigated by American historians. In this narrative, I have therefore tried to take the civilian inhabitants of the town during the British military occupation as a group, trying to live with them their experiences, their pleasures and their hardships. After 1776, the story of politics and warfare has been subordinated to the social and economic phases of the average New Yorker's existence. Since the city's history between the years 1763 and 1776 has been somewhat fully treated, I have merely summed up that period in the first two chapters. For more detailed works on the pre-war period, Carl Becker's Political Parties in New York, 1760-1776, and Alexander Flick's Loyalism in New York will prove most useful for the reader desiring to know more about the political side. For the military struggles, I recommend the writings of Henry Phelps Johnston ; for illustrative material, the Iconography of Manhattan Island, prepared by I. N. P. Stokes, and also the works of Henry B. Dawson and William Dunlap will be most valuable. My greatest regret is that I have been unable to use the Headquarters or Clinton Papers, recently brought to this country through the efforts of William L. Clements, but not yet available for general use by investigators. While these papers would probably not aid most of this story, they might give a fairer view of the military government and alter some conclusions. The chief difficulty in writing this history has been that of distinguishing between real evidence and mere hearsay or 7

8

INTRODUCTION

wilful attempts on the part of Loyalists or patriots to mislead their opponents. If I have erred, I am not alone; for even Judge William Smith, who kept in close touch with the leaders of the British cause and attended many of their councils, was forced to record in his diary: " W e have now arrived to the 6th May, 1778 . . . and I hope the war will end and before I have blotted many pages with the occurrences I am obliged to set down from very muddy streams of doubtful information." But so far as possible, I have used only contemporary sources: official documents, broadsides, letters, journals, orderly books, ledgers, and newspapers of the period. The map of New York City is a compilation of the three best known ones for this period: the Ratzen (or Ratzer) map of 1767, the Montresor Map of 1775, and the Hill Map of 1782. I am greatly indebted to Professor Charles H. Hull of Cornell University, who suggested the theme of this dissertation and who guided me in my first days of graduate study; to Professor Evarts B. Greene of Columbia University, who has spent many an hour aiding me with his valuable criticism ; to the staff of the New York Historical Society, who helped me in my search for material with cheerful courtesy; to the members of the Manuscript Division of the New York Public Library; to Mr. Warren Jackman of Flushing, who followed my instructions so ably in making the map of the city; and last but not least, to my father, whose library of Americana has made this study so interesting and entertaining for me. Ο. Τ. B., JR. SYRACUSE, Ν . Y . , APRIL,

1931.

CONTENTS PACK INTRODUCTION

7

CHAPTER I The City on the Eve of the Revolution

11

C H A P T E R II W i r Comes to a Peaceful City

33

C H A P T E R III Keeping Peace in the War-Time City

49

C H A P T E R IV The Physical Welfare of the War-Time Population

74

CHAPTER V Food and Fuel

98 CHAPTER VI

Commerce and Business

120 CHAPTER VII

The Press and Public Opinion

144

C H A P T E R VIII Churches and Schools

155 C H A P T E R IX

Wir-Time Diversions

170 CHAPTER X

The Military Cooperation of the Loyalists

igi 9

10

CONTENTS rui CHAPTER

XI

Exodus of the Loyalists and Return of the Americans

207

APPENDIX

231

BIBLIOGRAPHY

254

INDEX

263

CHAPTER

I

T H E C I T Y ON T H E E V E OF T H E R E V O L U T I O N

NEW Y o r k City's Revolutionary history was radically different from that of other places along the Atlantic seaboard. Its central and strategic position made it the objective of both British and American armies. Y e t after the British seized it in September, 1776, there were no important military campaigns in its immediate vicinity. F o r the next seven years, the town was controlled by soldiers of the King, and, since it was seldom in danger of capture, the wartime history concerns itself not with a tale of armed strife, but with the life and welfare of its civilian occupants. A t the southern tip of Manhattan Island in the year 1763 was situated the city of N e w Y o r k , a typical colonial seaport. Few would realize now that only a little more than a century and a half has passed since New Y o r k was so small. About twenty thousand inhabitants lived in the town which covered only about a square mile. The northern limit was the " Fields " , the site of the present City Hall. The southern end was somewhat narrower then, for the twentieth-century Greenwich Street formed the western bank of the North or Hudson River, and the area below the Bowling Green and Fort George, now Battery Park, was under water. T o r tuous and narrow streets were numerous then as now, and they were lined by intermingled residences and places of business. The older homes were for the most part of wood, but the newer ones were of brick. 1 Four-story buildings, 1

After Jan. 1, 1766, all new buildings south of the Fresh Water Pond

11

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

mainly of Dutch and Georgian architecture, were not uncommon. According to contemporary estimates, there were about four thousand structures in the city. 2 Broadway, even then the main street, started at the Battery and ran for about a mile northward through rows of trees fronting elegant residences, stately churches, spacious taverns, and numerous stores of every description. The main highway north from town was Bowery Road, which began at Broadway and St. Paul's Chapel; Queen Street, now Pearl, was the business center; the homes of the elite were on Bowling Green, Broad Street, and Dock Street. The rest of the island was covered with farms and woodlands, dotted here and there with small settlements such as Greenwich, Bloomingdale, and Harlem. Staten Island had no populous communities, whereas King's County, on Long Island, consisted of little hamlets—Brooklyn, Bedford, Bushwick, Flatbush, and Gravesend. The whole was a rural rather than urban area. The Montgomery Charter of 1731 established the city government.® It provided that a mayor, recorder, town clerk, treasurer, and most of the other municipal officers be named by the provincial governor in council for one year. The voters of each of the seven wards elected viva voce an had to be built of stone or brick, with roofs of slate or tile. This law was to prevent fire hazards in the narrow streets. Colonial Laws of New York, I V , 571-73· a For more detailed descriptions of the physical aspect of the city, see: Η . B. Dawson, ed., New York City during the American Revolution ( N e w Y o r k , 1861); T . A . Janvier, In Old New York ( N e w Y o r k , 1896) ; Τ . Ε. V . Smith, Nav York City in 1789 (New Y o r k , 1889) ; I. N. P. Stokes, ed., The Iconography of Manhattan Island (6 v., New York, 1915-28) ; W . L. Stone, ed., Letters of Brunszvick and Hessian Officers during the American Revolution (Albany, 1891); W m . Eddis, Letters from America (London, 1792) ; and the various works by Η. B. Dawson and H. P. Johnston. 8

The original charter is in the New Y o r k Public Library.

THE

CITY

ON THE EVE

OF THE REVOLUTION

13

alderman and an assistant, as well as minor officials—assessors, collectors, and constables. Municipal ordinances and regulations were passed by a common council, which consisted of the mayor, the recorder, and at least a majority of the aldermen. The electorate also chose annually a city vestry (which must not be confused with the ecclesiastical vestry of Trinity Church) to care for paupers and collect poor rates. The franchise, which was both municipal and provincial, was quite limited. It was granted to freeholders — t h o s e who owned estates within the city valued at over forty pounds a year—and to freemen. Freedom of the city was hereditary, and could also be secured by those who had served a seven years' apprenticeship. It might also be granted by the council to natural-born subjects of the K i n g or to those who had been naturalized. Since only freemen could carry on a trade or industry within the city limits, freemanship was a prized acquisition, but there were frequent complaints against the city corporation for monopolizing political power and limiting the number of freemen. This charge was evidently just, for, in 1769, there were only 1,515 voters. 4 Since the city was the capital of the colony, the citizens were also interested greatly in provincial matters. A t the head of the government was a governor, appointed by the King. Assisting him were a royally-named lieutenant governor and a council. There was also an assembly consisting of popularly elected delegates from the several counties. New Y o r k City in the pre-Revolutionary days was a town of castes. A t the top of the social scale were the imperial and provincial officers. Their social prestige was assured, * Peterson and Edwards, New York as an Eighteenth Century Municipality ( N e w York, 1917), 242; Ε. B. O'Callaghan, ed., Documents Relative to the Colonial History of the State of Neva York (15 τ.,

Albany, 1856-87), VIII, 457-

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

but their political power was stronger in provincial affairs than in those of the city, where they were not numerous enough to exert much influence. Closely associated with these officials were the landed gentry, who also depended upon the good will of the crown. 5 The merchants and traders, second only to the crown officers and landed gentry in society, held the political reins in the city. Numerically few, they exerted great control because they formed the largest part of the voters. Much of the city's wealth was in their hands, and their fortunes were built up and combined through intermarriage. Not only wealth accompanied these unions, but also great social and political prestige in municipal affairs." Next in municipal influence to the mercantile group were the lawyers, although they were fewer in number. They were led by the " triumvirate ", William Livingston, John Morin Scott, and William Smith., three of the ablest men of law in town.T Then came the " petite bourgeoisie " or middle class, a considerable group of people who enjoyed the franchise, earned a good livelihood, but had no social or political prestige. Among these were the lesser merchants and the master workmen. B y far the majority of the inhabitants belonged to the unprivileged class, which had no voice in municipal or provincial matters. Among these were the poorer landholders —those who possessed estates worth less than forty pounds a year, or who held more valuable property encumbered by mortgages. There were also clerks, journeymen, appren5 Peterson and Edwards, Ν. Y. as Eighteenth Century Municipality, 252; Letter Books of Cadwallader Colden (Ν. Y . Hist. Soc. Coll., 2 v.. New York, 1876-1877), II, 2; C. L. Becker, History of Political Parties in the Province of New York (Madison, Wise., 1909), 8-11.

• Becker, Political Parties in Ν. Y., 8-9. 7 Colden Letter Books, II, 2; Becker, Political Parties in Ν. Y., 9-10; A. C. Flick, Loyalism in New York during the American Revolution (New York, 1901), 12-18.

THE CITY ON THE EVE

OF THE REVOLUTION

15

tices, laborers, and mechanics—" inhabitants ", as they were referred to delicately, or the " mob ", as they were more familiarly known. It was possible for these to gain freemanship, but they were generally excluded.® This group, however, frequently did sway the actions of the privileged through what might be called mob action, for the unprivileged, too, had their likes and dislikes, and let others know them vociferously. New York was as cosmopolitan then as it is now, and many nationalities were to be found in its streets. B y 1763, the English had surpassed numerically the Dutch, who formed the largest non-English group. The remainder consisted of Germans, Scots, Irish, a few French, and a scattering of Jews, most of whom came from Portugal. The city was peopled also with many sects, and, as in the case of nationalities, two predominated since there was no established church in the province.* These two groups were the Anglicans and the Presbyterians, and they were constantly struggling for supremacy. The advantage, however, seemed to be with the members of the Church of England, for they were more closely allied with the Mother Country, most of the officials were Anglicans, and it was easier for them to gain royal favor; yet they formed only about one-tenth of the population.10 After 1750, the Presbyterians, aided by newcomers and by their college in New Jersey, outnumbered the Anglicans, and tried, with greater success as the years passed, to break up Anglican political supremacy. The less 8

Minutes of the Common Council of the City of New York, 1675-1776 (8 v., New York, 1905), IV, 97; Dawson, Westchester County, New York, during the American Revolution (Morrisania, 1886), 4; Peterson and Edwards, Ν. Y. as Eighteenth Century Municipality, 253. • Col. Laws of Ν. Υ., I, 328; Hastings, ed., Ecclesiastical Records, State of New York (7 v., Albany, 1901-16), II, 1368-70; Dix, ed., A History of the Parish of Trinity Church (New York, 1898), pt. i, 78 et seq. 10 Eccles. Rees, of Ν. Υ., V, 3612; Flick, Loyalism in Ν. Y., 9.

16

NEW

YORK DURING WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

important sects were the Dutch Reformed, which was gradually losing ground because the younger generation disliked to continue the Dutch tongue in church services; the Lutherans, aided by an influx of German immigrants; and the Quakers, Moravians, Methodists, Baptists, and Jews. The Jews, however, together with the Catholics, had lost their political rights earlier in the century, and, partly as a result, were few in numbers.11 Many forms of business were to be found within the city, but commercial interests outstripped all others. Although New York was not the principal shipping center of the colonies, it held an enviable place in the commercial world, and many an eighteenth century visitor predicted a great future for it. For instance, in 1762, 477 ships left its harbor carrying exports valued at £53,900, and imports totalled £480,000. Ten years later, the number of ships cleared had increased to 700, with exports worth £82,707." The city also occupied a strong strategic position on account of its excellent harbor and central location. The most important kinds of business, aside from shipping, were the " general stores " , a small linen manufactory with fourteen looms, one that turned out coarse woolens and linsey-woolsey, a beaver hattery, a glass house, two breweries which bottled several hundred thousand quarts of pale and brown beer a year, a shop for making fire engines, an air furnace for pots, kettles, anvils, and stoves, a nail manufactory, ship yards, and a whalebone factory, given its material by the Whaling Company of New York, whose capital of £10,000 had been subscribed by sixty investors." Manufacturing for exporta11

Ν. Y. Col. Does., V, 122-54; Col. Laws of Ν. Υ., I, 428; Ecclet. Rees, of Ν. Υ., II, 1368. ia Ε. B. O'Callaghan, ed., Documentary History of the State of New York (4 v., Albany, 1849-51), I, 493, 513; Stokes, Iconography, IV, 801. ™Doc. Hist, of Ν. Υ., I, 733; New York Post Boy, Sept 5, 1768;

THE CITY ON THE EVE OF THE REVOLUTION

17

tion, however, was prohibited by the Mother Country, and was also discouraged by the price of labor, which was so great that it would " always prove the greatest obstacle to any manufacture attempted Still it was carried on to some extent, and merchants and manufacturers were aided by their exclusive Chamber of Commerce, organized in 1768 to promote and encourage commerce, to support industry, adjust disputes, and promote laws beneficial to trade in general." No labor organization helped the laborer increase his wage. The Common Council regulated all business involving a public interest, such as carting, hawking, baking, and marketing.1* Price scales were drawn up, master workmen were informed how many apprentices they could train, working hours were regulated, and practically everything else in the municipal business field came under the Council's jurisdiction. The lower classes were restricted as much economically as they were politically. There was one social organization, however, for the master workmen, the " Friendly Society of Tradesmen, House Carpenters, in the City of New York ", with a constitution similar to those of fraternal orders of today." Since the wage of the mechanic averaged only about two York shillings a day, there was much poverty. The poor increased in the disturbed years before the outbreak of hostilities and became a real problem. True, New York Mercury, Apr. 20, 1767; Wm. Upcott, comp., Newspaper Cuttings Relating to America (in Ν. Y. Hist Soc.), II, 251; Transcripts ...of the Commission ...of the American Loyalists (in Ν. Y . Pub. Lib.), vol. 19, 483. 14 Doc. Hist, of Ν. Υ., I, 733. Gov. Moore must have referred only to skilled labor. 18 J. A. Stevens, ed., Colonial Records of the New York Chamber of Commerce, 1768-1784 (New York, 1867), 3 et seq. 14 Min. Comm. Coun., VII, 333-34, and passim. 1T Evans Collection, no. 24606, in Ν. Y. Pub. Lib.

l8

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

many of them were supported by the municipality in the public almshouse, and a number of private charitable organizations were formed to help them, 18 but not all could be cared for, and poverty breeds discontent. Primary education was taken care of by private schools, although there was one " charity school " conducted by the Anglican Trinity Church, aided by the Society for Propagating the Gospel. A few Dutch schools remained, but their attendance was rapidly diminishing as American-born Dutch desired rather to learn English. The Anglicans controlled King's College, the only institution of higher learning, which had been established in 1754. Amusements were many and varied. The theatre, concerts, dances, ice-skating, racing, hunting, bull baiting, cock fighting, and cards were some of the forms of entertainment or sport which diverted the citizens of New Y o r k in the prewar era. Such was New Y o r k at the opening of the Revolutionary period: a typical American town of the time, with its crown officers, its wealthy gentry, its merchants, its workers, and its poor, a flourishing town, alive to the possibilities of commerce and business, and a cosmopolitan town, not only in nationalities, but also in religions. T o this city war came, not suddenly, but in the same manner in which it came to the colonies as a whole—as a result of a series of forces in every field, political, economic, and social. It is impossible to isolate these local reasons from the general sources of discontent, but since the causes of the war have been so ably analyzed by numerous historians, 18 18 Peter Force, American Archives... (9 v., Washington, 1837-53), Fourth Series, III, 1424-25; IV, 1391; Calendar of Historical Manuscripts relating to the War of the Revolution (2 v., Albany, 1842), I, 3 1 1 ; New York Journal, Nov. 16, 1775.

" T h e best histories of the causes of the war in general are: the

THE CITY

ON THE EVE

OF THE REVOLUTION

19

this story will not deal with them at any length. It will give merely a picture sufficient to show how the various groups in the city regarded the acts of Great Britain, how they gradually divided when the issues become sharper, how the radicals gradually beat down the opposition of the conservatives, and how revolutionary government replaced royal control. The beginning of active discontent in the City of New York came immediately after the close of the French and Indian War. True, had the earlier Acts of Trade, placing restrictions on trade and manufactures, been strictly enforced, opposition would have begun sooner; but these early acts were by no means completely enforced and benefited only the English mercantile class, not the whole Empire. The Treaty of Paris of 1763, however, entirely changed British policy. Great Britain was saddled with a debt of one hundred and fifty million pounds. The ministry, led by George Grenville, a narrow, tactless, yet earnest man, decided that America should help England with her financial problems. While Grenville did not ask the colonies to aid Great Britain in paying any of this debt, he expected them to share part of the expense of their future defense against possible French uprisings or Indian attacks. To do this, a two-fold plan was adopted: the Navigation Acts were to be strictly enforced, were to be a source of revenue, and were to aid the Empire, rather than a few English merchants; and, secondly, the colonists were to be taxed. Although the first part of Grenville's plan affected the mercantile interests of New York City, the real outbreak started various works by G. L. Beer, dealing with England's commercial policy; C. H. Van Tyne, Causes of the American Revolution (New York, 1905) ; and A. M. Schlesinger, Colonial Merchants and the American Revolution (New York, 1917). Becker, Political Parties in Ν. Y., gives a detailed description of the events in the city.

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

as a result of the second part, for political as well as economic reasons. These political causes were extremely important in bringing on revolt. While heretofore Parliament had not taxed America, no objections were expected, but Parliament did not realize that a new spirit had arisen in the colonies, a spirit which most Englishmen failed to understand. The colonies had been allowed to go practically their own way for a century and a half; they had been populated primarily with discontented subjects; there had been a large influx of non-English groups; and the colonies were Americaminded, with a new view of the British Constitution. This theory advocated real rather than virtual representation, and since the colonists were not actually represented in Parliament, they believed they could not be taxed by it. Furthermore, although the colonies recognized the King as their rightful sovereign, they believed that their own assemblies were their representative bodies, not Parliament. The ministers, on the other hand, thought the colonists were objecting to taxation solely on financial grounds. It was this failure to comprehend American thought that probably did more than anything else to bring on the Revolution, for the cabinet continued a policy to which the colonists objected most vehemently. The first of Grenville's statutes which affected New Y o r k City was the Sugar Act of 1764. 20 Strict observance of this law would have meant ruin to the West Indian ventures of New Y o r k traders, 21 for while duties were reduced on rum, spirits, and molasses from British islands, importation of these articles from French and Dutch possessions was prohibited. Because the British islands could not furnish 20

4 George III, Cap. 15.

21

Weyman, New York Gazette, Mar. 5, 1764; Calendar of Council Minutes, 1668-1783 (Albany, 1903), 464; New York Assembly Journal,

II, 740-44-

THE CITY ON THE EVE OF THE REVOLUTION

21

enough sugar f o r America's needs, N e w Y o r k business faced destruction.

Leading

merchants,

whose

trade

suffered,

therefore objected, and they were strong enough to influence the Provincial Assembly to f o r m a committee of correspondence to write similar groups in other colonies about the unfairness of Parliamentary acts. 22

T h e s e committees helped

to strengthen the bonds of union among the colonies, and served more than any other single agency in furthering antagonism against Great Britain. N e w s of the passage of the S u g a r A c t reached N e w Y o r k at about the same time as a severe business depression.

The

m a j o r reasons f o r the hard times were to be found in the sudden loss of profit derived f r o m contracts made with the British army, other forms of general war-time profiteering, privateering, and illicit trade with the French during the French and Indian W a r .

Y e t the people attributed this

first depression, which lasted about five years, to the S u g a r A c t , not to its true source.

S o the first economic cause of

revolt w a s felt in N e w Y o r k .

Parliament then chose this

unfavorable time to pass other acts which intensified financial unrest: the Currency A c t 2 3 and the Quartering Act. 2 4 T h e former hurt business; the colonists were being drained of hard money because of an unfavorable balance of trade, and they found it difficult to pursue business without a convenient medium of exchange.

T h e y believed that paper

money would prove a w a y out of their troubles.

T h e Cur-

rency A c t , however, prohibited the emission of legal tender paper money, since it would doubtless decrease in value and so hurt English interests.

T h e latter act aroused opposi-

tion because people were asked to give what they thought were too large sums and supplies f o r troops quartered in the Ν. Y. Assent. Jour., II, 70. 4 George III, Cap. 34. 2< 4 George III, Cap. 18. 22

23

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

colony, supposedly for their protection. Yet the King was determined to enforce this measure, and at one time he prorogued the New York Assembly until it granted the amount Parliament thought necessary.25 The desire of King and Parliament to bring the colonies more closely under their supervision resulted in another source of discontent in the city in 1764-65. This was the case of Waddel Cunningham against Thomas Forsey, and involved the question whether appeals of fact from verdicts of juries in civil cases, as well as appeals on writs of error, could be taken to the Governor in Council and thence to the King in Council. The New York lawyers were highly incensed when Lieutenant-Governor Colden said that cases involving appeals on issues of fact could be sent to the King. Pamphlet after pamphlet was written showing how such approval would violate one of the fundamental principles of English common law.*" Another early cause for colonial objection arose over the impressment of American seamen for the British navy. For instance, on one occasion in 1764, four fishermen were taken by a man of war in New York harbor. The townspeople, determined that they should not be imposed upon, •seized and burned a boat belonging to that royal vessel, and forced the release of the fishermen. The city court, understanding the emotions underlying this act, were discreetly unable to charge anyone with the misdemeanor.27 Earlier grievances were obscured, however, during the 25 Ν. Y. Col. Docs., V I I , 883-84. A lesser cause for objection to the Quartering Act was that mustering troops in time of peace was contrary to English principles. Also, the people believed that the troops were here to oppress the colonists, not to protect them. 24 Colden Letter Books, I and I I ; New York Post Boy, Jan. 3, 1765 *t seq.; John Holt, The Report of an Action of Assault... between Thomas Forsey ...and Waddel Cunningham (New York, 1764). 21 Ν. Y. Post Boy, July 12, 1764.

THE CITY

ON THE EVE

OF THE REVOLUTION

23

excitement caused by the knowledge in April, 1 7 6 5 , " that the Stamp Act was to go into effect on the following November first." Stamps had to be used on practically all documents and papers, thus directly affecting every business. The early knowledge of the act gave the people plenty of time to prepare for resistance; the New York Assembly, led by the " triumvirate " urged united action against taxation without representation. James M'Evers, stamp tax collector for New York, had to resign in August, two months before the act went into force, because the inhabitants were so incensed that he feared for his life if he attempted to perform his duties.10 While there had been no disturbances, Lieutenant-Governor Colden rightly judged the temper of the people when he believed that a storm was certainly brewing, and that only a slight misstep by royal officials would cause it to break, flooding the city with a determined opposition. He advised General Gage, then in charge of the troops in North America, to send an extra battalion to prevent any outbreak.*1 Meantime, opposition to the Stamp Act grew. The Maryland stamp collector, fleeing from his post to New York, was forced to leave his tavern, and seek protection in Fort George, which was then being strengthened by John Montresor of the Engineers.' 2 Colonial resistance to the new Parliamentary measures had thus far been restricted to local disturbances, but on October 7, 1765, the first successful effort was made for intercolonial action when the Stamp Act Congress convened in 28 Ν. Y. Post Boy, Jan. 25, 1765, gives an idea of the hard times which the people thought the Stamp Act would intensify. 2e

5 George III, Cap. 12.

Papers of Cadwallader Colden (Ν. Y . Hist Soc. Coll., 7 v., New York, 1917-23), V I I , 56-5730

«Ibid., II, 23; Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VII, 758; Ν. Y. Mercury, Aug. 5,1765. 32 Colden Letter Books, II, 33, 35-36; Montresor Journals (Ν. Y . H i s t Soc. Coll., New York, 1881), 228.

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

New York City to petition the King and Parliament to rescind that grievous act." The Massachusetts House of Representatives had issued the call in June, at the instance of New York. Eight colonies accepted the invitation, and twenty-eight delegates arrived in New York in early October. The formal resolutions of the Stamp Act Congress, protesting against taxation without representation, and demanding trial by jury in all cases, are not as important as the fact that the meeting was successful, that it " sprang spontaneously from American sentiment", and that it was extra-legal, a meeting called for the first time by the colonies themselves and not by royal sanction. The delegates, however said nothing of independence. The measures of Parliament had as yet affected only the merchant class; the majority of Americans had not felt their burden.34 The merchants controlled the congress and their actions were conservative. While the congress was in session, the inhabitants of New York decided to combat the act more effectively, and a group of radicals, soon to be called Sons of Liberty, formed an association on October 17, to prevent submission to Parliament." A few days later, the Edward sailed into port so unobtrusively that the city was not aware that she had brought a cargo of stamps until a man-of-war went out to guard her against possible attack." The next day, two thousand people awaited menacingly any attempt to land the stamps, but they had been sent ashore secretly and lodged in Fort George.87 The mob, thwarted in its efforts to destroy " Ν. Y. Post Boy, July 18, 1765. " American Revolution in New York (Albany, 1926), 1 5 ; Niles Register, II, 337-42; Authentic Account of Proceedings of Congress held at New York in 1765 in New York Public Library Pamphlet 167; Winsor, Narrative and Critical History of America (8 v., Boston, 1888), V I , 74. 3S

Ν. Y. Post Boy, Oct. 17, 1765.

38

Ibid., Oct 24, 1765.

" Montresor, Journal, 336; Ν. Y. Col. Docs., V I I , 771.

THE CITY

ON THE EVE

OF THE REVOLUTION

25

the stamps, wreaked vengeance on much royal property, and even threatened to bury alive Major James, the commander of the fort. Others responded in quite a different manner, and went into mourning because of the death of freedom. In fact, as far as the inhabitants were concerned, the stamps were likened to a pestilence." On October 31, 1765, the day before the act was to go into effect, more than two hundred merchants gathered at Burns's Tavern and appointed a new committee of correspondence consisting of five Sons of Liberty, to cooperate with the merchants of other colonies. The meeting also agreed that 110 goods should be imported from Great Britain until the Stamp Act was repealed." The next evening, after a day full of grief and mourning, a mob collected, marched through the streets of the town, and burned effigies of Colden and the Devil. The people were so inflamed that the royal garrison in Fort George failed to overawe them; they marched to its very gates and would have destroyed it had it not been for the intervention of cooler-headed citizens.40 The people were beginning to disregard all royal authority and to have more confidence in their own leaders. This was shown particularly on November 5, when Colden, at the insistence of the populace, turned over the stamps to Mayor Cruger and the city corporation; the corporation was not an agency of the royal authority; the acting governor was. 41 The excitement was quieted for a time, but the new governor, Sir Henry Moore, who arrived on November 13, found so much opposition to the Stamp Act that he had Fort George Montresor, Journal, 336; Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VII, 770; Ν. Y. Mercury, Oct. 28, 1765. 38

39

Ν. Y. Post Boy, Oct. 21-Nov. 7, 1765.

Colden Letter Books, II, 54-56; Montresor, Journal, 337-38; Ν. Y. Post Boy, Nov. 7, 1765· 40

41

Min. Comm. Coun., IV, 438-39; Montresor, Journal, 338.

26

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

dismantled, thus placating the people to some extent." Moore was ready to enforce the act, but the Common Council advised against it,*' because of the popular excitement. Twelve hundred citizens of New York petitioned the Assembly to issue a " Declaration of Rights ", and in December, the New York lawyers agreed to pursue their business without using stamps." The refusal to use stamps and the passing of the non-importation agreement brought the city's business to a standstill. Debts were not paid, courts could not open, no vessels could leave port, marriages could not be legally performed, and the tradesmen and other workers agreed not to use any British goods.45 Notwithstanding the inconveniences caused to the citizens through their refusal to observe the act, the Sons of Liberty were not disheartened. On January 7, 1766, they decided to do everything in their power to prevent the carrying out of the Stamp Tax, and to correspond with similar organizations in other colonies.46 The colonists were beginning to realize that their only hope lay in united action. On January 9, ten boxes of stamped paper were taken from a vessel in the harbor and burned; rewards were offered for the capture of the offenders, but without success, for the magistrates were apparently afraid to exercise their authority in view of popular feeling.47 Great Britain was gaining nothing from the Stamp Act; the revenue from it was not enough to cover the cost of administering it. Economic reasons, particularly the non-im42

N. Y. Col. Docs., VII, 793-94, 805-07; Montresor, Journal, 339-40. Col. Coun. Min., 470. 44 Ν. Y. Mercury, Dec. 9-23, 1765. 45 Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VII, 802; Upcott Coll., II, 343. 48 Ν. Y. Post Boy, Jan. 9, 1766. 47 Ν. Y. Post Boy, Jan. 9, 1766; Col. Coun. Min., 470; Montresor, Journal, 345-49; Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VII, 807; Weyman, Gaiettt, Feb. 17, 1766. 43

THE CITY

ON THE EVE

OF THE REVOLUTION

27

portation agreements, rather than petitions of the colonists, caused the King to agree to its repeal on March 18, 1766. A t the same time, however, George III assented to the Declaratory Act, which claimed for Parliament the right to legislate for the colonies " in all cases whatsoever News of the repeal reached the city on May 20, to the great joy of the populace; a flag staff, called the Liberty Pole, was erected on the Common, and the Assembly voted statues of the King and William Pitt." Had the act remained in force, there is reason to believe that the war might have started in New York at that time. Indeed in April, 1766, the Governor had troops in readiness to meet the expected attack of the Westchester " levellers ", who were threatening to burn the city, to them the center of royal authority. The counties about New York were practically on the verge of civil war.80 The city itself was more unified against the actions of Parliament in 1765 and 1766 than it was when the war finally began. The merchants at that time were the chief opponents of the Stamp Act, and they stirred up the lower classes in their struggle against taxation. Most of the inhabitants still acknowledged the supremacy of the King, but they were violent against the assumption of what they termed unwarranted powers of Parliament. The colonists could no more understand the English theory than could Britons comprehend the American point of view. The Stamp Act had not been passed to oppress the colonies, but to secure money for their protection. With that act a failure, the British Parliament passed the Townshtnd Acts of June 29, 1767, largely to prove, according to «· Ν. Y. Post Boy, May 22, 1766. 49 Montresor, Journal, 368; Smith, Diary, VI, June 30, 1766; Ν. Y. Mercury, June 10,1766; Ibid., Aug. 20, 1770; Ν. Y. Journal, Sept. 13,1770. e®

Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VII, 825; Montresor, Journal, 348 el seq.

28

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

the Declaratory Act, that England had the right to tax, or at least legislate for, her colonies. The Townshend Acts, imposing indirect duties, provided that customs officials, free from colonial control, be sent from England to collect duties on tea, glass, lead, paper, and painters' colors, writs of assistance should be legal, evaders of these laws were to be tried in admiralty courts without juries, and the revenue was to help pay colonial governors and judges, thus making them financially independent of the various legislatures. 51 The colonists, having won their struggle against the direct taxation of the Stamp Act, now turned their attention to freeing themselves from the indirect taxes of the Townshend Acts. On February n , 1768, the Massachusetts legislature sent a circular letter to the other provincial assemblies, asking their opinion regarding future action.52 This letter reached New York just after the Assembly had been suspended by Parliament for its refusal to comply with the provisions of the Quartering A c t ; 5 8 so nothing could be done until the Assembly was reconvened on December 3 1 , 1768. Then the Assembly sided with Massachusetts in a 61

Statutes at Large of Great Britain, V I I I , 38-42; Annual Register (1767), 104. Pitt had been forced by poor health to relinquish his control of government. The very erratic Townshend thereupon assumed leadership. He died, however, a few months after the acts which he sponsored had been passed, and Lord North took his place. 62 53

Boston Gazette, Mar. 14, 1768.

The early contest between the Governor and the Assembly over the granting of money for troops, and the hard feeling between these troops and the inhabitants over the Liberty Pole add nothing to this story of the Revolution. Nor do the contested election for the Assembly in January, 1769, the troii)le with the new Assembly, the actions of the Sons of Liberty, the arrest of Alexander M'Dougall, or the battle of Golden Hill. They merely added a little fuel to the growing flames of discontent, and they fade into insignificance when overshadowed by the greater struggle against the acts of Parliament. The minor incidents, however, are treated in detail in Becker, Political Parties in Ν. Y., and Flick, Loyalism in Ν. Y.

THE CITY ON THE EVE

OF THE REVOLUTION

29

series of resolutions adopted unanimously to the effect that constitutional rights should be uniform throughout the British dominions, that it was inconsistent to tax, even indirectly, the unrepresented colonists, that the authority of a provincial legislature could be abridged only by the King, and that colonial assemblies had the right to correspond with anyone on any subject. This action, added to previous obstinacy, caused the Governor to dissolve the Assembly in June, 1 7 6 9 . " Meantime, the merchants of New York City took the initiative, and on August 27, 1768, adopted the following resolutions : not to order any more goods from Great Britain, not to import from her after the following November 1 unless the acts were repealed; orders placed since August 1 6 were to be countermanded, breakers of the agreement were to be regarded as enemies, and goods sent contrary to the resolutions were to be held in public warehouses until the taxes were removed.55 The mechanics and tradesmen, not to be outdone, promulgated somewhat similar regulations on September 5, adding that they would boycott those who did not sign or abide by the association.5® On March 13 of the following year, the merchants appointed a committee to investigate all importations from Europe,57 and the Assembly afterwards thanked them for their patriotism.5® Citizens who did not heed the agreements were dealt with vigorously, and were often forced to make public confessions of their errors, with promises to conform thereafter to the rules and regulations laid down.5* 84

31,

Ν. Y. Assent. Jour. (1768-69), 70-71, 75-76. « Ν. Y. Journal, Sept. 8, 1768. "®ΛΓ. Y. Journal, Sept. 15, 1768; Ν. Y. Post Boy, Sept. 12, 1768. 87 Ν. Y. Mercury, Mar. 20, 1769. μ Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 194-95. 19 Ν. F. Mercury, June 22-29, 1769; Ν. Y. Journal, July 13-27, Sept 1769.

NEW YORK DURING WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

Intercolonial support of these non-importation agreements was a primary factor in causing Parliament to repeal the Townshend Acts on April 12, 1770. The tax on tea, however, remained to uphold Parliamentary supremacy. When the news of repeal reached New York, the merchants and traders, whose business had suffered seriously from the embargo, were ready to break the agreement, importing everything but tea. The Sons of Liberty, on the other hand, together with others of the more radical element, were violently opposed to this intended action, and Sears, one of the leaders of the Sons of Liberty, openly declared that anyone breaking the association before the other colonies agreed to do so would lose his life.®0 In July, a vote was taken to test public opinion, and a large majority favored resuming trade with Great Britain.®1 The Sons of Liberty denied that this was a fair test, because only one-quarter voted; the rest, believing the vote irregular, refused to give their opinion.®* On the other hand, the merchants thought that the breaking of the agreement could have been accomplished sooner had it not been for the opposition of a noisy mob, which wished to keep the country in confusion in order to gain its ends and to hold the support it had received from mechanics and tradesmen." Gradually, however, other colonies followed the leadership of New York, and, by December, 1770, Cadwallader Colden, acting Governor since Moore's death in September, 1769, wrote that commerce between Great Britain and her colonies was then as large as usual.®4 *N. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 218-20. Ibid., VIII, 221; Ν. Y. Mercury, July 16-23, i7/0. t2 N. Y. Mercury, July 16, 1770. "Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 219. 44 Ibid., VIII, 257. Dunmore became Governor on October 18, 1770, and Try on on July 8, 1771. 41

THE CITY ON THE EVE

OF THE REVOLUTION

31

From early 1770 until the opening of the war, New York City was no longer united against Great Britain. The official class and a great part of the landed gentry had favored the Parliamentary stand from the very beginning, largely because they owed their positions and possessions to the crown. The merchant class on the whole was conservative ; true, it had opposed greatly the Stamp Act, the Townshend duties, and others which had hurt its business, but these motives were purely economic. The merchants called upon the lower classes to aid them in their successful fight to repeal those acts; but they did not believe that a mere tax on tea warranted a continuation of non-importation. So they were ready to resume their old relations with the Mother Country after the partial repeal of the Townshend Acts; they realized that loyalty to Great Britain meant good business. Many lawyers favored further resistance to the Mother Country, though some of them, such as Peter Van Schaack, Thomas Jones, and later in the struggle, William Smith were against actual revolt. Most of the poorer ones, however, believed they could improve their position by opposing Great Britain. It is difficult to state how the middle class and the mechanics and tradesmen viewed the approaching conflict; probably they were almost equally divided. The noisy faction, however, henceforth to be led by lawyers and Sons of Liberty from the privileged groups, would not retreat ; they wished to fight to win the point the merchants had raised first. They were not affected by non-importation as much as was the commercial class, and they did not have so much to lose by a break with Great Britain. Every step from this time on became a party issue, the conservatives or Tories aligning against the radicals or Whigs. One party had gained its end, an economic one; the other party had as its goal complete freedom from Parliamentary restrictions.

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

Gradually it was realized that to secure this freedom independence had to be w o n . " Schlesinger, Colonial Merchants and the American Revolution, gives the best account of the position of the merchants. See also, Ν . Y . Mercury, Sept. n , 1775. I* is impossible to learn how the various nationalities divided on the question of war. It is equally difficult to say how the different sects viewed the Revolution, with the exception of the Anglicans, who favored the royal cause generally and the Presbyterians, who, with few exceptions, sided with the Whigs.

CHAPTER

II

W A R COMES TO A P E A C E F U L C I T Y

ALL was fairly peaceful in New York from the time of the repeal of the Townshend Acts until the question of tea importation came up again in 1773, with the passing of the Regulating Act, which allowed the East India Company to import tea into America at a much lower rate than other companies by exempting it from the English tax. 1 Nevertheless, the company still had to add the three pence tax provided under what remained of the Townshend Acts, and this, together with the fact that the Regulating Act savored too much of a monopoly for the East India Company, caused some New Yorkers to object as much as they had to previous acts, even though they could buy tea more cheaply than could Englishmen. On October 15, 1773, a large assemblage thanked the captains of ships trading with London for refusing to carry tea; New Yorkers were happy to know that stamp officers and tea commissioners would " ever be held in equal estimation ". A civilian committee interviewed the local commissioners to find out how they proposed to dispose of the tea when it arrived. 2 These agents, Henry White, Abraham Lott, and Benjamin Booth, replied that the inhabitants were so incensed that they could not carry out their duties, nor act contrary to the wishes of their fellow townsmen.8 The Mohawks, a part of the Liberty party, did not believe this assertion; on November 27, they covered the city with handbills warning the inhabi113

George III, Cap. 44; Parliamentary History, X V I I , 841.

2

Rivington, Gazette, Oct. 25, 1773; Ν. Y. Col. Docs., V I I I , 400-01.

3

N. Y. Mercury, Dec. 6, 1773; Hist. Mag., 2nd ser., I V , 288. 33

NEW YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

tants against buying tea.4 As a further deterrent, the Association of the Sons of Liberty of New York was drawn up two days later and signed by many of all classes, with the following resolutions: no free people should be taxed without their consent or that of their representatives; those who imported tea, stored it, or bought or sold it, regardless of where the duty was paid, were to be considered enemies of American liberty, and the associators would have nothing to do with them.® The Governor's council, however, was in favor of landing the tea and storing it in the fort under official supervision.® On December 17, between two and three thousand people met at the City Hall and appointed a Committee of Fifteen to correspond with the other colonies on the tea question. There was no doubt in the minds of the majority of the inhabitants as to whether tea should be landed; they were heartily and uniformly against it.T The more conservative did not oppose the people because they feared the mob or wished its support in the coming elections. The DeLanceys, a prominent and wealthy New York family, it was said, sided with the multitude since Governor Tryon was too independent for them. According to William Smith, three members of the correspondence committee, M'Dougall, Sears, and Broome, claimed that had they known the great majority in favor of excluding tea, they would have demanded a test vote to show the weakness of the minority. 8 By the begin* Rivington, Gazette, Dec. 2, 1773. 5 Ν. Y. Journal, Dec. 16, 1773. * The Diary and Papers of William Smith (Ν. Y. Pub. Lib. Mss.), IV, Dec. i, 1773. 1 Ν. Y. Journal, Dec. 22, 1773. On January 20, 1774, the Provincial Assembly appointed a Committee of Thirteen to obtain the earliest information of the Parliamentary acts affecting the liberties of the colonists and to correspond with other colonies. Ν. Y. Assem. Jour. (1774), 16. * Smith, Diary, IV, Dec. 18, 1773·

WAR COMES

TO A PEACEFUL

CITY

35

ning of the next year, the attitude of the people was such that the safe landing of that obnoxious article could have been accomplished only by force of arms." Fearing that the long overdue tea ships might slip in unobserved, the Sons of Liberty decided in March, 1774, to meet every week to perfect their plans for greeting them.10 Not until the evening of April 18, however, did the Nancy arrive at Sandy Hook with the first load of tea since the partial repeal of the Townshend Acts. Captain Lockyer refused to sail farther until he knew the attitude of the city. He was allowed to enter under the eyes of a large crowd, and the Committee of Fifteen escorted him to the home of Henry White, one of the tea consignees, who emphatically declared that tea could not be landed, and that Lockyer would be granted only sufficient time to procure the necessaries for his return voyage.11 The next victim was Captain Chambers of the London on April 22. The Committee of Fifteen was assured by him that he had no tea aboard, but on receipt of information from Philadelphia to the contrary, his cargo was examined and tea discovered. That evening, the Mohawks, encouraged by the townspeople, followed the example of the Bostonians by dumping eighteen cases of it into the harbor. No other damage was done, although there were violent threats against Captain Chambers for his duplicity. The next day, Lockyer was escorted to Murray's Wharf by the Committee and a large following of enthusiastic Sons of Liberty; on April 24, the Nancy left the harbor with Chambers of the London on board.12 The excitement was intensified in 1774 by the news of • N. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 408, 413. 10 Ν. Y. Journal, Mar. 14, 1774. 11 Ibid., Apr. 21, 1774; Rivington, Gazette, Apr. 28, 1774; Broadside in Ν. Y . Hist. Soc. 12

Rivington, Gazette, Apr. 28, 1774.

ß6

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

the Boston Port Bill, closing that port until its citizens consented to pay for the tea they had destroyed. Sears and M'Dougall, acting for the Sons of Liberty, wrote to the Boston committee of correspondence on May fifteenth, expressing deepest sympathy, advocating a general non-importation agreement until all grievances were righted, and advising a general congress of committees from all colonies.13 A merchants' meeting under the chairmanship of Isaac Low decided the next day to appoint a committee to get in touch with other colonies on the subject. There were two parties: the Sons of Liberty offered the names of twenty-five; the merchants drew up a list of fifty. This latter group was victorious on May nineteenth, and the name of Francis Lewis was added, making a Committee of Fifty-One, or of Correspondence. In referring to this election, Gouverneur Morris wrote: " On my right hand were ranged all the people of property with some poor dependents, and on the other all the tradesmen, etc., who tho't it worth their while to leave daily labor for the good of the country. The mob begin to think and reason. The gentry begin to fear this. Their committee will be appointed, they will deceive the people, and again forfeit a share of their confidence. I see, and I see it with fear and trembling, that if the disputes with Britain continue, we shall be under the worst of all possible dominions. We shall be under the domination of a mob And Morris predicted correctly. The safe majority gained by the conservatives was abused for their own advantage, which did not at all please the Sons of Liberty, who, nevertheless, finally agreed to the Committee of Correspondence as selected, for " the salutary purpose of union On this 13

4 Amer. Arch., I, 782, 804; II, 242-43; Ν. Y. Journal, Sept. 14, 1774; Apr. 13, 1775. 14 4 Amer. Arch., I, 294-95, 343· 15 4 ibid., I, 295-96; Ν. Y. Journal, May 26, 1774.

WAR COMES

TO A PEACEFUL

CITY

37

committee, there were eleven men who might be termed radical, nineteen who later became Loyalists, and the " center ", which did not believe in forcible methods to gain its objective and was ready for compromise." The method of electing delegates to the general congress aroused much feeling within the committee. M'Dougall wished the five named to be agreed to by the Committee of Mechanics, a radical organization which had been formed after the selection of the Fifty-One, but this was refused. After long arguments, it was finally decided that the people should elect the delegates on July 7. The conservative nominees were James Duane, John Jay, Isaac Low, Philip Livingston, and John AIsop, 11 and the Mechanics drew up their own list, Low, Jay, Livingston, Leonard Lispenard, and Alexander M'Dougall. 18 On July 6, the Mechanics voted a series of resolutions: the Port Bill was unconstitutional; an attack on one colony was an attack on all; shutting a port was contrary to the commercial rights of Americans; nonintercourse was America's only salvation; and a subscription should be started to help the poor of Boston." The Committee of Correspondence disavowed these proceedings conducted without its permission; the resolutions, it claimed, were in no way binding, not being the real sentiment of the people.20 The vote, taken by fourteen men named by both committees, showed that a great majority of the New Yorkers favored the nominees of the conservative committee.21 To enforce the Association which the First Continental Congress had drawn up, a Committee of Sixty, known also 16

Becker, Political Parties in Ν. Y., 116-17. 4 Amer. Arch., I, 307 et seq. 18 Broadside in the Ν. Y . Hist. Soc. 19 Rivington, Gazette, July 14, 1774; 4 Amer. Arch., I, 312-13. 20 4 Amer. Arch., I, 311-12. 21 4 ibid., I, 309-10, 320. 17

38

NEW

YORK

DURING

fVAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

as the Committee of Observation or Inspection, was elected in New York on November 22, 1774, supplanting the Committee of Correspondence of Fifty-One, which agreed to disband after conferring with the mechanics and other citizens.22 Twenty-nine of the former committee were elected to the new body, eight of whom were Loyalists and eleven patriots. Of the thirty-one new members, ten were very active radicals, while the Loyalists numbered but five or s i x . " Although the moderate element had a majority, the radicals had secured a great advantage over the thorough-going Loyalists ; at its first meeting, the new committee made the rules necessary for enforcing the Association.24 Before the First Continental Congress adjourned in 1774, it resolved that a second assembly should meet in May of the next year. Parliament, however, tried to prevent it from convening by appealing to the provincial governors.25 Fear of an outbreak resulted in an Order in Council of October 19, 1774, which forbade the importation of arms and ammunition into the colonies for six months, although this did not prevent the contraband trade which New York was carrying on with Holland by way of St. Eustatius.2® The New York Assembly, under conservative influence, refused to thank the Congressional delegates for their work, or to commend the New Yorkers for upholding the Association.27 Naturally the Legislature was not popular with 22

Ν. Y. Mercury, Nov. 21-28, 1774; 4 Arner. Arch., I, 915 et seq.

23

Becker, Political Parties in Ν. Y., 166-67.

21

Ν. Y. Mercury,

25

Dec. 5. 1774.

.V. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 528; Dartmouth Hist. Soc.

Transcripts,

in Ν. Y.

2e Dartmouth Transcripts. On Dec. 27, 1774, Collector of the Port Elliot was threatened by the Sons of Liberty for seizing illegally imported gunpowder and firearms. Rivington, Gazette, Jan. 5, 1775.

"Ν.

Y. Assem. Jour. (i775), 38-40; 4 Amer. Arch., I, 1243-44.

WAR COMES TO A PEACEFUL

CITY

39

the radicals, and had lost all respect, especially since some members were believed to have been influenced to remain loyal by favors received from the crown, and others were said to have been imposed upon through ignorance or fear. 28 In the same spirit, the House voted two to one against appointing delegates to the second Congress.2" So on March i, 1775, the Committee of Sixty took matters into its own hands by asking freeholders and freemen to consider representatives for the proposed Congress.80 Thereupon the city voters decided to authorize their committee to name eleven men to meet deputies from the other counties to elect delegates to the Philadelphia gathering.81 On March 19, these eleven were appointed to a provincial convention despite a strong opposition determined to prevent colonial representation at Philadelphia; 82 on April 20, the representatives were appointed by this convention.83 News of the battle of Lexington marked the real turning point. No longer could the radicals be held in check. The influence of the conservatives, now regarded as Tories, grew less. There could be no doubt that the Whigs, about equal in number to the conservatives, would win the day since they had force and Congress to support them. We shall now consider the situation in New York City from April, 1775, until August, 1776, according to the chief problems facing officials and citizens. The first was that of the city government. The Mayor and other municipal officers were Tories as they were appointed by the royal gov28

4 Amer. Arch., I, 1191.

29

Ν. Y. Assem. Jour. (i77S), 44-45-

30

4 Amer. Arch., II, 4.

81

4 ibid., II, 48-49; Becker, Political Parties in Ν. Y., 182-85. 82 Ν. Y. Journal, Mar. 16, 1775. 88 Journals of the Provincial Congress. ..of the State of New York, 1775-1777 (2 v., Albany, 184a), I, 1-5.

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

ernor; for instance Mayor Whitehead Hicks, who resigned in February, 1776, when the city was controlled by Continental troops, was replaced by the Tory David Mathews.84 But the real power was in the hands of the Committee of One Hundred or the Committee of Safety, until February 2, 1776, when a committee of Fifty was formed. That committee remained in control until the fall of the city in September, 1776, and was largely responsible for the harsh treatment of the Loyalists. The Committee of One Hundred was elected on May 1 , 1775, to unite the city more effectively.85 It included men of both parties, but was dominated by the Whigs, or radical group. Some of its more important acts were: a general association to further the work of the Continental and Provincial Congresses and to oppose more effectively the oppressive acts of Parliament,8® the prohibition of the sale of arms to enemies of America,87 and the passing of many ordinances restricting the activities of Tories within the city.88 The committee system in itself was revolutionary because it was extra-legal, since no provision was made for it in the city charter. The people had become so dissatisfied with their regular municipal government that they did not hesitate to form a new organization to control their affairs and help more effectively the Provincial and Continental Congresses. At first the Committee of Fifty-One was controlled by conservatives; but the later committees had 84

Μ in. Comm. Coun., VIII, 127. The Provincial Congress consented to this appointment, possibly because Tryon could not be coerced. 85 Rivington, Gazette, May 4, 1775; Becker, Political Parties in Ν. Y., 197-99· 88 Ν. Y. Journal, May 4, 1775. 87 Ν. Y. Mercury, May 5, 1775. 88 For instance, every ship captain had to report to the committee within 24 hours after arriving, that there were no goods aboard forbidden by the Association; and Loyalists required special passes to visit British warships in the harbor. 4 Amer. Arch., II, 1574; Ν. Y. Mercury, Dec. 25, 1775·

WAR

COMES

TO A PEACEFUL

CITY

41

a majority of radicals and became increasingly revolutionary and antagonistic to the crown. The Committee of Fifty, which replaced the unwieldly Committee of One Hundred, was entirely dominated by the Whigs. A second problem in the municipal situation was the provincial government. The legal head was the royal governor, assisted by a crown-appointed council and a popularly elected Assembly. Naturally the governor and council were Loyalists because they owed their positions to the King. The Assembly, elected in 1769, had a working majority of Tories and continued so until the war reached New York. As the difference with Great Britain increased, the Whigs had less and less confidence in their provincial government. After April, 1775, the Governor's position became precarious." Finally, in May 1775, the voters of New York elected an extra-legal body, the Provincial Congress, to take over the affairs of the province,40 just as the Committee of One Hundred had taken over the municipal government. This Provincial Congress remained in control until the formation of the state constitution in 1777. Meantime, the royal Governor, William Tryon, became frightened at the turn of affairs, and in late October, 1775, took refuge on board the Duchess of Gordon, a British warship in the harbor,41 where he remained until the arrival of the British under General Howe the following July. 42 The royal provincial council also held its meetings on that ship until hostilities began.43 An important issue was the policy to be adopted toward "Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 593-94; 4 Amer. Arch., II, 1534; Jour. Ν. Y. Prov. Cong., I, 66. 40

Rivington, Gasette, May 4, 1775.

« Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 592-99, 635. «Ibid., VIII, 639-43; 4 Amer. Arch., I l l , 1052-54. 44

Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 646, 667; Smith, Diary, V, Dec. 4, 1775.

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

the Loyalists. Naturally when the committees controlled by radicals assumed charge within the city, when the Provincial Congress was all-powerful in the colony, and when the Continental Congress was supreme in America, the opponents of the new cause were not treated with any leniency. Indeed as early as May, 1775, Dr. Myles Cooper, president of King's College, had to leave America, to escape violence at the hands of the Sons of Liberty.44 Nor did he go alone, for many Whigs and Loyalists were afraid of impending hostilities and of rioting in the city streets.45 It was not until October 6, 1775, however, that the harsh treatment of Loyalists became serious as a result of the recommendation of the Continental Congress that all persons whose freedom endangered the liberty of the colonies were to be arrested.4* Aggressive Tories could no longer arouse their friends and hesitant colonists openly with their inflammatory talk or writings. The Provincial Congress, which was elected in November, passed an act preventing Tories from visiting the British warships in the harbor without special permission of the Committee of Safety. It also resolved that no one should enter the colony without a certificate from the committee of the place from which he came, because many unfriendly to liberty wished to come to New York and their arrival would make it appear that the province was an asylum for the disaffected.47 Nevertheless, many Loyalists remained in town. On March 14, 1776, the Continental Congress, fearing that its plans would be disrupted by a Tory uprising, voted that all ** Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 297-98; Penna. Journal, May 31, 1775. 45 Stokes, Iconography, IV, 888, quoting London Chronicle, June 2729, 1775· 44 Ford, Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789 (25 v., Washington, 1904-22), III, 280. 47 Ν. Y. Mercury, Dec. 25, 1775.

WAR COMES

TO A PEACEFUL

CITY

Loyalists should be disarmed as soon as possible, an order with which the city authorities quickly complied.'* Then riots occurred in the streets of New York during which Tories were attacked, ridden on rails, taunted, and jailed, so that after June 13th "hardly a Tory face was seen". 4 " T w o American generals, Putnam and Mifflin, condemned these attacks and appealed to the Provincial Congress, which professed disapproval of the riots, but asserted that they proceeded from a real regard for liberty and a detestation of persons inimical to the American cause. The people were asked, however, to create no more disturbances, leaving the seizure of Loyalists to Congress and to authorized committees."0 Finally, at the suggestion of the Continental Congress, the Provincial Congress appointed on June 5 a " Committee to Detect Conspiracies " composed of seven men, which began its work by examining disaffected persons and others who were under suspicion.81 This committee was largely responsible for rooting out the remaining Loyalists. It also unearthed the " Hickey P l o t " , said to have been organized by Governor Tryon, in which Mayor Mathews and other eminent Tories were involved, and which aimed at the murder of Washington and the delivery of the city and the American army to the British. The exasperated Whigs vented their wrath on the Tories who still remained openly in town, and most of them now took flight, seeking refuge mainly in Queens County, Westchester, Staten Island and " F o r d , Jour. Cont. Cong., IV, 205; Cal. Ν. Y. Hist. Mss. Papers), I, 259.

{Rev.

Ν. Y. City during Amer. Rev., 97; Hist. Mag., 3rd ser., I l l , 135. 50

Jour. Ν. Y. Prov. Cong., I, 491.

Jour. Cont. Cong., IV, 441; Cal. Ν. Y. Hist. Mss. {Rev. Papers), I, 340 et seq.; 4 Amer. Arch., IV, 1370, and passim. 51

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

along the Jersey Coast where they prepared to join the British army on its arrival.52 It is possible here only to sum up briefly the attempts to defend New York against the British, and some of the more important features of town history after May, 1775, when the Committee of One Hundred and the Provincial Congress were elected. The city was in constant excitement, patriot militia companies were enrolled and armed, and the sale of arms was forbidden to Loyalists.53 The revolutionists were strong enough by this time to hold in check the royal forces still left in the city. They believed that force should be repelled by force, and a sufficient body of patriots was kept ready to protect their partisans from insult or injury.54 The King's troops were allowed to remain in the barracks so long as they were peaceable, but they could not erect any fortifications or interfere with Whig communication between the city and the surrounding country. In early June, the British troops finally left New York under Major Hamilton and boarded the British man-of-war, Asia. The local militia, under Marinus Willett, prevented them from carrying away several cartloads of arms.55 Washington, now Commander-in-Chief of the Continental forces, arrived on June twenty-fifth, accompanied by Generals Schuyler and Lee. They were greeted vociferously by the inhabitants, and nine companies of the newly formed city militia paraded in their honor.59. After a visit 52

T. Jones, History of New York during the Revolutionary War ( Ν . Y. Hist. Soc. Jones Fund, 2 v., New York, 1879), 83 et seq.; Jour. Ν. Y. Prov. Cong., I, 512. 53

Ν. Y. Journal, May 4-18, 1775; Ν. Y. Mercury, May 15, 1775.

st

Jour. Cont. Cong., II, 49-61; Ν. Y. Mercury, May 22, 1775; Colden Letter Books, II, 415-16. 55

Ν. Y. City during Amer. Rev., 57-59; Colden Letter Books, Π, 424-26; Rivington, Gazette, June 8, 1775. 5β

Smith, Diary, VI, June 25, 1775; Jones, Hist, of New York, I, 55.

WAR

COMES

TO A PEACEFUL

CITY

45

of only a few hours, Washington left New York for Boston, leaving Schuyler in command at New York to carry out Congressional orders and to hold Governor Tryon in check.57 Then the raising of troops for the Continental army was begun in earnest around the city. Physical strength, sobriety, and discipline were three qualities stressed in enrolling men for the companies under the leadership of Colonel M'Dougall." Hundreds flocked to the new regiments and were soon drilling under officers appointed by the Provincial Congress.5* Attempts were made to cast cannon, gunsmiths were employed, gunpowder obtained, and supplies of all kinds gathered for the new recruits. Royal storehouses within the city were broken open, a boat from the Asia was seized and burned, cannon were removed from Fort George, British warships fired upon the city, and skirmishes between Americans and British were frequent. All this confusion caused many Whig families to seek safety by leaving town.80 All was relatively quiet in the military field, however, until February 4, 1776, when General Charles Lee arrived to superintend the erection of fortifications, an important matter, for it was generally recognized that sooner or later the scene of operations must shift from Boston to New York, because of the latter's central and strategic position, and also because the province was regarded as a Loyalist stronghold.*1 The British evacuated Boston in March, and 57

Ford, Writings of Washington, II, 495-96.

58

Jour. Ν. Y. Prov. Cong., I, 57-66; N. Y. Mercury, July 3-10, 1775. 4 Amer. Arch., II, 1592.

59

60 4 ibid., II, 1784; Ν. Y. Col. Docs., V I I I , 597; Rivington, Gazette; Aug. 31, 1775; Gaine, Mercury, Aug. 28, 1775; Jour. Ν. Y. Prov. Cong., I, 77-78. 91 Smith, Diary, V, Feb. 5, 1776; Ford, Writings of Washington, I I I , 473; 4 Amer. Arch., IV, 3, 7, 927; B. F. Stevens, Facsimiles of Manuscripts in European Archives Relating to America (25 v., London, 188998), no. 656.

4

NEW

6

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

although their avowed destination was Halifax, Washington hastened most of his army to New York, where additional troops were being enlisted and drilled, and the town was rapidly being depopulated of its civil inhabitants. On May 29, the Committee of Mechanics petitioned the Provincial Congress to instruct the New York delegates to the Continental Congress to vote for independence from Great Britain." The Provincial Congress, however, decided to ask the opinion of the voters; this was accordingly done on June 6 under the auspices of the Committee of Fifty, and the delegates were instructed to approve a new government free from Great Britain.*' Then public attention was turned to Philadelphia, where the Continental Congress was debating the proposal of independency, which was finally approved on July second. Not until the ninth, however, did the New York Congress, then sitting at White Plains, give its formal approval." That night the New Yorkers gave vent to their joy by pulling down the statue of George I I I and by removing every reminder that the city had once been royal. Meantime, the military leaders were anxiously watching that part of the British navy that had arrived off Staten Island on June 29, disembarking General Howe's troops on that island three days later.65 Business in the city came to a standstill, but the twenty-eight thousand Continental troops seemed quite confident that they could ward off any attack.68 Then came the efforts of Lord Howe and General Sir William Howe to conciliate the Americans. On July foure2

Gaine, Mercury, June 10, 1776.

83

4 Amer. Arch., VI, 743; Jour. Ν. Y. Prov. Cong., I, 468-69; Gaine, Mercury, June 24, 1776. "Jour.

Cont. Cong., IV, 428-29; Jour. Ν. Y. Prov. Cong., I, 518.

«» Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 681. ββ

Ν. Y. City during Amer. Rev., 99-1«».

WAR

COMES

TO A PEACEFUL

CITY

47

teenth, they declared that they were ready to pardon all rebels who were willing to recognize again the King's authority, but there was little response to this proposal.®* Several other similar efforts were put forth by the British leaders; still the Americans would not listen, since the Howes refused to accept the W h i g view that the insurgents were only defending their rights and so needed no pardon." The military odds were favorable to the British as their effectives, both British and Hessians, numbered twenty-five thousand, while the Americans had only about eighteen thousand fit for duty out of twenty-eight thousand. The British fleet also controlled the harbor, while Washington had to scatter his men on Manhattan and Long Island since he did not know the British plan of attack. Brooklyn Heights, which dominated the city as Dorchester Heights had controlled Boston, was in charge of General Putnam and seven thousand Continentals, guarded by a series of fortifications; Generals Sullivan and Stirling with about five thousand commanded the rest of Long Island. Finally, on August 22, General Howe landed fifteen thousand men near Gravesend. Washington then transported most of his army from Manhattan to Long Island, but he could not guard all the roads to Brooklyn. When the British attacked from front and rear on the twenty-seventh, the Americans were decisively defeated, more than a thousand falling captive. T w o nights later, Washington brilliantly transported the remainder of his army and most of the ordnance to Manhattan Island under cover of a fog, while the British sluggishly 67

Ν. Y. Mercury, Sept. 30, 1776.

Ν. Y. Packet, Aug. 1, 1776; Jones, Hist, of New York, I, 106; Journals of Lt. Col. Stephen Kemble (Ν. Y . Hist. Soc. Coll., 2 v., New York, 1883-84), I, 87; E. G. Schaukirk, Moravian Journal... (in Penna. Mag. of Hist, and Biog., 1877 and 1886, and in Johnston, Campaign of 1776, pt. ii), Aug., 1776; Winsor, Narr, and Crit. Hist., VII, 12; Jour. Cont. Cong., V , 765-66. ίβ

48

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

failed to follow up their advantage. On September 1 5 , the British easily captured New Y o r k City as the Americans retreated to Harlem, where a battle was fought the next day with no great advantage for either side. S i x days later, Nathan Hale was captured while attempting to secure military intelligence for Washington. On October 12, Howe tried to cut off the American army from the mainland by getting in its rear by way of the East River, but Washington retreated to White Plains. The only point on Manhattan Island remaining in Americans hands was Fort Washington, which, however, prevented the British fleet from ascending the Hudson past that place. This fell on November 16, and the whole island was in British possession.68 From this time until November 25, 1783, Manhattan Island and the City of New York were under British control. This seven year period forms the chief part of this story, for never in modern times has an enemy held one of the important cities of its opponent for so long a period. Many changes took place within the city during this time. Its government was changed to a military autocracy; it was partially destroyed by a great fire; its population was increased by the influx of many Loyalists who fled to it for protection; the fire, the increased population, and the coming of thousands of troops caused a severe housing problem; business was restricted and hampered even more than in time of peace; food and fuel were scarce and prices increased; and the problem of defence and internal order resulted in much anxiety. In some walks of life there were many changes, but in others affairs seemed to proceed much as usual. The details of this story will be brought out in the succeeding chapters. ββ

The best account of the struggle for possession of New York may be found in Johnston, Campaign of 1776 (Brooklyn, 1878).

CHAPTER

III

KEEPING T H E PEACE IN T H E W A R - T I M E C I T Y

FRESH from their victories on Long Island, the British army swept the Americans from New York City in the middle of September, 1776. With the city under their control, the military leaders immediately assumed command of the local government, justifying their action by the provision of the Prohibitory Act enacted by Parliament to take effect on January 1, 1776. 1 This statute, in response to an act of the Continental Congress forbidding American trade with Great Britain and her dependencies, not only cut off colonial trade, but also provided that the King's commissioners (generally called the Kings' Commissioners for Restoring Peace to the Colonies) appointed to supervise the act, might grant pardons to any persons, and " declare any colony or province . . ., or any country, town, port, district, or place, in any colony or province, to be at the peace of his Majesty ". In other words, the restoration of the King's peace meant nothing more or less than the removal of the trade restrictions of the Prohibitory Act. Nothing was even implied in the act to mean that the colonies had lost their right to government. The military officials, however, influenced, it was claimed, by some leading inhabitants who believed that they would benefit financially under military government,2 declared that the Prohibitory Act meant that the colonies in revolt had 1

1 6 George III, Cap. 5.

A n excellent account of the legal side of this controversy may be found in Jones, Hist, of New York, II, 98 et seq. 2

49

0

5

NEW YORK DURING WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

lost their rights, civil and political, not solely their right to trade. In this stand they were aided by the Declaration of Independence, that had destroyed the last vestiges of royal government which had existed in name only since the establishment of the Provincial Congress and the various committees in New Y o r k City. O f course, the revolutionary governments in New Y o r k lost their power when the city fell into British hands; so there were neither royal civil officers nor revolutionary committees in the city on the arrival of his Majesty's troops. Though military government may have been expedient, the Prohibitory Act should not have been made the basis for it. There was no thought of removing the royal officials before the capture o f New York, nor of closing the courts of law. S o this military interpretation was merely a means to an end, that of securing military control to replace the former civil government. Outside of the legal basis for military government, the army authorities were truly justified in their actions. The city was in a war area, and the army had to hold supreme control, unhampered by any civilian institutions. Furthermore, it was customary in that day and age for the conquering army to assume all authority, a fact that was recognized by the international lawyers o f the time. There were many criticisms of military government in New York, however, most of which came from men who had held governmental positions under the former royal regime or who aspired to office; no doubt their views were biased. And most o f the accounts now available of the governmental side of the war period were written by civilians who naturally presented the situation unfavorably. True, there are orderly books and letters of military men, but these soldiers did not question the actions of their superiors. Perhaps when the papers o f Sir Henry Clinton, now being prepared for research in the Clements Library, are opened

KEEPING

THE

PEACE

IN THE

WAR-TIME

CITY

51

to the public, new light will be thrown on some of the governmental difficulties. Until that time, however, the historian of the city's war period must be content with the sources now available. The court records, customs-house entries, and other official documents have disappeared; only letters, diaries, journals, newspapers, and orderly books remain to tell of governmental procedure. The first intimation that a military depotism would continue to control the city came on September 24, 1776, when Admiral Lord Howe and his brother, Sir William, Commander-in-Chief of the army, who as the King's Commissioners for Restoring Peace were empowered to restore New Y o r k City to the good graces of the King, reappointed William Tryon to the governorship. This was an empty honor, for he was advised to keep " the executive powers of civil government dormant", and to leave the direction of provincial affairs in the hands of military authorities.3 The Howes were sympathetic with the colonial cause, and should have been good peace emissaries. Sir William, the younger brother, had first distinguished himself during Wolfe's campaign at Quebec, and was regarded as one of the most brilliant of the younger British officers at the close of the French and Indian War. A f t e r 1774, he began to disagree with governmental policy in America, and he disliked being sent to Boston, where the memory of his eldest brother was still greatly cherished. The following year, after he had led his men successfully at Bunker Hill, he was made lieutenantgeneral and took over the command of the armies in America until May, 1778. Then he resigned (as did his brother, Lord Howe, who had enjoyed as much success in the navy as had Sir William in the army) because of his belief that the home government had not supported him properly and also because a second group of peace commissioners had been appointed. 3

Ν. Y. Col. Docs., V I I I , 685-86.

52

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

Because of their military responsibilities, their sympathies did not prevent the Howes from agreeing to military government ; even they admitted that in times of anxiety, especially when the American army was so near the city, supreme military control was inevitable. T h e Loyalists at first shared this v i e w ; yet few believed that such government would have to continue long. In fact in November, 1776, Governor T r y o n drew up lists of officers preparatory to reorganizing a civil magistracy, thinking that civil control was not far distant. 4 Tryon, long in the service of the K i n g , honestly seemed to have the interests of the people at heart. Unlike others, he did not enrich himself at the expense of the Royal Treasury. H e was one of the principal sufferers f r o m continuance of military government, but he continued to support the crown staunchly, particularly on the field of battle. The Governor's preparations, however, were fruitless, for the military officers continued to hold the reins of government until evacuation. N o attention was paid to the pleas of the citizens for an assembly; 5 instead a military oligarchy reigned supreme, for in time of war the army is all powerful, not the citizenry. T r y o n still kept the title of governor ; but he exerted no authority and owed his position to the Commander-in-Chief, the head of the Commissioners for Restoring Peace, who in turn were responsible to the Ministry. Not until General Robertson succeeded T r y o n in 1780 did the governor have any power, then only because he was an army officer. Robertson frankly admitted to A n drew Elliot, who superseded him in 1783, that he owed all his authority to his high military rank and exercised few powers solely as civil governor. W h e n Robertson left for England, his military duties were taken by another general, while Elliott, a civilian, had to depend on his own character, * Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 691. 5

N. Y. Mercury, Nov. 4, 1776.

KEEPING

THE PEACE

IN THE WAR-TIME

CITY

53

ability, and the honor due his position to keep order, since the actual functions of civil government were executed by army men.® N o provincial council was formed until 1780, and since it was composed of civilians, it proved of little importance. In municipal matters, the change was even greater. There was no Mayor appointed by the Commissioners, although David Mathews, who held that position before the war, still kept the title. N o r was there any Common Council to guard the citizens' interests, and the other municipal officials also ceased functioning. In their stead were the appointees of the peace commissioners. A t the head of the municipal government was a Commandant, who had charge of all the diversified phases of city activity: law and order, cartmen's rates, auctions, and taverns, to mention but a few. T h e first incumbent was M a j o r General Robertson, w h o was later elevated to the governorship. He was appointed by Sir William H o w e on September 16, 1776, when he was over sixty years old. His Loyalist enemies claimed that he was a weak administrator, a lover of power, and a breaker of promises, who tried only to keep in the good graces of his superiors. Nevertheless, he treated the New Yorkers as well as did any of the British officials. O n February 17, 1777, he was succeeded by M a j o r General Pigot, who remained in office until the following September 27, when Robertson returned from England to resume the Commandant's duties. From May 4, 1778 to July 5, 1779, the office was held by M a j o r General Valentine Jones w h o was replaced in turn by the efficient General Pattison. General Robertson was reappointed on August 13, 1780, but a month later gave over the command to Brigadier General Birch, who remained in office until the evacuation, and seems to have done his work well. βReport

on American Manuscripts (Carleton Papers), IV, 34.

S4

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

This kind of government would not have been so bad from a civilian point of view had it not been for the fact that, as has always been the case under military government, no provision was made for trial by jury. The civilians did not, however, regard themselves as enemies of Great Britain; they thought that such a form of trial, which every Englishman regarded as part of his civil liberty, should be continued; and they complained strenuously when the only form of trial, even for cases involving non-combatants, was by court martial without a jury. Not until 1780 were there civil magistrates for trying cases in the city; even then there were no juries, and the judges were appointed and controlled by the military. T o the civilians, this judicial procedure seemed unjust; to the military, it was legal under military law. There was nominally a court of admiralty in the town, but important cases were generally sent to England for examination. 7 In spite of all criticisms of military government because it did not heed the pleas for political and civil rights of Englishmen, this much can be said in favor of the army officials: they did not tax the citizens of New Y o r k at any time during their control of the city. T o aid him in his many duties, and with the consent of the Commander-in-Chief, the Commandant appointed on May 4, 1778, a quasi-civil body, the department of police. A t its head was Andrew Elliot, a Scotch official's son, who had been sent to America at an early age and had served in a Philadelphia counting house before becoming a merchant in New York. A second marriage brought him a substantial fortune. From January, 1764, to the close of the Revolution, he was receiver general and collector of the Port of New York. He was assisted in the police administration by David Mathews, a man of whom few spoke highly, and by Peter DuBois, an ambitious person who believed he had been T

Smith, Diary, VI, Apr. 9, 1780.

KEEPING

THE PEACE

IN THE WAR-TIME

CITY

55

slighted in being named for so inferior a position. The specific duties of the police were: " suppression of vice and licentiousness support of the poor, direction of the night watch, regulation of markets, ferries, and all other matters in which the " economy, peace, and good order of the city " were concerned.* Actually, however, the police had little authority in municipal matters. Although appointed solely for civil functions, it was on the military Commandant that they depended for execution of their orders. On December 27, 1777, the Commandant appointed another civilian group, the city vestry, modeled after the prewar organization, to take charge of renting houses, to help the poor, and oversee lamp lighting, pump fixing, and street cleaning." The members of this organization were mostly well-known business men: David Mathews, John Smyth (who acted as treasurer), Richard Sharpe, Charles and George Shaw, Miles Sherbrook, Theophylact Bache, Gabriel Ludlow, Edward and William Laight, Henry Brevoort, Vincent Ashfield, Benjamin Hagget, Willet Taylor, John Oothout, Frederick Rhinelander, James Hallett, Jeronymous Van Alstyne, Richard Yates, Augustus Van Horn, and Isaac Low. Although their duties were closely related to those of the police, they, too, were controlled solely by military officials. Business was supervised by the Commandant, who issued the necessary rules and regulations for the different industries. It was his duty to fix prices, although the Commander-in-Chief frequently set the maximum prices for food and fuel. Since army men were not well versed in economic affairs, the Chamber of Commerce was in June, 1779, al8 Kemble, Journal, 1, 60S; Gaine, Mercury, May 4, 1778; Rivington, Gazette, May 9, 1778. 9

Gaine, Mercury, Jan. 5, 1778; Rep. on Atner. Mss., I, 203. The membership varied, so the names given are of those who served longest.

5

6

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

lowed by Commandant Jones to resume its meetings. 10 T h i s organization aided the Commandant greatly with much needed advice, particularly in the matter of business disputes and questions of fair price. Foreign trade was taken care of by the Prohibitory Act. The customs were continued in the hands of Andrew Elliot, collector before the war, who also held the position of superintendent of exports and imports, by appointment of General H o w e on July 17, 1777. 1 1 In both capacities, Elliott was directly responsible to the head of the army. The docks were supervised by the Commander-in-Chief, who issued many strict rules concerning their use by civilians. Other functions exercised by the Commander-in-Chief or the Commandant were: the care of the town jail through the military provost-marshal, the control of fire companies and issuance of fire regulations, and the appointment of the night watch. These organizations, military and quasi-civil, controlled the internal affairs of the city until November 25, 1783. T h e many complaints of military government (and all bodies formed by the British come under this head as they were all dependent on military appointment) show that civil affairs could not be administered effectively by men who were either trained only for army service or totally untrained. A n d to make matters worse, the military interfered with the semi-civil bodies at every turn. The need of the inhabitants for protection was as much against internal disorders as against enemy attack from without. Many citizens believed that protection from within could be secured only by a strong civil government, since the army was too busy with its own problems to bother much about internal order, except in so far as it affected military strategy. T o supplement the military guards, the civilians formed 10

Col. Rees, of Ν. Y. Chamber of Commerce, 203-04.

11

Gaine, Mercury, July 21, 1777.

KEEPING

THE PEACE

IN THE

WAR-TIME

CITY

57

their own night watch in January, 1777. 1 2 Yet despite this double protection, robberies and thefts were frequent. The civilian police department tried to suppress vice and disorder, but its powers were insufficient without the full cooperation of the military authorities, and without adequate support it could not insure to peaceful citizens the protection of life and property. The problem of preserving order was, indeed, no easy one. The town was crowded with people who sought the protection of the crown, many of whom did not know the meaning of law and order, or when removed from their home communities, were quite irresponsible. The problem was further complicated by the presence of so large a number of soldiery, British and German, quartered among the civilians, in a headquarters city without much military activity except routine. A s early as September, 1776, some unruly soldiers showed that they could not be restrained easily by their officers, by breaking into the City Hall and plundering it of equipment belonging to King's College. They also mutilated paintings, stole many volumes from the Corporation library, and committed other disorders. Although Commandant Robertson offered rewards for the apprehension of these marauders, there is no record of their being punished. 14 Looting continued, and by the end of October, 1776, it had become so extensive that General Howe directed the arrest and immediate punishment of all offenders." Ten soldiers were seized the following week for disobeying this order, and seriously punished. 15 Another measure to prevent dis12

Gaine, Mercury, Jan. 13, 1777.

13

Jones, Hist, of New York, I, 136-37; Ν. Y. Mercury, Sept. 30, 1776; British Guards Order Book (.1776), Sept. 25, 1776. 14

Order Book, British Army, 17th Foot, 1776, Oct. 31, 1776; Kemble, Journal, I, 96. 15 Kemble, Journal, I, 98; also the various orderly books of the period

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

order was a proclamation forbidding tavern keepers to allow soldiers or sailors in their hostelries after eight o'clock at night, a precaution against drunkenness.18 These rules, however, did not prevent disorders. Even the guards posted in the suburbs were not free from suspicion; frequent complaints were received at headquarters that they wreckcd empty houses and robbed inhabitants of their property.11 Murders, brawling, gambling, and drunkenness were other sources of complaint.18 Though these troops were probably no worse than others of the time, it may well be imagined with what fear Loyalist citizens retired, never knowing when their homes would be pillaged. Civilian robbers did not have to fear the harsh punishments which threatened military offenders. In their case, indeed, the police and military authorities were so lax, it was said, that it was dangerous " to walk the streets at night or be in a crowd in the day ", and scarcely a night passed without some crime being committed.18 In short, citizens had serious causes for complaint in this respect; all contemporary evidence proves the inability of the authorities to police the city properly. Another source of fear was incendiarism, for after the great fire of 1776, the citizens believed that incendiaries were still lurking in the town, ready to complete its destruction at a favorable moment.20 Yet the fire companies were well organized for that time. The engines, stationed in the various 18

Gaine, Mercury, Jan. 13, 1777.

11

Kemble, Journal, I, 437.

18

Schaukirk, Diary, Aug. 19, 1779. Pennsylvania Packet, Oct. 4-14, 1783; Rivington, Gazette, Sept. 17, 1783; Von Krafft, Journal, Jan. 5, 1782; Pattison, Letters, 397; Schaukirk, Diary, Feb. 5, 1780. 18

20

Schaukirk, Diary, Nov. 29, 1777; Stokes, Iconography, V, 1061, quoting St. James Chronicle, Jan. 17-20, 1778.

KEEPING

THE PEACE

IN THE

WAR-TIME

CITY

59

•wards, were in good condition, and, when operated by the •well-drilled firemen, proved fairly efficient.21 These engines however, were of a rudimentary kind, and bucket brigades were still important. A t the very beginning of the British occupation, firemen were quickly enrolled for service under several captains, as before the war, and soon they numbered two hundred and sixty. A s an inducement for volunteering, and to render them continuously available for fire fighting, they were exempt from military duty except in cases of emergency. 22 In addition to the regular fire companies, a number of citizens reorganized the salvage corps known as the " Friendly Union ", " Hand in Hand and " Heart to H e a r t " to carry to safety personal effects endangered by fire. They did not handle buckets or work engines, and were distinguished by their round, black-brimmed, whitecrowned hats.2S Later, two other organizations, the " Military Club " and the " Fire Club ", were formed to assist the regular companies.24 These companies were supervised by the Commandant, who was also responsible for the night watch, an added precaution against fire. The duties of this guard were to inspect the city, to arrest incendiaries, and put out fires before they became dangerous. Eighty men patrolled the seven wards, and were considered sufficient for all needs.25 The Commandants promulgated many orders to help the firemen: no military officers should interfere with firemen in the discharge of their duties, six inspectors should supervise the monthly cleaning of all chimneys, no combus21 Loyalist Transcripts, vol. 45, 595 et seq.; Gaine, Mercury, July 10, 1780. 22

Extracts from Dorchester Papers, in Ν. Y. Hist. Soc.

Rivington, Gazette, Apr. 18, 1781. These companies had been started first in March, 1767. Weyman, Gazette, Mar. 2, 1767. 23

24

Rivington, Gazette, Aug. 17, 1782.

25

Gaine, Mercury, Jan. 13, 1777; Mar. 3, 1777.

6o

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

tibles, such as pitch, tar, and turpentine, should be stored in dangerous places, soldiers must guard salvaged goods, and all vessels must be ready to leave their docks in case of fire.28 Yet all these precautions were not sufficient to prevent occasional fires resulting from carelessness, dirty chimneys, and inflammable wooden houses, rather than by incendiaries. Hope for the restoration of civil government was strengthened by the arrival of the second, or Carlisle, Commission for Restoring Peace, late in July, 1778. The Commissioners first went to Philadelphia the preceding May and then accompanied Sir Henry Clinton to New York after the evacuation of Philadelphia. These new Commissioners were the Earl of Carlisle, William Eden, and George Johnstone, with General Clinton as the nominal head, since he was Commander-in-Chief of the army. Clinton was the son of A d miral George Clinton, one time Governor of New Y o r k . He first served in the New York Militia, but later went to England, where he enlisted in the Coldstream Guards. S i r Henry was quickly promoted, particularly after his brilliant work during the Seven Years' War, returning to America in 1 7 7 2 as a major general, and, after the battle of Saratoga, he became Commander-in-Chief. Frederick Howard, fifth Earl of Carlisle, had sown his wild oats early; then turning over a new leaf, he showed ability in the fields of government and diplomacy, and his appointment to the Commission at the age of thirty was justified by his record. William Eden was trained as a lawyer, had been Secretary for Ireland and Ambassador to France, and was well connected, being a son of Governor Robert Eden of Maryland and sonin-law of Sir Gilbert Elliot, eldest brother of Andrew Elliot. 2e Kemble, Journal, I, 426, 440-41; Gaine, Mercury, Dec. 2, 1776; M a r . 3, 1777; Dec. 22, 1777; July 27, 1779; Col. Ree. of Ν. Y. Chamber of Commerce, 207; British Guards Order Book, 177S, Aug. 31, 1778; Rivington, Gazette, Oct. 28, 1778; Aug. 8, 1778.

KEEPING

THE PEACE

IN THE WAR-TIME

CITY

fa

George Johnstone had at one time been Governor of Florida. The Commission's secretary was Adam Ferguson, best known for his History of Rome. The popular expectation was that the Commissioners would declare the city at the King's peace, and that civil government would then be restored. The Commission made a long and searching study of all conditions in New York, and their attitude was encouraging to the proponents of civil government. Although the Commissioners tried to impress upon the New Yorkers that military force was employed only with the ultimate purpose of re-establishing civil authority,27 they evidently realized that the private citizen was not well protected under military dictatorship, that his property was constantly in danger, and that a citizen tried without a jury was not fairly tried. In fact, the Commissioners, with the exception of General Clinton, advocated restoration of civil government, and were the first influential Britons to do so. Commissioner Eden, however, pointed out in the official report several obstacles which then, at the end of 1778, prevented immediate resumption of civil control. In the first place, New York was in constant danger of attack, and legal government was hardly consistent with the requirements of a garrison town. Courts of law, they believed, would be constantly at odds with the military provost, while municipal judges would obstruct the business of the quarter-master and the barrack department. To restore proper civil government, assemblies would have to be summoned, but they would be impractical at such a time because of the restraints occasioned by the presence and natural interference of a larger armed force.28 These reasons were sound; but the Commissioners did not take into consideration that a gov27 28

Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 1216. Ibid., no. 1217.

62

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

ernment formed by and for Loyalists might have cooperated more helpfully with those fighting to protect them. They also overlooked another possibility, namely: that the establishment of popular government would have shown other provinces, particularly those under American control, that Great Britain was not fighting to suppress local government, and so might have secured an extension of loyalty helpful to the British cause. When, in November, 1778, Commissioners Carlisle and Eden were ready to return to England, the leading inhabitants of New York drew up an address expressing appreciation of the survey made by the Commissioners, renewing the request for civil government, and promising that it would help, rather than hinder, British military operations. The sooner such government was restored, the citizens prophesied, the wider would be its influence, and the better would it be prepared to protect the public which was weary of that " sanguinary system " under which so many had lost life, liberty, and property.29 This plea did not, however, influence the departing Commissioners, who informed George Germain by letter on November 27 that though they were anxious to see legal government restored, conditions at New York did not then warrant such a change.80 A more specific and favorable report was made by the Commissioners on March 8, 1779. Civil government, they said, would be extremely useful in conciliating the people by removing popular apprehensions and by issuing fair and helpful proclamations. Furthermore, it would prove advantageous in promoting secret communication with Loyalists of other provinces and in preventing friction between the unarmed populace and the quartered soldiers. A legal and responsible government would stimulate fair trade, at 29

Rivington, Gazette, Nov. 25, 1778; Stevens, Facsimiles,

50

Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 1227.

no. 1226.

KEEPING

THE PEACE

IN THE WAR-TIME

CITY

63

the same time preventing illicit enterprises of New York merchants. Such a government, also, would help the military officials through the assistance of those more familiar with civil business. Since civil government was then not feasible, in their opinion, the Commissioners advocated appointing an intercolonial council with a majority of civilian members, having important powers and responsibilities. They proposed that the president of the board be the Commander-in-Chief, aided by the Admiral, and that five to seven councillors be chosen from a group consisting of the Governor, the Commandant of New York or perhaps the second in command of the army, Superintendent Elliot, Attorney-General John Tabor Kempe, William Smith and Henry White, former provincial councillors, ex-Governors Franklin and Martin of New Jersey and North Carolina respectively, and Chief Justice Smythe of New Jersey. The Commissioners suggested that this council should have the right to declare any province at peace with Great Britain, after which assemblies might be called and civil courts reopened.31 Although planned as an intercolonial authority, most of its duties would have to do with New York, since that was the only place permanently in British hands. The British cabinet, however, postponed the question in favor of business then deemed more important, and the council was never appointed." It is only conjectural how such a board would have worked, but the military members would doubtless have clashed with and frustrated the attempts of the civilian councillors when the question of popular government was raised. The British officials, represented by at least two, and possibly three, powerful leaders, could easily have enacted its own proposals and vetoed those which it opposed. For such a commission, only one 11

Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 1269.

S2 Gaine,

Mercury, May 3, 1779.

64

NEW

YORK DURING WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

military member should have been appointed, and his authority limited to representing the views of the army and to giving advice on questions involving military expediency. This would have given real power to civilians; the proposed compromise meant no more than a continuance of military control, even though it provided for civilian representation. The one important group of civilian officials, the police magistracy, which supposedly worked for the interests of the people, was disrupted by internal strife. Peter DuBois, so Judge Smith records in his diary for August, 1779, spoke contemptuously of Andrew Elliot, and scored David Mathews in no uncertain terms, charging that he abused his position as vestryman, magistrate, and mayor by making large sums of money under false pretenses. The erection of civil government might have stopped this malfeasance, and was strongly urged by William Smith, especially after his appointment on May 4, 1779, as Chief Justice of New Y o r k . " Since, however, the courts of law were not actually opened by the British, Smith's position was purely honorary. Because of his legal training, William Smith was always heartily in favor of civil government; but the New York Loyalists looked upon him with distrust: he was a Presbyterian, he helped draw up the New Y o r k State Constitution, and he waited until 1778 before he definitely sided with the cause of the crown. Many still doubted his loyalty to the King. Nevertheless, he left the city at the end of hostilities, choosing to go to Canada instead and there is little doubt that after 1 7 7 8 he was a staunch Loyalist, whose honesty and integrity brought strength to the side of the crown. Judge Smith, delighting in his new office, believed he could protect the citizens when law and order were reestablished. He knew, nevertheless, that he would incur 88 Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 798; Loyalist Transcripts, vol. 44, 617-29; Smith, Diary, VI, Aug. 1-5, 1779.

KEEPING

THE

PEACE

IN THE

WAR-TIME

CITY

65

the " wrath of the refugees under Mathew's influence ", to whom civil government would mean the loss of power and profit." General Pattison, commandant during most of the active discussion over civil government,88 received the full burden of blame for all hardships to civilians, but he evidently tried to be fair and just to the inhabitants. In November, 1779, he ordered the closer observance of barrack regulations to prevent ill treatment of civilians by the military, because his duty required him to protect citizens against oppressive acts.8" Officers were forbidden to commit civilians to the guard house except by order of a general officer or magistrate, or in cases of flagrant breach of the peace. In fairness Pattison allowed officers to demand redress from citizens.87 Sir Henry Clinton was not so helpful to the Loyalists, for he always held the soldiers' view about civil government and he fought against its restoration to the end of his stay in America, believing that the two forms of government could not cooperate effectively. When he left for Charleston at the end of 1779, he made General Knyphausen commander at New York, and placed Governor Tryon in charge of the few remaining civil functions until the arrival of the new governor, General Robertson. Clinton gave Tryon blank warrants for courts martial, with the right to confirm sentences which did not involve loss of life or limb. Not a word however, was said about criminals under sentence, who had no redress until Clinton's return since there was no opportunity of appealing from the decision of the court martial which had tried them without a jury. 88 34

Smith, Diary, VI, Aug. i-Sept. 12, 1779.

85

See ibid., VI, Oct. 5, 1779.

86

Rivington, Gazette, Nov. 27, 1779; Pattison, Letters, 280-88.

87

Rivington, Gazette, Nov. 27, 1779.

88

Von Krafft, Journal, 102; Smith, Diary, VI, Dec. 30, 1779.

66

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

General Robertson, then in England on leave, was appointed Governor of New York early in May, 1779, and when he returned to the city to take up his new duties on March 21, 1780, the Loyalists were much pleased.39 T w o days later he was sworn into office with Andrew Elliot, the new Lieutenant-Governor. A council consisting of two military men, Cornwallis and Robertson, and five civilians, Franklin, Martin, Smith, Smythe, and Kempe, was notified of its royal appointment to advise General Clinton.40 The council was a failure from the beginning, for there was internal discord throughout its meetings. Elliot disliked Franklin and Kempe, and sought Smith's aid in furthering his own plans.41 The first act of the new organization was to decide that military government should continue for the time being. This was inevitable, for Governor Robertson, despite his royal appointment, could not restore civil government until after Clinton should declare New Y o r k in the King's peace; until that was done, nothing could be done towards a restitution of civil rights. The council believed that the Commander-in-Chief would do this at their request,42 and so certain was Robertson of Clinton's willingness to comply, that he employed William Smith to draft a proclamation of peace.48 Clinton, however, was violently opposed to such a proclamation, and absolutely refused to consider it.44 A t this time and ά propos of the discussion at the first council meeting, Judge Smith wrote his " Notes upon the Enquiry whether it is expedient to declare any part of the **N. 40

Y. Col. Docs., V I I I , 787; Smith, Diary, V I , Mar. 21, 1780.

Rivington, Gazetie, Mar. 29, 1780.

41

Smith, Diary, V I , Mar. 22, 1780.

42

Ibid., V I , Mar. 23-24, 1780.

43

William Smith Mss., Folio 194.

" Smith, Diary, V I , June 21, 1780.

KEEPING

THE PEACE

IN THE WAR-TIME

CITY

67

Province of New York at the King's peace and to revive civil government?" His views were: that the removal of the restraints of the Prohibitory Act would please the Loyalists and win rebels to the King's cause, that the greatest danger to the crown would come from postponing civil government, and that the restoration of civil order would place everyone in a responsible position in the eyes of the law. He recognized that this change would be opposed by the army, dreaded by those who reaped huge profits from military favor and hated by those who sought vengeance on the Whigs for their personal losses. He considered it essential, therefore, that a legislature should be convened for the enactment of new laws to prevent clashes between the two orders. The assembly, if found to be opposed to measures in favor of the crown and the common interest, might be dissolved, and military government resumed. Although an advocate of civil rights, Smith realized that the military was at the moment the primary interest, that full cooperation was necessary between the military and civil authorities, and that if civil government hindered the military, it should be dissolved.45 On April 15, 1780, Governor Robertson made a conciliatory address to the citizens, stating that the King was desirous of proving, by the revival of civil government, that he did not wish to govern America by military law, but by local legislation. The Governor then promised that, with Clinton's approval and as soon as public exigencies would permit, he would issue an order to open the courts of law and convene an assembly.48 The Governor also brought with him royal instructions for appointing an advisory council similar to the Governor's council before the war. This council was to include no members of the regular British army, and was to exert no 45

William Smith Mss., Folio 194.

"Rivington, Gazette, Apr. 19, 1780; Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 767.

68

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

authority outside of the district which the British controlled in New York. It differed greatly from General Clinton's council, organized two months earlier, which was purely military and intercolonial in scope. The members of the Governor's council were: Andrew Elliot, William Smith, Charles Ward Apthorp, a wealthy landowner, Hugh Wallace, a well-known business man, Oliver DeLancey, a prominent New Yorker, Roger Morris, a landowner and leader of refugees, and John Harris Cruger, a lawyer and one time Mayor of the City. 41 Although these men were staunch Loyalists, their tendency to form cliques and to indulge in petty squabbles prevented their accomplishing much of importance. In July Governor Robertson appointed George Duncan Ludlow superintendent of police on Long Island " to hear and determine peace and good order ", and required all other officers on that island to aid this magistrate and obey his decrees.48 F a r from being a beginning of civil government, this was a step towards setting up committees with great powers, ministerial and executive, without responsibility to the people, and with no authority in cases involving the army. Since no provision was made for juries, the court was merely another form of court martial such as had been trying civilians ever since the arrival of the British army. 48 Yet a slight concession was granted civilians after December 20, when the Governor proclaimed that civil suits not exceeding ten pounds were to be adjudged by William Walton and William Waddell, two civilians, who had the power to appre« Smith, Diary, VI, May 3, 1780. 48 48

Rivington, Gazette, July 19-26, 1780.

Jones, Hist, of New York, II, 1 et seq., gives a detailed account of this court from a legal point of view. It also tells of the other courts set up on Manhattan and Staten Islands later in the year. See also Loyalist Transcripts, vol. 41, 499 et seq.

KEEPING

THE PEACE

IN THE WAR-TIME

CITY

69

hend and confine those coming under their jurisdiction.®0 Thus these minor cases, at least, were removed from the jurisdiction of courts martial. The question of restoring civil courts then lapsed for over a year, although the Loyalists did not give up hope in spite of the fact that no judges could be secured for them. The men empowered to render decisions lacked legal training, and there was always uncertainty about jurisdiction. Indeed in such confusion, no justice could be expected. For instance, there was the case of two civilians, Peter Corn against Samuel Brownjohn. It was unimportant in the beginning, but grew in importance as the winter of 1781-82 advanced. Corn secured the Mayor's permission to erect, on a wharf, posts which Brownjohn later cut down as a public nuisance. Corn thereupon appealed to the police, from whom the case first went to the Commandant and then to the general court martial. The court allowed the plaintiff ninety pounds for his losses and fined the defendant an additional one hundred pounds for having taken justice into his own hands. Commandant Birch approved this verdict, but Brownjohn appealed to General Clinton, who, in turn, asked Governor Robertson to render a decision. Robertson consulted Judge Smith, not officially as Chief Justice, but personally as a man of legal training. Smith thought the fine for damages just, but that the other fine should be remitted since there had been no breach of the peace. The citizens made a martyr of Brownjohn, the Governor became infuriated at the police for declining to hear important civil cases, and the full odium of the decision fell on the military. 51 Perhaps as a result of this case, the Governor's council was convened on March 2i, 1782, to reconsider establishing civil government; but with the exception of Judge Smith, the entire council still 80

Gaine, Mercury, Dec. 25, 1780.

51

Smith, Diary, V I I , Feb. 6, 1782.

jo

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

strongly opposed it, claiming the time was not ripe because o f the presence of troops. 52 There were some rapid changes during the next t w o months. O n April 27, Sir Henry Clinton was removed f r o m the command of the armies in America, and on M a y 5, Sir Guy Carleton arrived to replace him. Carleton had w o n fame under W o l f e at Quebec, and from 1766 until 1778 was Governor-General of Canada. While Governor, he had endeared himself to the French-Canadians by codifying civil law and by promoting the passage of the Quebec Act. T h i s conciliatory spirit made the Loyalists hopeful of their future. O n M a y 1 came the order that hostilities should cease because of the beginning of peace negotiations. 53 T h e cessation of hostilities and the consequent removal of the necessity for military preparedness would, from the civilian point of view, have been the correct time to grant civil concessions; but when the military council met on May 4, it still resolved against civil government, possibly because any new arrangement would have been short-lived. General Carleton, while not favoring complete return to civil control, desired reform at least in the judicial system, and about three weeks after his arrival he began discussing the problem of replacing courts martial by courts with grand and petit juries. Judge Smith, Judge Smythe, and Attorney-General Kempe, lawyers all three, were appointed to decide the best means of substituting for the obnoxious military control a judicial procedure more compatible with ideas of civil justice. In his statement for the committee, Judge Smith repeated his earlier views: criminal cases were unfairly treated under military control, since extra-legal courts, without juries, might be too severe in punishing cases which 52

Smith, Diary, VII, Mar. 21, 1782.

Journal of Hugh Gaine, II, 148-49; Smith, Diary, VII, Apr. 27-May 5, 1782; Gaine, Mercury, May 6, 1783. 03

KEEPING

THE PEACE IN THE WAR-TIME CITY

71

involved l i f e and limb; a magistracy, dependent on the crown or legislature and therefore legal, would be the only just w a y to dispose o f capital cases; such judges should be controlled only by the law of the land, not by any outside influence.

U n t i l the legislature w a s restored, Judge S m i t h em-

phasized, magistrates could do little more than imprison criminals, even in capital cases.

S o to preserve order, pre-

vent oppression, and secure justice, the committee recommended the appointment of a judicatory board, responsible only to the Commander-in-Chief, with power to d r a w up a code, hear complaints, and dispense justice according to common law. 5 4

T h e report of the three lawyers w a s accepted

on June 7, 1 7 8 2 ; and thereafter when a citizen w a s imprisoned, his case w a s at once reported to the Governor, w h o made immediate arrangements f o r his trial. 55

T h i s w a s the

first step in reorganization and in the removal of civilian cases f r o m military jurisdiction. This small but important s a f e g u a r d of civil rights made the inhabitants more eager f o r complete resumption of civil government.

Judge Smith, voicing the sentiments of his

neighbors, asked Governor Robertson, then preparing to leave f o r England, to grant a suitable corporation charter, and suggested that perhaps a mayoralty court might relieve the police. 58

Robertson, however, did nothing, and the plea

was turned over to General Carleton.

Realizing how in-

effective would be such a court unsupported by the military, the Commander-in-Chief at first opposed this suggestion, but finally, in February, 1783, he instituted a court f o r the trial of citizens.

It w a s not given full charge of criminal cases,

but was enabled to discharge persons improperly committed, besides checking the sometimes overzealous police. 57 84

Smith, Diary, V I I , May 27, 1782; William Smith Mss., Folio 194.

85

Smith, Diary, V I I , June 9, 1782; William Smith Mss., Folio 197.

88

Smith, Diary, V I I , July 20, 1782.

57

Ibid., V I I , Feb. 5, 1783.

72

NEW YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

A f t e r the formal proclamation of the cessation of hostilities on April 8, 1783, the whole question of civil government lost its importance. The only thought of many Loyalists was to leave the city, and no further efforts were made to secure trial by jury or greater control qf municipal government by civilians. F o r those immediate questions of debt between civilians and of civilian claims against the army which had to be settled before the citizens and soldiers evacuated the city, two special commissions were appointed. On April 16, General Carleton named a board of commissioners, all civilians, to settle matters of debt exceeding ten pounds and contracted by citizens after November 1 , 1776. This group met three times a week, with authority to summon witnesses and call for such documents as might be needed in determining cases brought before them. Decisions were made without a jury, but the commissioners seem to have acted fairly and their findings were reported to Commandant Birch who enforced settlement.68 Though appointments were made by military authority and the enforcement was left to the Commandant, the actual decisions were made by civilians. The speed necessary for completing the business on hand accounted for the absolute power of the board. On May 5, a similar commission was instituted by the Commander-in-Chief to adjudicate all claims for supplies obtained from civilians by the army departments since April 1 9 , 1 7 7 5 . This board had the same investigatory powers as the civil one, but instead of effecting immediate payment, it simply registered claims for future liquidation.6® Citizens might have escaped judgments against them, but the army of his Majesty could always be held to account, and immediate payment was therefore not necessary. 88

Rivington, Gazette, Apr. 23, 1783. The commissioners were: Isaac Low, Sampson Blowers, William Walton, and Daniel Coxe. 59 Gaine, Mercury, May 5, 1783.

KEEPING

THE

PEACE

IN THE

WAR-TIME

CITY

73

Thus throughout the seven years of the British occupation, the loyal inhabitants of New York had to surrender to the exigencies of war their representative legislature, their right to trial by jury, and their government by responsible civilians. They submitted, though not without grumblings and efforts to restore some part of their civil rights. They endured the power of the military, for the sake of the cause to whose support they were committed. Although many of their able and learned leaders felt that this cause might have profited by the concession of some legal rights, the military power remained supreme and unmitigated through the war. Its agents, military and civil, controlled in every detail the property, business, liberty, and lives of the citizens.

C H A P T E R IV T H E P H Y S I C A L W E L F A R E OF T H E W A R - T I M E POPULATION

ON the approach of the British, the greater part of New Y o r k ' s population left the town, so that when it was captured only about five thousand civilians remained. In September, 1776, after the British troops had swept the Americans from most of Manhattan Island, many Loyalists began entering the city, not only those who had fled from it earlier because of rebel persecution, but also those from other parts of the country who preferred to be within the British lines. The confusion resulting from such a rapid change in population made the housing problem difficult, and it was aggravated by the large number of troops to be provided for and also by the great fire of 1776, which destroyed almost one-fourth of the town. T h e distribution of houses was remarkably well taken care o f , considering the circumstances. A t first the military officials had entire charge of this work, but after December, 1777, it was entrusted almost wholly to the city vestry, which was appointed by the military authorities. It was primarily an increased population during the war period which caused the difficulty in housing. The exact number of people living in N e w Y o r k City during the British occupation is largely conjectural, as no authentic census has come down to us and probably none was taken. Moreover, the population fluctuated continually because of the movement of troops, the incoming and releasing of pris74

PHYSICAL

WELFARE

OP WAR-TIME

POPULATION

75

oners, and the ingress and egress of Loyalists. The soldiers and prisoners are not the primary concerns of this study, but they must be considered in this connection. An estimate of the number of troops in or near the city during the course of the war is as follows: February, 1776, 8,000 Americans; August 25, 1776, 28,500 Americans and 31,000 British; January 8, 1777, 3,311 British; November 11, 1777» 4.97°; July, I77 8 » 9 . ° ° ° ; December, 1779, 4,000; August 20, 1781, 9,686; and December 12, 1782, 17,207} The impossibility of determining the military population exactly is due to variations in contemporary official figures 2 and the constant shifting of troops. With such differences in the military estimates, it is apparent that obtaining an approximate total for civilians must be a more difficult problem, since they were not subject to reports and musters, and there are few authentic enumerations. The census of 1771 credited the city with a population of 21,863. Other figures must be taken from reports probably exaggerated. The population just after the outbreak of war and before the persecution of the Loyalists was about twenty-five thousand. Allowing one-fifth for neutral inhabitants, there were twenty thousand partisans. 1 Upcott Coll., I V , 347; Mather, Refugees from Long Island to Connecticut, 38 and Fortescue, Hist, of Brit. Army, III, 183; Kemble, Journal, I, 107; ibid., I, 143; ibid., I, 156; Smith, Diary, V I , Dec. 26, 1779; Minute Book of General Board of Brit. Officers, 844 et seq.; Extracts from Dorchester Papers. 2

For example, on July 17, 1778, Adjutant Kemble reported a total of 9,000; on the 27th, Clinton wrote that there were 12,000; and two days later Kemble stated that there were 20,000. Kemble, Journal, I, 156-58; Stevens, Facsimiles, No. 1123. Both of these men should have known the exact totals, yet their figures differed. The differences can not be accounted for by the arrival of additional trooips, since at that time the harbor was quite effectually blockaded by the French fleet, and there were no large garrisons near New York to send reinforcements. However, some of the figures may have included hospital cases, sick leaves, etc., where others did not.

76

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

Upon the arrival of the American army, it was known that the city would be the scene of hostilities, with the result that both patriots and Loyalists packed their possessions and began to flee.8 About February, 1776, the Provincial Congress ordered an enumeration of the city's empty houses for the use of the American troops then arriving daily, 4 which showed that the town was being depopulated to an appreciable extent. B y the first of March, 1776, the civilians in town probably numbered about ten thousand, and the total rapidly decreased, until in August there were only half as many. A contemporary official estimate stated that between the last months of 1 7 7 5 and June, 1776, there was an emigration of nineteen-twentieths of the pre-war population, or more than twenty-two thousand people, including " rebels or persons in opposition to his Majesty's government and in civil or military capacities " , people of both sides who feared the dangers and hardships of a besieged town, Loyalists, those who wished to avoid military enrollment,' and " some hundreds of persons who were taken up and sent into confinement or on parole in different parts of the country " because of their loyalty.® This is probably too large an estimate, for the neutrals and those who successfully concealed their opinions must have numbered five thousand/ But all 8

In November, 1775, the city was " half deserted for fear of a bombardment." New York City during Amer. Rev., 84-85. See also, Schaukirk, Diary, Feb., 1776; Ν. Y. Col. Docs., V I I I , 667; Ν. Y. Packet, Feb. 15, 1776. 4

Jour. Ν. Y. Prov. Cong., I, 301.

8

Ibid., I, 114-16.

β Ν. Y. City during Amer. Rev., 149-50. See also, Ford, Writings of Washington, IV, 347; Corres. Ν. Y. Prov. Cong., II, 277; Jour. Ν. Y. Prov. Cong., I, 578; Ν. Y. Mercury, Aug. 19, 1776. 7 This number compares favorably with that estimated by a British soldier. Stokes, Iconography, V, 1023, quoting St. James Chronicle, Nov. 2-5, 1776.

PHYSICAL

WELFARE

OF WAR-TIME

POPULATION

77

accounts showed that most of the citizens had left the city by September, 1776. Since the Americans were unable to defend the city, they withdrew before the British advance, and by the fifteenth of September, the royal troops had complete possession of what was then an almost deserted town. The British were followed immediately by a " great concourse of people ", the Loyalists. 8 Gradually, also, other Loyalists drifted back to "legitimate authority", especially to western Long Island, where the villages were filled with fugitives wearing red ribbons in their hats to distinguish themselves from American rebels who were prisoners of war.' On October 16, 1776, more than eleven hundred civilian Loyalists, including former judges and members of the Governor's council, gathered at the City Hall where they drew up and signed an address to the King, proclaiming their loyalty and requesting the restoration of the city to the King's peace. The town was again becoming populated and began to " wear a cheerful appearance". 10 Major General Robertson said that Loyalists were so eager to return that there were eleven thousand in town by the middle of February, 1777. 1 1 Governor Tryon had the inhabitants take an oath of allegiance to the King, and was successful in securing the allegiance of 3,020 men in February. 12 There is no doubt that the neutrals swore fealty to his Majesty for their own protection. Assuming, arbitrarily but reasonably, that each man had three dependents, the city's population would have been 8

Schaukirk, Diary, Sept. 15, 1776. Baurmeister, " Diary ", in Mag. of Arner. Hist., I, 39. 10 Ν. Y. City during Amer. Rev., 117-38; Ν. Y. Mercury, Oct. 21-28, 1776. Allowing each of the signers three dependents, the number of Loyalists would have been 4400 or a total city population of 9,000. 11 Stokes, Iconography, V, 1064, quoting St. James Chronicle, Mar. 22-25, 177712 Upcott Coll., IV, 467-69. 9

-8

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

twelve thousand, an estimate nearly coinciding with that of General Robertson. During the later years of the war, the population was augmented not only by the return of former inhabitants, but also by the arrival, from the interior of New Y o r k and other provinces, of Loyalists who sought royal protection. When Philadelphia was evacuated by the British in June, 1778, at least three thousand Loyalists accompanied the army on its return to New York, 1 3 and when other British garrisons from Rhode Island were withdrawn, civilians also followed the military to New York. 1 4 Because people continued arriving in town almost daily," the city's population increased rapidly, and by 1 7 8 1 there were probably about twenty-five thousand civilians. Another basis for estimate is the number of militia enrolled in January, 1780. The total was about five thousand, to which must be added four hundred firemen and Quakers exempted from service. If each man had three dependents, the total would have been more than twenty thousand. T o this number must be added the families of the two thousand Loyalists (estimating conservatively) who had joined the regular army or provincial corps. Thus New Y o r k had to accommodate, probably, about twenty-six thousand civilians. The population continued to grow when other posts, particularly Charleston, were abandoned, and Loyalists flocked to town until the evacuation, when there were possibly as many as thirty-three thousand civilians in the city. 18 This is probably an accurate 13

Winsor, Narr, and Crit. Hist., VII, 195. Eden said there were 5,000. Stevens, Facsimiles, No. 501. 14 One British officer wrote: "This city is crowded with inhabitants who come from all parts of A m e r i c a . . . " Stokes, Iconography, V, 1129, quoting Lloyd's Evening Post, April 27-30, 1781; see also Van Tyne, Loyalists, chap, on "Expatriation." 15 Gaine, Mercury, Oct. 21, 1776. 19 Duncan, Hist, of Royal Artillery, I, 329.

PHYSICAL

WELFARE

OF WAR-TIME

POPULATION

yg

estimate for in August, 1783, the town was " fuller of inhabitants than at any other period." 17 It would have been easier to house this increased population had it not been for the fire of 1776, which broke out just as the British were preparing to enter the city. After the defeat of the Americans on Long Island and their subsequent retreat to Manhattan Island, Washington and his generals knew that New York would necessarily fall into British hands. The heights of Brooklyn dominated the lower part of Manhattan Island, and the absolute superiority of the British fleet necessitated rapid withdrawal of the American troops to Fort Washington and Kingsbridge to prevent their retreat being cut off. Washington consulted Congress as to the measures he should pursue with regard to the city; on September 2, 1776, he wrote: " I f we should be obliged to abandon the town, ought it to stand as winterquarters for the enemy? They would derive great convenience from it on the one hand; and much property would be destroyed on the other." 18 Congress replied that special care should be taken not to damage the city, for though the British might capture it, there was no doubt that it could be recovered.19 This was the American official decision, but rumor prevailed that the common soldiery had determined to destroy the town before they left it, despite Washington's orders.20 In spite of these threats, however, the Continental troops did nothing to fire the town before their retreat northward. Nevertheless, in the late evening of September 20th, a blaze broke out in a small wooden structure on a wharf near 17

Stokes, Iconography, V, 1167, quoting London Chronicle, Oct. 2-4,

1783. 18

Ford, Writings of Washington, IV, 378-81. Ford, Jour. Cont. Cong., VI, 33-3420 Smith, Diary, V, Sept. 4, 1776. 19

go

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

Whitehall Slip. The fire gained headway rapidly, and consumed all the houses on the east side of the Slip and the west side of Broad Street as far as Beaver Street. When the conflagration reached this spot, shortly before midnight, the wind, which had been blowing from the southwest, suddenly veered to the southeast, and changed the fire's course to the west, so that the houses on both sides of Beaver Street as far as Broadway were burned. The wind then drove the flames across Broadway to Beaver Lane, where they gutted houses on both sides of Broadway, as well as several in New Street as far west as Rector Street. A three-story brick house prevented the fire from spreading further on the east side of Broadway, but it continued through Lombard Street, and destroyed all the houses between Broadway and the North River. Not until it reached, at three in the morning, Mortkill or Barclay Street was the fire extinguished. The yard and the open land back of King's College effectively prevented any further damage. In this conflagration, about one-quarter of all the houses in the city were burned. Of those destroyed, 167 were located between Mortkill and Cortlandt Streets, 175 between Cortlandt and Beaver, and 151 between Beaver Street and the East River. Trinity Church and the Lutheran Church were burned. St. Paul's Chapel was saved, as were some houses on the west side of lower Broadway facing the Bowling Green: Captain Kennedy's, Cortlandt's, Axtell's, and Hull's Tavern. The loss in property cannot be determined. The memorials to the Commissioners on Losses, filed after the war, are filled with claims for houses and property burned in this fire, but these values were doubtless exaggerated. Oliver DeLancey, for instance, asked £8,480 for his twenty-five houses that were burned, although he was awarded a much smaller amount.21 About the only 21

Loyalist Transcripts, vol. 41, 178.

PHYSICAL

WELFARE

OF WAR-TIME

POPULATION

8Ϊ

authentic appraisal of destruction was that of Trinity Church property, namely: Trinity Church, including the organ, £17,500; its library, £200; two charity schoolhouses and their fences, £2,000; and the rector's house, £2,500. There was also a debit of £536 per year for loss of rent of houses burned.22 In spite of the uncertainty of the figures for losses, the destruction was certainly enormous.2* Naturally the fire was charged to the Americans. It was rumored that many scoundrels had been arrested, and, in some cases, immediately hanged for interfering with the salvaging of the town. Yet Commandant Robertson, five days after the fire, was not able to find any trustworthy witnesses, even though he offered rewards for information leading to the arrest of incendiaries.24 Near the close of the war, on October 18, 1783, Sir Guy Carleton appointed a commission of three to ascertain " whether the fire was accidental or the effect of design, and if of design, to whom generally or individually the same was imputable Many witnesses were called to appear before this committee. During the investigation, the King's officers were inclined to be fairer to the Americans than were the Loyalists, as the most rabid of the latter did not hesitate to place the blame on their fellow-countrymen. The investigation proved nothing since it was held too long after the fire for the testimony of witnesses to be of much value. No decision was reached, but it was generally agreed that the city had not been fired 22

Trinity Minutes; Valentine, Manual (1866), 767 et seq. For more detailed accounts of the fire, particularly regarding charges of incendiarism, see: David Grim's Account, in Ν. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll. (1870), 275; Winsor, Narr, and Crit. Hist., VI, 334; Kemble, Journal, I, 89-90; Ν. Y. Mercury, Sept. 28, 1776; Doc. Hist, of Ν. Υ., Ill, 643; 5 Amer. Arch., II, 493-93, 5»3· 24 Brit. Guards Order Book (1776), Sept. 25, 1776. 25 The original manuscript report of this commission is in the Ν. Y. Hist. Soc. 23

82

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

through any official American order. The royal forces could not be blamed either, for they had not yet entered the city when the fire started. The Loyalists would hardly have done it intentionally, since they would have been the chief losers. From contemporary accounts, discounting highlycolored rumors, it would seem that the inception of the fire was accidental, and grew to disastrous proportions because of the wind, the dry weather, the disorganization of the city, the inadequate methods for fighting such a serious fire, the wooden houses, and the narrow streets. The significance of the fire was not, therefore, political or military; its seriousness was its destruction of houses needed not only by the army, but for the civilians who flocked to the city. There was no attempt to rebuild the burned area, which was presently occupied by followers of the army, by drunkards, roustabouts, and negroes, who fitted up temporary shelters by stretching sailcloth from remaining walls and chimneys. This " Canvas Town " was a neighborhood of ill-fame and ill-repute throughout the war. 26 Another great fire on August 3, 1778, began accidentally in the home of a chandler and destroyed sixty-four houses and £250,000 worth of property in the vicinity of Cruger's Wharf, Little Dock, and Dock Streets. The chief losers were Colonel William Bayard, John and Henry Cruger, and David Provost, who each lost six houses, Gerardus Duyckinck, who lost seven, Thomas Brown, four, Peter Mesier (whose family had lost fifteen houses within two years), two, and sixteen other persons had from one to three houses burned. A reward of one hundred and twenty guineas brought no information about supposed incendiaries.27 The 26 27

Dunlap, Hist, of Amer. Theatre, I, 79.

Gaine, Mercury, Aug. 3-17, 1778; Rivington, Gazette, Aug. 5-8, 1778; Kemble, Journal, I, 1 5 8 ; Von Krafft, Journal, 58; Valentine, Manual (1866), 768 et seq.

PHYSICAL

WELFARE

OF WAR-TIME

POPULATION

83

question of finding shelter for an increased population was made more difficult by these two large fires, one of which destroyed about five hundred houses, the other, sixty-four. There were numerous other fires, but they did not endanger the city or affect the housing problem. Immediately after entering the city on September 16, 1776, the British began to prepare for housing officers and troops. The Commander-in-Chief declared forfeited all houses within the city owned by people in rebellion; 28 the barrack-master-general was authorized to take possession of all vacant houses or stores necessary for the King's service; 29 and William Butler, appointed by General Howe, began to appraise all rebel property.30 This property, exclusive of that burned in the fire of 1776, was estimated at £575,550; that on Long Island and Staten Island amounted to £ 1 4 1 , ioo. 31 The most elegant of these homes were occupied by officers, who were forbidden, however, by a headquarters' order of September 19 from occupying them without special permission from the Commandant."2 28

Schaukirk, Diary, Sept. 16, 1776.

29

British Guards Order Book (1776), Sept. 16, 1776.

30

Ν. Y. City during Amer. Rev., 150.

31

Stevens, Facsimiles, nos. 1233, 1234, 1235. Suffolk County Richmond County King's County Queen's County New York, Out Ward West Ward North Ward South Ward Dock Ward East Ward Montgomery Ward

32

British Order Book (1776-77), Sept. 19, 1776.

£86,500 2,000 37,000 15,600 224,000 24,100 62,800 11,100 47,800 117,800 87,950

84

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

T h e military occupants had the first choice of homes and store houses. It was essential that places for storing the equipment and necessaries of the various army departments be close together to decrease the number of sentries and the area to be guarded. M a n y dwellings taken over for this purpose were owned by Loyalists, who naturally objected to this summary occupation, even though it was for the good of the army. T o satisfy them, they were promised payment, and two disinterested citizens were appointed by the Commandant to estimate a reasonable annual rental. 83 Places previously owned by W h i g s were officially confiscated, and so were occupied by the military without compensation. Soldiers were billeted in public buildings, warehouses, stores, even in churches, and were also quartered in private homes through the city. B y the beginning of November, 1776, this quartering caused considerable trouble, as many soldiers had wives and children. A s the war advanced, most of the troops were transferred to huts on northern Manhattan, on Staten Island, and in Queens County, which helped the housing problem considerably. 34 T h e thousands of prisoners captured on L o n g Island and at Fort Washington added to the difficulties, because they were then kept in town, either in churches or sugar houses. Within three years, most of the public buildings, particularly churches of dissenters, had to be appropriated for the use of soldiers and prisoners. Later, however, many captives were placed aboard the prison ships in New Y o r k harbor. 81 T h e citizens, who returned to the city gradually, had no difficulty in finding shelter during the first few months of 83

Ν. Y. City during Amer. Rev., 151-52.

" Von Krafft, Journal, and Onderdonk, Rev. Incidents in Queens Co., Passim. »5 Schaukirk, Diary, Nov., 1776; Dandridge, Prisoners of the American Revolution, passim; Narrative of Ethan Allen's Captivity.

PHYSICAL

WELFARE

OF WAR-TIME

POPULATION

85

the British occupation, in their own homes, in rented Loyalist houses, or in confiscated rebel property; 88 but they were ordered to move out of the latter before November 1, 1777, so that more room could be had for troops.87 In 1777, however, the city was so crowded that the inhabitants felt severely the loss of houses destroyed in the great fire. Many refugees could rent no place, and had to depend on charity.8® Furthermore, owners of houses profited from the great demand for private quarters by raising rents four hundred per cent above those of peace times.8® The city vestry, appointed by Commandant Robertson on December 27, 1777, to care for the poor, was given charge of houses belonging to those in rebellion which were not used by the military, and was authorized to collect rents to help the poor, and to pay for such municipal functions as lighting lamps, cleaning streets, and fixing pumps. At first, the rents were to be collected only for the half-year ending May ι, 1778. 40 On July 9, however, some noble-spirited citizens, knowing that Sir Henry Clinton would not allow taxes in the city, even to provide money for the poor, petitioned him to allow the vestry to collect rents for another half-year. 41 The arguments showed that the people who occupied confiscated property often derived great profit and convenience from it. Furthermore, it was neither an injury nor an injustice to order a person living in a house not his own either to pay rent or move. The paying of rent did not 38

Stokes, Iconography, V, 1039, quoting London Chronicle, Jan. 1-3, 1777" Gaine, Mercury, Sept. 15, 177758

Stokes, Iconography, V, 1041-42, quoting " Letter from an Officer in New York to a Friend in London." 39

Ν. Y. City during Amer. Rev., 154.

40

Rep. on Amer. Mss., I, 203.

41

Rivington, Gazette, July 18, 1778.

86

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

exempt him from taking in troops; but this, the petitioners claimed, was not always a hardship, as government pay for quartering was good. Another argument advanced was that the British authorities also benefited by having the houses rented by the vestry, for homes without tenants were often either demolished or so damaged that they became unfit for use. Convinced by these arguments, Sir Henry Clinton consented, the fair rents were collected until the evacuation, and the plan seemed to work well. This decision precluded the idea that civilians could live in rebel homes without paying rent and seems entirely fair. If people living in houses belonging to Loyalists paid rent, why should the occupants of Whig property be exempt? More than twenty-two hundred pounds was collected by Vestryman Smyth for the first half-year/ 2 which, f o r houses renting at thirty pounds a year (probably a high average estimate) meant that about one hundred and fifty of them had hitherto been used without claim or title. Y e t the rents of houses during the war cannot be standardized. They varied greatly, and since the style of houses advertised for rent was seldom given, it is impossible to determine an average rent f o r a home of four, five, six, or more rooms. The demand for houses naturally increased rents over pre-war times, but the vestry did its best to keep them down. In February, 1779, the vestry forbade anyone to transfer his interest in a house without special permission, or to give or receive premiums for such a transfer. Nor could renters renew their leases with the object of re-renting houses for excessive sums. They could not be lax in paying rent, either, for they were notified on May 1 2 , 1779, that if it were not paid by the first of June, they would be dispossessed. 48 « Rivington, Gazette, July 18, 1778. 43 Gaine, Mercury, Feb. 8, 1779; Rivington, Gazette, May 15, 1779.

PHYSICAL

WELFARE

OF WAR-TIME

POPULATION

87

Not all troops were sent to huts,44 and citizens had to quarter those who were needed for duty in town. The civilians regarded this as a most disagreeable duty,45 and their complaints of ill-treatment, especially by officers and their servants, were so frequent that the Commandant had to warn the troops that any irregular act would be punished.4" But five months later, in March, 1780, there were similar complaints, and some citizens claimed that the barrack department was improperly billeting its employees in private dwellings. Pattison then appointed a board of inquiry, which decided that no billet could be issued except by the barrack-master, and then only after the house in question had been examined to determine the number of men it could conveniently hold.47 In July, 1780, General Robertson issued a decree calculated to help persons seeking homes. The houses and lands of those in rebellion, except those needed by the crown, might be lawfully possessed by Loyalist refugees who applied to Philip J. Livingston. 48 There was, however, some risk of fraud or mistake in ownership. Livingston might, for instance, appear as plaintiff before the police court and claim as rebel property the land which a Loyalist really owned. The Loyalist could not testify, there was no defence, the court would decide in favor of Livingston, and there would be no appeal. In such cases, land might sometimes be turned over to favorites or hired out to others. Thus averred Judge Jones, possibly without foundation.4* The government did not always pay Loyalist owners for 44

Pattison, Letters, 280.

45

Onderdonk, Rev. Incidents in Queens Co., 252.

48

Rivington, Gazette, Nov. 27, 1779.

4 7 Gaine,

Mercury, Mar. 6, 1780.

48

Rivington, Gazette, July 19, 1780; Rep. on Amer. Mss., I V , 27-28.

48

Jones, Hist, of New York, II, 35-36.

88

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

the use of their homes. F o r example, one Thomas Bosworth returned to the city in 1780 after a three years' imprisonment by the Americans to find his home occupied by Commissioner of Provisions Butler, to whom he applied for either rent or possession. Butler told him that the house was needed for the service, and the government would reimburse him; but although Bosworth's house was used by the military until the evacuation, he received no money for it.50 N o r was this the only case of this kind. W h e n the Commander-in-Chief's council met in February, 1782, David Mathews and Beverly Robinson reported that certain Loyalist owners claimed £12,000 rent for their houses and stores which were being used by the military. Elliot wished to have these men paid, but Robertson was alarmed, for he feared that if this rent were paid, claims of £200,000 would follow from other owners. Smith urged that houses used by the government should so far as possible be returned to their owners, and he advised the payment of back rent to help the sufferers and to stop evil reports. Thereupon, the council decided to give up twelve houses, and ordered a general report on housing conditions. 61 Y e t the Loyalists were not always in the right, and some who tried to collect rent from the military authorities f o r houses which they did not o w n were punished by the Commandant. 82 During the war, the position of the Loyalists in N e w Y o r k was anything but easy. They were often deprived of their property with inadequate compensation, they suffered needless annoyances, and saw their homes occupied by British officers, some of whom had more than one residence. 58 80

Loyalist Transcripts, vol. 17, 121 et seq., vol. 44, 641.

51

Smith, Diary, VII, Feb. 20, 1782.

M

Rep. on Amer. Mss., IV, 348.

M Riedesel, Letters and Journals, 167 et seq.; Smith, Diary, VII, Feb. 20, 1782.

PHYSICAL

WELFARE

OF WAR-TIME

POPULATION

89

Yet when the evacuation of the city by the British appeared inevitable, steps were taken to safeguard all houses for returning Americans. On February 18, 1783, AdjutantGeneral DeLancey ordered anyone then in the city whose house or land had been withheld because of offence to the crown, or anyone outside the lines who owned an estate within, to place his claims at the police office.54 Anyone occupying such an estate was warned to take good care of it, since he would be held responsible for any damage. The police sent representatives to examine such property and to make inventories. As a further precaution against damage to houses under vestry control, possessors were not allowed to leave them without advance notice to the Commandant. When such houses were vacated, their condition was examined, and the keys were then deposited with him. Persons who occupied vestry-controlled houses without permission were severely punished.5' Steps were also taken to protect the departing Loyalists. To prevent the stream of Americans from rushing in too quickly to demand their former homes, which in many cases were still held by troops or by Loyalists, the victors were forbidden to enter after April without a passport, while those already in town had to report at the Commandant's office. Confusion resulted, and in some instances Americans could not regain their property for some time.5* It was not until June 16 that officers with the proper authority were named to whom they could apply for possession.57 Failure to return houses promptly was not always the fault of the officials. In the case of the Misses Roosevelt, it appeared that their home M

Rivington, Gazette, F A . 19, 1783. Ibid., Apr. 30, 1783. »• Stokes, Iconography, V, 1161, quoting London Chronicle, June 5-7,

85

1783.

" Gaine, Mercury, June 23, 1783; Penna. Packet, Aug. 23, 1783.

go

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

had been occupied by some soldiers, w h o transferred it to a poor refugee family.

T h e barrack department, not wishing

to turn them out, gave up its claim to the house and considered it a charge of the vestry.

T h e vestry, however, did

not enter the house on its books, although the refugees remained in possession.

T h e r e f o r e , it w a s difficult to deter-

mine w h o had charge of the house, and the Roosevelts h a d much trouble in regaining it because no one knew w h o had authority to return it to them. 58 A board of claims, composed of officers of both armies, w a s appointed early in 1783 to see that the terms of the treaty were faithfully observed.

T h e returning Americans

presented another problem which came up b e f o r e this board. T h e y claimed ownership of all buildings which had erected on their property during the war.

Loyalists

T h e Loyalists,

on the other hand, held that if the W h i g s would not compensate them f o r the buildings, they could be

removed.

T h e board decided in f a v o r of the Loyalists, since it was the only way they could save their property. 5 9

T h e final order

dealing with the housing problem w a s given in A u g u s t , and

forbade anyone to demolish any buildings

without

authority.* 0 T h e most notable service of the vestry, indeed the one f o r which they were primarily appointed, was the care o f the poor.

There were many people in N e w Y o r k w h o had

forsaken their homes, leaving much of their personal property behind them.

F o r such persons the problem of finding

employment in a new home was serious, especially in a garrison town.

A d d to these circumstances the high cost

of the necessities of life caused b y scarcity and war-time conditions, and it is easy to understand w h y there were so **Rep. on Amer. Mss., I V , 30s, 331. 339· »»Ibid., I V , 308. 60

Rivington, Gazette, Sept. 3, 1783.

PHYSICAL

WELFARE

OF WAR-TIME

POPULATION

91

many poor persons in the city during the British occupation. The almshouse " was soon filled with people who could not support themselves, and it became a great source of anxiety during the early part of the occupation, since with no regular taxes, the poorhouse was dependent on voluntary contributions."2 Fortunately, officers of the British army and wealthy Loyalists took a deep interest in these unfortunate people. The first great public charity was on Christmas Eve, 1777, when forty poor widows and housekeepers, having a certificate of their necessity signed by two neighbors, went to the home of Dr. Inglis, rector of Trinity, where they received tickets entitling each to a quantity of fresh beef and a halfpeck of bread from the supply donated by a lawyer of the city, John C. Knapp.' 8 These efforts were not sufficient, and two days after Christmas, Commandant Robertson, realizing that some special provision was needed, authorized the vestry " to assess the quotas of the inhabitants and to superintend the poor, . . . to solicit and receive the donations of the charitable and well-disposed, and to appropriate the same to the relief of the poor according to their wants." Furthermore, it was empowered to rent houses owned by rebels and not occupied by the military and to administer the license money and fines collected by the police.·4 These fines imposed and collected by the police for the use of the vestry covered every infringement of military regulations and were, next to rents of rebel-owned homes, the el Located on the present site of City Hall Park. Valentine, Manual (1862), said the fire of 1776 caused three hundred persons to seek admission. ,2

See Stokes, Iconography, V, 1056, quoting St. James Chronicle, Sept. 23-25, 1777. "Gaine, Mercury, Dec. 22, 1777; Rivington, Gazette, Jan. i, 1778. 41

Gaine, Mercury, Jan. 5, 1778.

NEW

g 2

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

greatest source of income to the needy. Farmers who charged more than the fixed price for their crops were liable to have all their harvest seized, and in that case half of it went to the poor. 65 Watchmen who neglected their duties," bakers who disobeyed the bread assize, 47 and those who broke the shipping regulations, 88 cartmen who charged too high rates,69 all had to contribute to the poor. There were fines also for storing combustibles within the city limits,70 throwing dirt into the streets, 71 holding auctions without licenses,72 profiteering in wood, 73 evading militia duty, 74 and violating regulations.7® The amount collected by the vestry through the police from all these sources was amazingly large. From November i , 1 7 7 7 until April 30, 1782, rents totalled £ 3 5 , 2 8 1 , tavern licenses, £ 1 2 , 9 6 1 , ferry rents, £3,386, lotteries, £ 1 0 , 3 1 4 , and fines and forfeitures, £ 1 , 4 7 4 ; more than half of this total, or £35,732, went for the use of the poor. The rest was spent for salaries, for repairing ferries, buildings, pumps, lights, and fire engines, for paving and cleaning streets, for miscellaneous charities, and for general municipal expenses.7® From May 1, 1782 until April 14, 1783, £7,075 was turned over to the poor, from April 15 to August 95

Rivington, Gazette, Jan. 3, 1778. Gaine, Mercury, May 31, 1779. "Ibid., Jan. 13, 1777; Jan. 25, 1779· 48 Rivington, Gazette, July 24, 1779. ββ Gaine, Mercury, Sept. 20, 1779. 70 Rivington, Gazette, Aug. 8, 1779. 71 Ibid., Apr. 19, 1780. 72 Gaine, Mercury, Oct. 23, 1780. 7a Ibid., Nov. 30, 1778; Mar. 19, 1781. 74 Rivington, Gazette, Sept. 9, 1780. 75 Gaine, Mercury, June 4, 1781. 7e Rivington, Gazette, June I, 1782. 86

PHYSICAL

WELFARE

OF WAR-TIME

POPULATION

93

20, 1783, £1,100, from August 21 to October 31, £500, and from November 1 to 24, £35. The amount given to other charities during this period was £109/' Thus during the military occupation, the vestry turned over at least £45,000 to the distressed. They had collected about £92,000 during their term of office, of which £53,700 came from rents, and the administration of all this money must have kept them busy. Other methods of helping the poor were public lotteries, one of which raised over a thousand pounds," contributions of money and clothing from England, 7 * permits to cut wood from rebel estates,80 contributions by individual military officers and civilians.81 Roger Morris, inspector of refugee claims, spent more than two thousand pounds in helping emigrants find new homes,82 and General Carleton subsequently did much among children and orphans.88 There were, of course, many private donations which never received publicity, most of which were collected by the vestry. There were some donations from the theatre; but amusement, not charity, was the prime purpose of the theatre, and charity profited less than society. During the first season, £515 went from the box-office to the needy,8* but in 1778, only £140 went to the poor, although the managers took in almost four thousand pounds.8' In January, 1779, Lieu77 Rivington, Gazette, Aug. 30, 1783; Nov. 12, 1783; Nov. 29, 1783; Dawson, Report on the City Finances. 78

Rivington, Gazette, Dec. 27, 1777; Jan. 3, 1778.

n

Winslow Papers, 21-22.

80

Rivington, Gazette, Nov. 7-14, 1778.

81

Ibid., Jan. 6, 1779.

82

Rep. on Amer. Mss., I l l , 8.

83Ibid.,

IV, passim; Extracts from Dorchester Papers.

84

Rivington, Gazette, Nov. 21, 1778.

85

Ibid., Oct. 10, 1778.

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

tenant Brown reported how he distributed for the poor the eighty pounds he had received from the management; twenty shillings went to each of forty-four widows, shoes and stockings to forty, twenty shillings apiece to seventy-two children, and forty-five shillings to each of sixteen orphans. 8 ' During the season of 1780-81, £5,303 was collected by the theatre managers, of which only £291 went to the poor. The next year the proportion was larger, for £827 out of a total of £4,138 was given to charity. 87 The problem of safeguarding public health was as important to the physical welfare of the inhabitants in general as the housing problem and the care of the poor. New Y o r k was fortunate in not having any really severe epidemic during the war period. Though a number of children died of fever in the summer of 1777, 8 8 this was not unusual at that time of year. 89 In 1779, however, there was an epidemic of intermittent fever. A ship from Georgia arrived in July carrying several passengers suffering from a " very contagious distemper " . A few of the sick came into town before Commandant Pattison learned of it and set up a quarantine.*0 Soon after this happened, a fever spread through the city, and proved unusually persistent. There were eleven ill at one time in the household of Judge William Smith, and ten in that of Andrew Elliot. Almost every house, some said, was a hospital, and there were scarcely enough well persons to tend the sick. Most of the cases were agues and intermittent fevers, and fortunately were not fatal, except for the aged. This epidemic lasted until March, 1780, and near the end of October, 1779, was com86

Rivington, Gazette, Jan. 20, 1779.

87

Broadside in Ν. Y . Hist. Soc.

88

Schaukirk, Diary, Aug. 3 1 , 1777.

89

Montresor, Journal,

511.

Pattison, Letters, 232.

PHYSICAL

WELFARE

OF WAR-TIME

POPULATION

95

plicated by several cases of smallpox.91 During this sickly season, Chief Surgeon Nooth, of the general hospital in the city, complained so much of the lack of nurses that each regiment had to provide one woman for every six of its patients; she had to serve or have her rations stopped.*2 As to the care of sickness, the doctors in the city seemed to have as much skill as the average physician in America at that period.' 3 There were few well-trained medical men in this country prior to the Revolution; Judge Jones said that anyone could start a practice regardless of his training. Doctor Dastuge, a private physician, advertised frequently in the New York papers during the occupation, praising his own skill. He had studied in Paris, and claimed to be versed in the secrets of " physics and chirurgery ". Among his many accomplishments was the ability to make artificial teeth and excellent bandages! Other general practitioners in the war-time city were the Doctors Mallet, John Jones, and Gaspardo. The army surgeons were superior to the ordinary civilian doctors because of their better training and wider experience. Dr. Nooth was the most prominent of these, and did valuable work in the general hospital.'* His medical assistants were also good workers, but the nurses were few and inexperienced.*5 For those who did not consult physicians, there were many patent medicines whose virtues were advertised in the newspapers. Maredant's Drops were certain cures for rheumatism, inflamed eyes, and every disorder caused by bad blood. Prussian Powders drove away lice. There were also Jesuit Drops 91 Riedesel, Letters and Journals, 182-87; Smith, Diary, VI, JulyOct., 1779. British Guards Order Book (1779), Oct. 7, 1779, in Ν. Y. Hist. Soc. »> See Packard, Hist, of Medicine in the U. S. 94 Rivington, Gazette, May 20, 1780. ·» British Guards Order Book (i779), Oct. 7, 1779.

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

and Huxham's Tincture of the Bark, Dr. James's Fever Powders and Aneleptic Pills, Dr. Anderson's Scots Pills, Turlington's Balsam, Keyser's Pills, Sugar Plums, and Dr. Bailey's Antiscorbutick Drops, to mention but a few. Sanitation was primitive. The vestry was responsible for cleaning the streets, but could not prevent people from throwing dirt in them, even though Commandant Pattison came to the vestry's aid by ordering all filth to be kept indoors until it was taken away each week at the householder's expense and dumped into the under-water swamps.®* T h e Fresh Water Pond, which partially supplied the town with water, became the receptacle for bones, dirt, and filth; even clothes were washed in it.®7 Such practices naturally contributed to the spread of disease, and the efforts of the authorities to check them were unavailing. The next chapter will bring out the scarcity of water, and the fact that the diet of the people was limited not only in amount but in the kind of fresh food necessary to continue good health. T h e weather, which neither vestry, doctors, nor military officers could control, was another element in the public situation. T h e town was ill-prepared, because of lack of wood and poor housing conditions, to face the hard winters, especially that of 1779-80. Naturally the poor suffered most, as they lived in the worst houses and could ill-afford to buy the high-priced wood. T h e vestry did what it could by distributing fuel to them. The hot summers, particularly that of 1780, were also trying. Both rich and poor were in crowded quarters, and even the rich were prevented by military exigencies from going farther than L o n g Island or the northern part of Manhattan to find cooling breezes. T h e little town of New Y o r k found the obligations of hospitality difficult. Its guests were too numerous for its ••Rivington, Gazette, Mar. 21, 1778; Apr. 19, 1780; Mar. 17, 1782. tr

Ibid., July 29, 1778; British Guards Order Book (1779), June n , 1779.

PHYSICAL

WELFARE

OF WAR-TIME

POPULATION

97

housing facilities. The British army, its prisoners, and the Loyalist refugees considerably outnumbered the American partisans who left it, and the fire of 1776 reduced the available quarters. Military authorities and magnanimous civilians cooperated with some success; but despite their regulations and their charities, soldiers and civilians, rich and poor, neutral, Loyalist, and combatant, all suffered serious inconveniences and hardships.

CHAPTER

V

FOOD AND F U E L

T H E most difficult problem facing the army and the civilian population was that of supplying the city with food. Before the war, the suburbs and the neighboring provinces had sent the town enough food for its needs; but with the advent of hostilities the supply from other colonies was cut off, since the enemy controlled them, and the demand for food was increased both by the coming in of civilians and the needs of a large army. T h e farms of upper Manhattan could not at any time satisfy the requirements of the town at its southern tip. L o n g Island did its share, but not enough to meet the needs of the city, and the activities of American whaleboats made the transference of supplies to Manhattan most precarious throughout the greater part of the war. Because of this, the larger portion of the city's war-time victuals had to be transported from Great Britain and Ireland in great fleets convoyed by British men of war. Y e t difficulties were encountered in this method of supply; there was always danger of capture, particularly after the French fleet arrived in American waters in 1778. The victualling fleets were often delayed in transit and the British Ministry did not provide sufficient advance supplies. During the trans-Atlantic voyages, which usually lasted at least a month, a portion of the food was likely to spoil since there was no method of refrigeration. Food was also obtained by foraging parties f r o m areas held by the enemy; but in this respect the commanders were extremely negligent, miss98

FOOD AND

FUEL

99

ing splendid opportunities to obtain cattle, sheep, and other livestock for the use of the army and civilians through failure to strike at the right time. Even in periods of dire necessity, as when a Cork fleet was delayed, the military leaders seemed content to sit idly by, when the city might easily have been supplied by raiding hostile territory. Another source of food was through the illicit trade with Americans, who had an abundance of food to exchange for the desired English goods with which New York could supply them. It is not known, however, how much was secured in this way, though the amount must have been large in time of necessity. Naturally under such conditions of supply, there were frequent periods of distress during which the population suffered greatly from scarcity of food. Civilians were the first to suffer, since the military officials, who supervised all of the imported food supplies, had to look out first for the interests of the army. The Commander-in-Chief and the Commandant, who controlled food prices, did their best to prevent hoarding and unreasonable raising of prices, but despite their efforts, the cost of living went up at least three hundred percent during the war. This was only natural, for those who had supplies tried their best to secure the highest prices. Then, too, transportation charges raised prices, and the military officials had to take all these things into consideration when drawing up price lists of victuals. The Commander-in-Chief determined the amount of food which each family might buy, and also how much each farmer could keep for his own use. He supported the army commissary department in its demands; this department was the bane of every farmer's existence, for it could force the farmer, loyal or enemy, to sell his crops at a stated price, fair or otherwise, and seldom took into consideration the farmer's own needs. Such actions naturally alienated the farmer, who would often hide his supply to prevent its being

joo

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

practically plundered by army agents, thus making the army even more dependent upon imported goods. The imported supplies were primarily for the use of the army, but since the neighborhood could not produce enough to take care of an increased civilian population, the military leaders had to sell part of the army rations to non-combatants in order to prevent serious distress. Some indication of the large amount of food transported from the Mother Country may be found in a report of the shipment of foodstuffs from Cork to New York and Philadelphia during the three-year period from 1776 to 1778, as well as the amount for which the British government contracted for the use of the army in 1779. Two hundred and twenty-nine ships carried 5,691,138 pounds of beef, 20,499,358 pounds of pork, 40,372,388 pounds of bread and flour, 2 3 1 , 4 1 9 bushels of peas, 4,860,354 pounds of oatmeal and rice, and 2,154,052 pounds of butter. The meat was calculated to last 40,cxx) men at least 1,039 days, the bread and flour, 1,009 days, peas, oatmeal, and rice, 1,282 days, and the butter, ι ,005 days. Furthermore, there was to be shipped from Cork in February, 1779, enough food to supply 32,000 men for four months. T o compensate for the amount lost or captured on the voyage across the Atlantic, however, a two weeks' consumption was deducted.1 As we shall see, the victualling fleets did not always arrive on schedule, and these supplies often failed. Both the army and the inhabitants of New York then suffered from lack of food. Immediately after the recovery of Long Island by the British in September, 1776, the Loyalists of that island were forced to contribute to the needs of the military. To prevent their enemies from gaining possession of large herds of cattle, the Americans had driven them within their own 1

Curtis, The Organisation of the British Army in the American Revolution, 172, quoting Treasury Mss. in Public Record Office.

FOOD

AND

FUEL

101

lines, but the British victory was so quick and overwhelming that the Americans scarcely had time to transport even themselves and their ordnance to Manhattan Island, and the round-up herds were taken easily by the invaders. General Howe, partly to placate the inhabitants, announced that those who could prove their loyalty and produce affidavits of ownership might regain their property. Actually, however, only the milch cows and the lean calves were returned; the wellfed cattle were turned over to the commissary department for the troops, who, since leaving Halifax, had subsisted largely on salted meats. The owners did not grumble for they were promised full payment. When the campaign of 1776 ended victoriously for the British, those who owned the beef used by the troops applied for payment; contrary to expectation, they were refused any money whatsoever for their losses. The historian, Thomas Jones, a staunch Loyalist, but a stern critic of wrongdoers regardless of party, claimed that the British Treasury expended for this beef a large sum, which was not paid to the owners but pocketed by General Howe and Commissary Chaumier. 2 In October, 1776, the commissary department directed John Hewlett of Jamaica to bring in cattle and sheep for the army. Upon delivery, receipts were given to the owners, payable at a certain time and place. These receipts caused the farmers much trouble, since the collection of their claims often meant a journey of many miles to the commissary department; even then their claims were frequently rejected or delayed on the ground of insufficient proof. Those who bought animals from farmers on the pretense that they were to be used for the military had to have a written order from an army official, or else their purchases were seized by the commissary, who also confiscated all rebelowned cattle and sheep.8 2

Jones, Hist, of New York, I, 115.

» Ν. Y. Packet, Feb. 20, 1786.

NEW YORK DURING WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

The capture of Fort Washington in the middle of November, 1776, opened communication with the Jerseys and the lower Hudson Valley so that farmers from those districts could more easily bring in their provisions.4 This did not lower the cost, for it was claimed that as early as 1777 market prices had advanced eight hundred percent," particularly for fresh meat and vegetables.® T o keep down these prices, the military authorities issued proclamations limiting the amount that could be charged either to civilians or to the army commissariat. Bread was the first article so regulated by an assize (an old custom in New York) of January, 1777; after learning the price of the best flour, and considering the increasing cost of labor and fuel, the Commandant fixed fourteen pence as a fair price for a loaf weighing three and a quarter pounds, with those of lesser weight selling proportionally. The baker who attempted to sell at a higher price was arrested, and his bread was given to the poor.7 This may sound severe, but conditions in the city necessitated stringent rules especially to protect the citizens. As the year 1777 advanced, however, prices continued to rise in spite of military regulation; nor did the food gain in quality; one diarist called it " poison ". 8 The cost of living became so high by the middle of October that General Tryon issued a list of foodstuffs on which he placed maxi* Schaukirk, Diary, Nov. 16, 1776; Stokes, Iconography, V, 1039, quoting London Packet, Jan. 1-3, 1777. * Ν. Y. City during Amer. Rev., 153-54· See also Penna. Packet, Feb. 19, 1777· * Upcott. Coll., V, 497 Gaine, Mercury, Jan. 13, 1777. For other regulations, see Col. Rees, of Ν. Y. Chamber of Commerce, 349. «Schaukirk, Diary, Aug. 31, 1777; Journal of Hugh Gaine, II, 53; Stevens, Facsimiles, nos. 707, 714.

FOOD AND FUEL

103

mum prices,* and in December, Sir Henry Clinton also issued an order to prevent excessive charge by farmers for the necessities of life; they were required to give an accounting of all grain on hand and an estimate of the quantity they would need for their personal uses before the next crop was * The following price lists indicate the cost of living in the city during the war: Ν. Y. GaztUt, Ν. Y. GauUt, Ν. Y. Gatetie, Ν. Y. Mercury, Sept.,'75 Oct.,'77 May-Dec.,'78 Mar .-Dec., *8i Wheat Flour Brown Bread . . . West India Rum. . New England Ram. Muscavado Sugar . Single Ref. Sugar, Beef (bbl.) . . . Pork (bbl.) . . . Fine Salt . . . . Coarse Salt. . . . Indian Com . . . Tea Coffee Molasses

7s, 6d 20s

10s 32»

12s 35s

14s

28s

40-45S

70s

6s, 6d 5s

45-58$

IOOS

is, 2d 65s £5 3s, 6d 3s 3s, 6d-4s

2s, 8d

£5, 10s

55 6d 4s

3s 2s, 6d

4s, 6d-8s

6s 5s, 6d 7s ios is, 6d 23, 9d~4s

26s 70»

£$,

2s 90-120s isos-£s,ios 4s, 6d 3-4S 7s

10s is, gd £i ios 2s is ics

is, 6-9d 3s, 6d

is 2s, 6d

Rivington, Gasette, Oct., 1783: Beef (lb.), 6d-is; Mutton (lb.), 7d-is,6d; Lamb (lb.), iod; Veal (lb.), i s - i s , 6d; Fowl, 4S-4S, 6d; Turkeys (8 lb.), 6s; Potatoes (bu.), 3s, 6d; Indian Meal (cwt.), 16s; Butter (lb.), 2s, 6d. Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 1220.

(Certified by Adam Ferguson) Feb., 1778

Beef (tierce) Pork (bbl.) Flour (cwt.) Bread (cwt.) Sugar (lb.) Cheese (lb.) Spirits (gal.) Molasses (gal.) Butter (lb.)

£$ £5, ios £1, 15s £1, 15s is, 6d is, 3d 6s, 6d 2s, 6d is, 6d

Nov., 1778 ios £10 £6, ios £s, 15s as, 3d 2s, 6d 16s 5s 2s

Cat. Rev. Mss., I, 671: Feb., 1777, Beef (lb.), 18s; Butter (lb.), 4s; Mutton (lb.), is, 6d; Veal (lb.), is, 6d; Turkey, ios; Cabbage, 2s; Milk (qt.), i s ; Salt Hay (cwt.), 9s; no fresh hay, wheat, Indian Corn, or oats to be had; damaged flour ( c w t ) , 33s.

I 0 4

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

ready. 10 A s a result, the surplus might be readily requisitioned and the commissary would know just how grain was available. Despite these attempts to keep a sufficient reserve of foodstuffs, the winter of 1 7 7 7 caused much suffering among the inhabitants. Because floor was scarce and cost four pounds a hundredweight, the people lived mainly on imported rice, which was plentiful; 1 1 in May, 1778, civilians had to register at the superintendent's office to get the precious flour." The arrival of the French fleet in July prevented the entrance of any British supply ships and the town became wholly dependent on its reserve and on the neighboring farmers. Although the French fleet did not remain long, the Cork fleets could no longer sail to New Y o r k unafraid, for they had more to guard against than the few American privateers. While D'Estaing was still outside the harbor, there were only nine weeks' rations in the army commissary; two weeks later Clinton said that the coming of the next victualling fleet was a " material consideration " , and there was serious danger of its capture because the French knew of its approach. 13 William Eden thought the odds were in favor of at least a part of the supplies arriving in August or September, but he, too, believed that if they did not come and no other fleet was sent immediately, the city must be evacuated." T o conserve the supply on hand as long as possible, peas and oatmeal were served 10

11 12

14

Rivington, Gazette, Dec. 27, 1777. The prices fixed were: Bushel of wheat (58 lbs.) 12s Bu. of rye or Indian corn 7s Rye flour (cwt.) 20s Merchantable wheat flour (cwt.) 35s Indian meal (cwt) 17s Gaine, Mercury, May 5, 1777; Penna. Mag. (1887), 137. Rivington, Gazette, May 16, 1778. Stevens, Facsimiles, nos. 844, 1123; Montresor, Journal, 507. Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 512.

FOOD

AND

FUEL

to the soldiers instead of their customary ration, while their wives and children received but a quarter instead of their regular one-half doles. Hunger, it was said, drove men to plundering more frequently, so that the Long Island farmers sold their cattle, poultry, and other stock rather than risk their being stolen." The fire of August 3 increased the misery by burning a four weeks' food supply for the army. 1 * August 25, however, was a day of rejoicing, for the victualling fleet arrived from Cork with a supply which was expected to last six months. The delay had been occasioned by its proceeding to the Delaware in the belief that the main body of the army was still in Philadelphia. When the fleet finally came in, it was said that only a five weeks' reserve remained in the storehouses. 1 ' Commissioner Eden reported that New York had " escaped a famine miraculously " ; he severely blamed the ministry for the suspense, claiming that although the cabinet had ordered the evacuation of Philadelphia in March, the needed supplies were sent there at the end of May, two months later. It was fortunate indeed, he reiterated, that the fleet had not been captured.18 For fresh vegetables the city was dependent on the contiguous countryside since they could not be transported from Europe, and the inhabitants were severely troubled when the American whaleboats operating in the Sound began to interfere with the market boats coming to the city. 19 The green goods which did arrive were mostly sold in the public markets in the town: the Fly Market, at Maiden Lane and 1 5 Holt, Ν. Y. Journal, A u g . 10, 1778; Penna. Packet, Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 844. 18

July 25, 1778;

Penna. Packet, Aug. 15, 1778.

Montresor, Journal, 5 1 1 ; Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 519; Smith, Diary, V I , Aug. 25, 1778. IT

18

Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 519.

19

Gaine, Mercury, Sept. 7, 1778.

I0

6

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

Pearl Street; the Fish Market, on Dock Street, one block north of Broad; the Old Ship Market, on the corner of Dock and William Streets; Peck's Slip Market, on Peck's Slip near Queen Street; and the Oswego Market, at the junction of Broadway and Crown Street.20 After 1780, the hours were limited during which butchers, greenwomen, poulterers, vegetable sellers, and hucksters could be in these markets; the Chamber of Commerce believed that such regulation would be " attended with very good effects " for the inhabitants. It was further ordered that no fresh meat, vegetables, or poultry should be kept in stores or cellars.21 Fresh meat was obtained from New England when General Grey brought back approximately two thousand sheep, one thousand fat cattle, and fifteen hundred hogs.22 Once again it was claimed that the commissaries cheated the Royal Treasury, this time by charging it at the rate of two shillings, sterling, for stock that had cost them nothing." Another avenue of supply was cleared when Clinton's campaigns of October-November, 1778, in the Hudson Highlands opened parts of Jersey and New York to the British, and the city received a " considerable supply of provisions ". 2 * Yet even with these large quantities of captured supplies, prices were not lowered. Lord Carlisle wrote to his wife in September: " How people exist in this town is to the great20 For a more detailed description of these city markets, see DeVoe, Market Book. 21 22

Col. Rees. of Ν. Y. Chamber of Commerce, 208-09. Jones, Hist, of New York, I, 278; Andre, Journal, II, 39-44.

2S Jones, Hist, of New York, I, 278 et seq. Other facts connected with the war, which some claimed was really to rob the British Treasury, bear out these statements of Judge Jones, who was in close touch with the military officials and had much inside information until the time of his capture. 24 Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 1176; Stokes, Iconography, V, 1075, quoting St. James Chronicle, Nov. 7-10, 1778.

FOOD AND FUEL

107

est degree wonderful. All the necessaries of life are dear beyond exception. Meat is from 15 to 17 pence a pound, and everything else in proportion ". The relation between prices in England and New York is shown by Carlisle's comparison : " New York weekly bills come to as much as the house account at Castle Howard when we have the most company In November, 1778, less than three months after the arrival of the Cork fleet which was supposed to have carried a six months' supply, another serious shortage was reported. Navy rations were reduced to two-thirds of the regular allotment, and the army store was not plentiful. Graft in the navy department was given as one cause of the scarcity, for it was said that Admiral Gambier was a " money-getting pompous fool ", whose schemes to fill his pockets were quite " unlike an officer of his station By Christmas, only a small amount of fresh meat was served to each soldier, and the rest of the dole consisted of rum, butter, peas, and salted meats. Flour and bread were unknown luxuries; Admiral Gambier had to mix flour, oatmeal, and Indian meal to make biscuits,27 and when an admiral was reduced to such a necessity, one can imagine the fare of the common sailors and soldiers, not to mention the civilians who were served last. At the end of the year the provision depots were entirely empty. City bakers were prevented by official order from plying their trade so that every particle of flour might be saved for the army. Fortunately, two Cork victuallers sailed into New York early in January, 1779, when hope was almost gone." To prevent future worries, Sir Henry 25 28 27 28 29

Quoted in Trevelyan, American Revolution, pt. ii, vol. ii, 142. Kemble, Journal, I, 167. Von Krafft, Journal, 74-75; Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 1232. Von Krafft, Journal, 77; Kemble, Journal, I, 170. Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 1240; Schaukirk, Diary, Jan. 12, 1779.

χθ8

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

Clinton believed that New Y o r k should always have a year's supply of food on hand, particularly since the arrival of the French fleet in American waters. If one victualling fleet were captured, he said, hope of holding the city would be futile under existing conditions.30 The year 1 7 7 9 was one of plenty compared with the previous one, but prices remained so high that even the wealthy, it was claimed, felt severely burdened.81 Fresh meat became more of a luxury as the herds in the vicinity were exhausted by the heavy demands of the commissary. T o save the remaining stock, William Smith tried in vain to prevail upon Admiral Gambier to lend the Chamber of Commerce six hundred drag nets for sea fishing on a large scale.82 A t the same time, refugees and loyal farmers on Long Island were allowed to work the farms of rebel owners in order to increase the area under cultivation and consequently the amount of produce.88 Civilians and soldiers suffered during the exceptional winter of 1779-80. The snow began to fall in the early part of November and continued almost daily until the middle of the following March, when in some places it lay four feet deep on the level, which made travel extremely difficult.8* The island was practically isolated before January, since the rivers were filled with ice too thick for boats to pass to and fro, but not compact enough for sleds to be drawn across it, so the transportation of provisions and wood was impossible. By the middle of the month, however, all the waters 80

Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 5 3 1 ; Hist. Mag., ist. ser., V , 363.

81

Stokes, Iconography, V , 1066, quoting Lloyd's 25-26, 1779. 32

Evening

Post, June

Smith, Diary, V I , July 9, 1779.

33

Ibid., V I , July 9, 1779. See also Rivington, Gazette, Mar. 1 1 , 1780; Ν. Y. Col. Docs., V I I I , 801. 34

Jones, Hist, of New York, I, 320; Riedesel, Letters and Journals, 171.

FOOD

AND

FUEL

109

around the city were frozen solidly enough for men, sleds, and even cannon to cross the ice; 3 5 at one time eighty sleds loaded with provisions for the troops isolated on Staten Island were driven across the icy harbor." The ice did not break until the evening of February 22, after having formed a bridge to the Jersey shore for thirty-six days." Meantime, as the supply of food diminished, prices continued to rise. The freezing of the rivers and bays around Manhattan Island made it possible for provisions to be transported over the ice; but on the other hand it correspondingly prevented the arrival of victuals from Europe and from eastern Long Island, and this more than made up for the slight advantage gained. Two natural causes also combined to decrease the local supply during the spring of 1780. A severe drought, combined with the cold, prevented the usual growth of grass and made the feeding of livestock a problem. At the same time an insect pestilence attacked the fruit buds, delaying the crop and indeed almost destroying it. 18 General Schuyler might have exchanged provisions for bullion and other things which the American army needed had not Washington forbidden it.89 Both sides would have been benefited, but it savored too much of illicit trade which both sides were trying to prevent. Toward the close of the winter, as a result, everyone " except the rich and dissolute " was put on short rations, and the troops were served oatmeal biscuits said to be as coarse and nutritive as ground straw.40 The difficult situation was finally relieved " Hardie, Description of N. F., 94; Smith, Diary, V I , Jan., 1780; Jones, Hist, of New York, I, 320; Schaukirk, Diary, Feb. 4, 1780. se

Rivington, Gazette, Feb. 2-9, 1780; Journal of Hugh Gaine, II, 79.

« Smith, Diary, V I , Feb. 22, 1780. « Ibid., V I , May 27, 1780. 38

Ibid., V I , Dec. 28, 1779.

40

Ν. Y . Hist. Soc. Pamphlet, vol. 238, 58.

no

NEW

YORK DURING WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

by the arrival of a victualling fleet when navigation was reopened. Not until 1 7 8 1 did the ministry carefully consider how the troops and inhabitants could be properly provided f o r ; 4 1 then estimates and contracts were drawn up, and a sufficient supply was planned for each garrison. These plans, however, could not remove the time factor which proved disastrous all through the war. There were no refrigerated ships, and much of the food was spoiled on the trip across the Atlantic. A n investigation conducted in New Y o r k in July, 1782, showed that at the victualling stores, seventy-five barrels of pork and eleven of beef were unfit to eat. Countless barrels of butter, oatmeal, flour, and peas had to be thrown into the river because of mould. G r a f t was again in evidence, for six barrels, sold to the government as containing fine flour, were found to contain " sweepings of stores and bake houses, rags, paper, and old hats " . One barrel contained what appeared to be a composition of " flour, meal, peas, and d i r t " . " Such foods, then sold to the civilians or rationed to the troops, caused a great deal of sickness so that the supplies had to be carefully watched.48 The citizens were cheated when they bought English butter by invoice, because a firkin of butter, it was said, lost from one to four pounds in weight on its shipment across the Atlantic. Finally, after many popular objections, the Chamber of Commerce ordered firkins to be weighed separately on arrival ; 4 * this eliminated one evil, but the greater ones remained. News of the signing of the preliminary peace treaty 11 42

Barham Papers, II, 48-49.

Rep. on Amer. Mss., I l l , 43. 43 Montresor, Journal, 512. ** Col. Rees, of Ν. Y. Chamber of Commerce, 227; Miscellaneous Mss., in Ν. Y. Hist. Soc.

FOOD

AND

FUEL

III

changed the aspect of things, for the Prohibitory Act was no longer enforced. Food was brought in in abundance by the Americans and prices dropped, especially those of flour, rum, molasses, and coffee; therefore it was claimed that the high prices during the war had been " artificial Farmers drove in livestock to be slaughtered in the markets, assuring fresh meat,48 and Scott and Allingham, merchants of the town, added a further inducement to the incoming Whigs by taking American produce in exchange for their own goods.47 This was beneficial to both parties, since one lacked merchandise, the other provisions. Nevertheless, a little more than a week before the evacuation, foodstuffs were still higher than in pre-war days, although supplies of all kinds kept pouring in; lack of ready gold, which the victorious farmers demanded, was probably the cause.48 In summary, the cost of meat and flour advanced rapidly during the war, although many of the staples remained almost stationary. Wheat which sold for 7s, 6d in 1775, brought 26s in 1781, flour cost 20s in 1775 and two and a half times as much six years later, brown bread which cost 14s in 1775, sold for 70s in 1781, and beef increased in price from 65s to £8 during the same period. These few examples of the ascending scale of the cost of living during the British occupation will give an idea of one of the hardships which the inhabitants had to face during the war. Closely related to the food supply, is the question of the fuel used to cook the food, and to provide warmth for the people. The chief article of fuel, as before the war, was wood. Coal, transported principally from England, was not 45

Schaulark, Diary, Feb. 14, 1783.

48

Gaine, Mercury, June 16, 1783.

47

Rivington, Gazette, June 21, 1783.

Stokes, Iconography, V, 1171, quoting London Chronicle, Dec.18-20, 1783, quoting a letter from New York dated Nov. 16, 1783. 48

112

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

burned in any quantity and cost too much for general use. A t the beginning of the war, there was an abundant supply of timber in the uncultivated areas near the city, but the needs of a large army and an increased civilian population rapidly reduced this supply and much was wasted by wanton or unwise cutting. Prices of fuel increased, and, as in the case of food, the military authorities had to fix maximum prices. T h e barrack department played almost the same role in obtaining wood as the commissariat had in securing food. Private supplies of all kinds were seized by the barrack master, whose actions were upheld by the Commander-in-Chief; this lack of respect for private property alienated many local citizens. The army was, however, the first to be considered, although the military leaders also tried in some measure to supply the needs of the civilian population. The chief sources of supply were L o n g Island and Staten Island, which had abundant timber reserves. T h e trees on rebel estates were cut first, since the government never had to pay for them, except to meet the expenses of cutting and carting. A s this supply dwindled, Loyalist timber had to be taken, and in time Manhattan Island was almost deforested, including the trees within the city's limits. T h i s was largely due to lack of foresight on the part of the military officials, who frequently waited until the last moment to stock up for the winter, thus causing much hardship for military and civilians alike. A s early as October, 1776, the Hessians cut down all the available saplings near their camps on L o n g Island and carted them away in impressed wagons. 4 ' They used extravagant quantities, and often seized rails from fences to keep their watch fires blazing all night, to the great inconvenience of the farmers. T h e capture of Fort Washington was regarded at the time as an act o f Providence, for it was believed that wood, which had been scarce and expensive, could ** Barclay, Diary, 26, 48.

FOOD AND

FUEL

"3

thereafter be brought in from Jersey and upper New York. Yet the price then was four pounds for a cord of oak, and two months later it sold for five pounds, though before the war the same amount could have been purchased for twenty shillings. 60 The cause of scarcity and high prices at the beginning was that the British troops secured possession of the city just as cold weather was coming on. The soldiers needed fires at once, and the supply of cut wood that was easily available was quickly consumed. This, together with the knowledge that civilians' wood piles might be confiscated for the use of the army at any time, made the price of fuel high. The experience of the first winter caused early preparations for the next, and in July 1777, Commandant Pigot permitted civilians to cut wood on the lands of certain persons in rebellion.51 Despite these plans, the outlook for the ensuing winter was gloomy. With the North River above New Y o r k still in the hands of the Americans, wood was hard to obtain from the north. 52 B y November, the boatmen and wood sellers were charging such exorbitant prices that Commandant Jones had to fix a maximum charge for wood and its transportation, or else there would have been " no bounds to their extortion ". Walnut was limited to five pounds a cord, and not more than four pounds could be charged for any other kind. If the cutters held their wood for higher prices, their boats were seized and manned by more responsible and loyal persons. Owners of wood were ordered to sell to cutters at a reasonable price, under penalty of confiscation.53 This caused a temporary overstocking of the 50 Schaukirk, Diary, Nov. 10, 1776; Penna. Gazette, Feb. 19, 1777; Journal of Hugh Gaine, II, 25. 51

Emmet Collection, no. 2382, in Ν. Y. Public Library. Schaukirk, Diary, Aug. 31, 1777. 83 Rivington, Gazette, Nov. 22, 1777.

52

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

market, and a month later General Robertson reduced the cost of walnut to four pounds and other woods to fifty-five shillings, 54 prices still regarded as excessive. 55 In July, 1778, the military government decided that the inhabitants of Gravesend and Yellow Hook on Long Island should furnish the city with fuel, 5 " and in the fall of the year, the poor were allowed to cut trees on rebel estates on the same island." Spruce trees were excepted, however to make the beer which helped to avert scurvy, a sickness resulting from constant use of salted meats.58 The winter of 177879 was long and severe and at one time the thermometer dropped four degrees lower than it had for seven years." A s a result of the need for more fires, the price of wood went up again. 40 During such severe times, army officials seized wood arbitrarily for the use of soldiers, securing their supplies from every possible source; a typical case is that of Mrs. Roger Morris. In July, 1779, Mrs. Morris, aided by Judge William Smith, tried to prevent General Tryon from wasting the timber on her Morrisania estate; but Tryon refused to listen to any pleas, since the King's troops had to be supplied, even though Mrs. Morris was deprived of valuable property, the sale of which might have freed her from debt. N o attention was paid to the ardent loyalism of Mrs. Morris and her husband. When Smith intimated that Tryon might have to answer to Lord Mansfield for his acts, the General replied that Parliament would sustain him. " Is it "Rivington, Gazette, Jan. 3, 1778. 55

Penno. Mag. (1887), 137.

86

Maryland Loyalist Order Book, 30-31.

" Rivington, Gazette, Nov. 14, 1778. 58

Maryland Loyalist Order Book, 31-32.

59

Gaine, Mercury, Dec. 28, 1778; Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 548; Smith, Diary, V I , Mar. 20-22, 1779. 60

Rivington, Gazette, Dec. 2, 1778.

FOOD AND

FUEL

" 5

right," asked Smith, " to destroy the property of K i n g ' s f r i e n d s ? " T r y o n answered, " T h e y will be paid f o r it." " Will they? " countered Smith. " Maybe so, after the war is over," smiled Tryon. 4 1 In many other instances inhabitants were treated with as little consideration, the despoilers counting on their superiors to support them. The needs of the troops counted more than the friendship and loyalty of the countryside. It was war, and the army was all important, but the officers might have been more tactful. A s the winter of 1779-80 advanced, there were fresh complaints that no adequate measures were taken to gather wood. Various reasons were given f o r this neglect, the chief one being the indifference of the Commandant; it was claimed that had he put two thousand men at work on L o n g Island, the city might have been supplied f o r a year in two weeks' time.®2 In October, William Smith paid six dollars f o r a load of green sticks and thought he was lucky to procure that, for many had no wood of any kind. Not until November 23 did Clinton realize the shortage; then he ordered all cut wood on L o n g Island and Staten Island to be brought to the city immediately, 63 f o r although six hundred cords, it was said, were used by military and civilians each week during the winter, only seventy cords of wood and eighty chaldrons of coal remained in the depots. Soldiers had only two-thirds of their allowance, and the sugar houses and distilleries were called upon to give up their surplus. A thousand cords hoarded on Staten Island were seized and quickly brought to New Y o r k . " General Smith employed three hundred men in Brooklyn in the woods nearest the ferry 81

Smith, Diary, V I , July 10,

1770.

Lord Mansfield was firm in trying those guilty of malfeasance in office. 62

Ibid., V I , Oct. 5, 1779.

83

Rivington, Gazette, Nov. 24, 1779.

64

Pattison, Letters,

302-06, 3 1 7 - 1 9 .

!X6

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

landings, disregarding private property. In general, however, the private supplies of the citizens were not seized for military u s e . " By January, 1780, no wood could be brought to Manhattan Island since the rivers were not solidly frozen, and it was feared that the island would be deforested within a week while three thousand cords lay useless on the opposite shores. Despite Pattison's order to the contrary, fruit trees, ornamental, and shade trees in the city were cut down for fuel."® The trees near the battery were destroyed in spite of many objections, and old ships, were broken up, as well as uninhabited shacks, sheds, and garden fences. The poor even resorted, it was asserted, to burning fat for the little warmth it would give; often two or three families would gather in the same house to conserve wood, and some were frozen to death in their homes. Of course the little wood available was exorbitant in price." B y the middle of January, however, the ice was solid in the rivers and wood could be brought on sleds from Long Island."8 The disastrous effects of this winter were felt long afterwards. Washington's reconnoitering expedition in 1 7 8 1 reported that Manhattan Island was " totally stripped of trees and wood of every kind ", 69 and Lieutenant Von K r a f f t , on returning to the Hessian hut encampments near Fort Knyphausen in October, 1780, found the place almost unrecognizable be63

Smith, Diary, V I , Dec. 22, 1779.

1,6

Von Krafft, Journal, 103; Smith, Diary, VI, Jan. 5-8, 1780; Pattison, Letters, 341-43, 363; Jones, Hist, of New York, I, 320 et seq. 87 Riedesel, Letters and Journals, 169-76; Von Krafft, Journal, 103; Ν. Y. Hist. Soc. Pamphlet, vol. 238, 58; Stedman, Hist, of Amer. War, II, 234; Hardie, Description of New York, 94; Smith, Diary, V I , Jan. 14, 1780. 88

Pattison, Letters,

69

Mag. of Amer. Hist., V I , 120-31.

371, Smith, Diary, V I , Feb. 7, 1780.

FOOD AND

FUEL

117

cause of the removal of trees and bushes. 70 A new and saner policy was adopted for the next winter, f o r as early as June, 1780, preparations were made to fill the New York barrack yard, and Commandant Robertson issued long and detailed orders for cutting, cording, and carting wood from the Long Island counties. 11 The British evacuation of Rhode Island and other posts, with the consequent increase in the number of soldiers and civilians lodged in New York, doubled the fuel consumption and increased the price of wood. S o great was the cost to government, that a comprehensive survey was made by a group of general officers. They discovered that in 1 7 7 7 and 1778, wood had been procured at a fairly moderate price, everthing considered, while large quantities gathered from rebel estates cost the government, on an average, only thirtyfive shillings for cutting and carting; but as the supply on Manhattan Island diminished, and that near the Long Island landings became scarcer, the barrack officials had to pay between seventy-five and eighty shillings. F o r the year ending August, 1 7 8 1 , forty-eight thousand cords were issued to soldiers and civilians. 72 With such consumption, it is no wonder that the islands were deforested. Severely cold winters in 1 7 8 1 and 1782 did not help matters. The price of wood continued to rise, and civilians complained more and more of arbitrary acts of the military in obtaining what little timber was left. The once beautiful estate of Nicholas Jones of Bloomingdale was robbed of seven hundred trees,73 John Stone of Flushing lost five hundred and fifty cords of 70

Von Krafft, Journal, 122-23, 128.

71

Rivington, Gazette, June 17, 1780; Jones, Hist, of New York, II, 26 et seq. 72

Minute Book of Gen. Board of Brit. Officers, 100 et seq.

73

Miscellaneous Mss., in Ν. Y . Hist. Soc.

ι J8

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

wood valued at more than two thousand pounds, 74 and Charles Apthorp of Bloomingdale valued at £15,366 the timber removed from his estate by the King's forces." W a t e r supply was another vital problem for the military and civilian population. E v e n before the war, fresh water of good quality was scarce and high in price." 1 T h e opening of hostilities prevented the completion of wooden pipe lines in the city, which had been partially laid by Christopher Colles. Consequently the garrison and citizens had to depend for their supply on the Fresh Water Pond, the T e a Water Pump, and private wells; even these were contaminated by refuse, as we have already learned. In the northern part of the Island, the drinking water was poor and caused some sickness among the soldiers; 7 7 scarcity did not cause real suffering until near the end of the war. In the summer of 1782, a drought dried up most of the wells in town. Soldiers sent out to dig for water could find only the smallest springs even at the depth of forty feet. Vendors sold the precious article at stupendous prices, and at that it was of poor quality. 78 T h e British officials had more to do than plan campaigns and protect their gains; they had to provide the necessities of life for the civilian inhabitants of New Y o r k as well as for their own men. Considering the isolation of the city, the slowness of ocean travel, and the many dangers from the French fleet and the American privateers, they did their work well. Y e t they were criticised, sometimes without reason, during periods of hardship, hunger, and cold; for prices increased, as is usual in time of war, and the officials 71

Loyalist Transcripts, vol. 44, 513.

" Ibid., vol. 17, 577; vol. 46, 5. 78

Eddis, Letters from America, 426.

77

V o n Krafft, Journal, 71.

78

Ibid., 167.

FOOD AND

FUEL

119

could not overcome the law of supply and demand. On the other hand, it is a wonder that with all the hardships endured and self-sacrifice practiced by the Loyalists, there was not more defection from the royal cause. Perhaps this could be accounted for in two ways: because the Loyalists were content to endure temporary discomfort for the sake of ultimate victory, and because there was not much else to do but stay and make the best of things.

CHAPTER

VI

C O M M E R C E AND B U S I N E S S

IF New Y o r k City had not been accustomed to British restrictions on her external trade, particularly after the French and Indian War, and had not her internal business been regulated by many ordinances of the Common Council, she might have felt more severely the stern provisions of the Prohibitory Act and the sometimes harsh regulations of the British military government. These were the inevitable effects of war and military occupation. Yet, as in the case of the control of the necessities of life, the military government was charged with injustice. A war was in progress, however, and the city was in the hands of a combatant army. Considerate as the officers tried to be of civilian interests, their primary duty was to see that sufficient supplies went to their army and none to the enemy. If the orders restricting business were more severe and more strictly enforced than before the war, it was largely for military reasons, not with the intent to embarrass the inhabitants; indeed most of the regulations were calculated to benefit consumers by endeavoring to keep down the rising cost of living. With the increase in living expenses, the price of labor went up; but only in those industries involving the public interest did the military authorities interfere to keep down wages. A s before the war, the largest profits were derived from shipping. This was regulated both by the general laws effective before the war and by the Prohibitory Act passed after its outbreak. During the first war years, shippers and traders were prevented by the Prohibitory Act of January 120

COMMERCE

AND

BUSINESS

χ2ΐ

ι , 1776, 1 from exporting merchandise from the port of New Y o r k until it should be declared at peace. The act stipulated, however, that special export licenses might be obtained f r o m the Commander-in-Chief or the Commissioners for Restoring Peace, but few such permits were issued until later in the war. Furthermore, there being no external trade, no export duties were collected until 1780. The Prohibitory Act allowed merchants to import goods from England, but did not allow them to export in exchange. The struggle to regain the right to trade was not settled until the Commissioners for Restoring Peace made some concessions in 1778. In view of the one-sided trade, the city would have been rapidly drained of its specie had not the British army brought its own military chest 2 and thereby saved the million-dollar private trade which it was claimed the city enjoyed; 3 for the army was a potential buyer and the merchants were also helped by an increased civilian population. The various kinds of money used before the war continued to circulate, though there was naturally a great influx of English coin. The most generally used money was the pound sterling and the New Y o r k pound, worth half as much; but Spanish milled dollars were also much in evidence, together with Portuguese half-johannes and moidores, proof of the earlier wide trade of the city. 4 1

1 6 George III, Cap. 5; 4 Amer. Arch., I, 1691, 1716. For the difficulty in determining the amount of shipping from the city during the war, see Rep. on Amer. Mss., IV, 457-58. 2

Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 531.

8

Upcott Coll., IV, 87.

* On April 30, 1777. General Howe issued a currency rate to facilitate money changing. Gaine, Mercury, May 12, 1777. Guinea weighing 5 pennyweight, 7 grains £1 17s 4d Half-johannes " 9 " 3 " 3 4 Moidore " 6 " 22 " 2 8 Spanish dollar 8 English shilling 1 9 In the figures given, the pounds are in New York currency unless otherwise stated.

122

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

Though New York merchants were, it was said, looked upon as honorable before the war, 5 opinions were less favorable after hostilities began. A royal agent, accusing them of profiteering, complained two years later of enormous " peculation in every profitable branch of the service " , particularly in groceries.® Merchants could not be entirely blamed, for the heads of the army departments set them an extremely bad example, desiring only to fill their purses and make " hay while the sun shineth ", 7 There was no redress from extortions of the military, but the merchants were stopped in their attempts to raise prices, partially at least, by military orders. Shippers were aided by New York's excellent harbor, which their merchant vessels 8 were constantly entering despite the war. There were probably almost no merchant vessels there during actual hostilities on account of fear of bombardment: once the British were in possession, there was no danger of that, and by the end of October, 1776, there were almost five hundred vessels in New York harbor." Probably a great majority of these were privately owned mercantile ships, as less than one hundred armed vessels had arrived off Sandy Hook in July and August. 1 0 Each issue of the New York papers told of the increasing activity of these merchant ships. The extent and variety of the merchant trade may also be 8

Willard, Letters on the Amer. Rev., 167.

β

Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 707.

7

Schaukirk, Diary, Dec. 16, 1780. same opinions.

Judges Smith and Jones give the

8 Beatson, Naval and Military Memoirs of Great Britain front ιγιγ to 1783, I V - V I , gives adequate accounts of the British naval power in American waters. 9 New York Mercury, Oct. 28, 1776. Ibid., Oct. 7, 1776, said this was the largest array of ships seen in America. 10

Beatson, Naval and Military Memoirs, I V , note 44, lists 82 warships.

COMMERCE

AND

BUSINESS

123

judged from an invoice of sundries shipped by Glassford, Gordon, Monteith, and Company of Glasgow, in the ship Catharine, to Neil Jamieson, who ran a general store and wholesale business in the city. T h e cargo consisted of four hundred and one bales, casks, and other containers, holding a diversity of articles of use and l u x u r y : vari-colored calicoes, muslins, cambrics, hair trunks, tartar emetic, foolscap paper, grills, ink, sealing wax, flannel, silk knee-garters, waistcoats, spotted rugs, blankets, ropes and canvas, ivory combs, saddles, felt hats, penknives, assorted dishes, shears, saws, and wines. T h e total value of the cargo, including insurance (which then amounted to eight guineas a hundred weight), freight, import charges, and storage came to £ i 2 , 4 6 4 . u New Y o r k ' s position was, however, exceptional, because on account of her isolated situation, she was dependent on foreign trade for almost everything, certainly for most of her luxuries. S o important had the trade problem become by July 17, 1777, that General Howe issued his first trade decree which regulated " all imports and exports to and from the Islands of New Y o r k , L o n g Island, and Staten Island ", with the exception of transports, victuallers, and prizes, to prevent cargoes " from being clandestinely conveyed to the rebels ". This proclamation gave definite regulations for the entry and departure of goods. All masters of merchantmen had to make a proper entry of their cargo upon arrival, and deliver certified statements to the superintendent of exports and imports of all goods in their vessels' holds. A n y undeclared articles could be summarily seized, and there was to be no breaking bulk without permission from the authorities. All imported rum, spirits, sugar, molasses, and salt must be stored in warehouses, at the owners' expense, and the keys given to the superintendent, who could then grant permission 11

Jamieson Account Book, in Ν. Y . Hist. Soc.

124

HEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

to sell all or part for use of the army, or inhabitants. These written permissions had to specify the amount sold and the name of the purchaser. Equally stringent were the rules governing exports. No ship, except those in his Majesty's service, could leave port until its captain had received permission to load the vessel, and had entered a sworn enumeration of the quantity and quality of the goods with the name of the owner, and had obtained from the superintendent a certificate that no fraud had been committed and that all requirements of the proclamation had been fulfilled. Were this intricate procedure not followed, ship and cargo were seized and the master imprisoned. Smaller craft, engaged in transporting goods from Manhattan to the neighboring shores, were also regulated to prevent supplies reaching the enemy. They could not take from New Y o r k , either to Staten or Long Island, more than one barrel of rum, spirits, sugar, or molasses, more than four bushels of salt, nor more merchandise than was judged sufficient for the use of one family. T o make these laws more effective, anyone who gave evidence resulting in conviction received half the proceeds from the sale of the forfeited goods. The officer charged with the execution of these port regulations was termed superintendent, and General Howe's appointee was Andrew Elliot. T o prevent bribery, no fees were permissible in his office. 12 Five days later, the Commander-in-Chief forbade small boats passing to or from the Jerseys without special permit.151 Under these orders, New Y o r k trade was minutely regulated before the end of 1777. The rules were not always strictly enforced, however, and an illicit trade with Americans resulted, which, as we have seen, aided New Yorkers in securing food, for which they exchanged some of their imported goods. 12

Gaine, Mercury, July 21, 1777.

™ Ibid., July 28, 1777·

COMMERCE

AND

BUSINESS

125

In September, 1 7 7 7 , the New Y o r k Insurance Office was reopened for marine insurance only, and within fifteen months two others were started, the New Insurance Office under William Branthwaite, and Wardrop and Cunningham's Public Insurance Office. 14 Shipping must, therefore, have become comparatively stable by this time, though premiums were very high on account of ravages by the French fleet and American privateers. In February, 1778, it was reported to Parliament that rates had increased from two to two and a half percent for vessels under convoy. Unarmed and unescorted ships had to pay fifteen percent, i f , indeed, they could find an underwriter to assume the risk. 10 The arrival of D'Estaing's fleet off the coast of New York, in July, 1778, sent many merchant ships scurrying to the protection of British warships in the harbor. Trans-Atlantic trade ceased for about a month. Consternation spread in New York, and many prizes were captured by the French, but otherwise trade was not greatly injured. 1 ® The Commissioners for Restoring Peace informed Superintendent Elliot in August, 1778, that, as the Commanderin-Chief and the Admiral thought it inexpedient to except New York shipping from the Prohibitory Act, that decision must be respected. The Commission was willing, however, to allow a limited amount of tonnage to bring flour and wheat from Quebec to New York, and fish from the Newfoundland coast, so that the city, always short of food, might be better supplied with these essentials. Elliot was asked to ascertain what merchants would be willing to engage in such business. Many responded to his proposal, and Canadian 14

Gaine, Mercury, Sept. 8, 1777; July 6, 1778; Rivington, Gazette, Dec. 29, 1779. 15 Annual Register (1778), 127. 18 Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 505; Kemble, Journal, I, 156; Montresor, Journal, 506.

I 2

6

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

17

trade was resumed, thought it was never important, eith'er for traders or food purveyors. A s a result of that provision of the Prohibitory Act which forbade the exportation of goods to Great Britain or her dependencies, there were, in the summer of 1778, 261 merchant ships, aggregating thirty-five thousand tons, lying idle in the harbor ; 18 and gathered in store houses were large quantities of exportable merchandise. The Commissioners realized that this tonnage was needed in England, and that the goods should be circulated. 1 " Acting, therefore, under their discretionary power, they suspended that part of the Prohibitory Act, and authorized Superintendent Elliot to permit ships to sail to the British Isles after September 26, 1778. At first, this order was to remain in force for only three calendar months, but its effect was prolonged by subsequent proclamations until the very end of the war. At the same time, the Commissioners permitted the taking of prizes into New York and Newport for condemnation.20 Released by these orders, fifty-two vessels sailed from New York between October 1 and 16, aggregating 10,260 tons and employing 447 men. 21 17

Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 1134.

18

Ibid., no. 1059.

10

Ibid., nos. 1179,

I2I

9·

20

Ibid., no. 527; Gaine, Mercury, Oct. 5, 1778. On November 18, 1778, the order was extended until June 1, 1779; Clinton and Eden, on April 22, 1779, extended it until December 1, 1779; and Clinton continued it indefinitely after October 24, 1780. 2 1 Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 1187. The amount and value (price current in London, July, 1778) of the goods were as follows:

Tobacco Indigo Staves Flax seed Beeswax Potash Lignum Vitae

3.700 210 520,000 1,750 71 32 22

Hogsheads Casks and other lumber Casks Casks Casks Tons

£296,000 42,010 15,000 10,380 6,200 250 132

COMMERCE

AND

BUSINESS

127

In 1778, the merchants of the city petitioned the Commissioners to amend the Prohibitory Act in order to make intercourse with Great Britain easier. In answer to this petition, the Commissioners suspended the provisions requiring licenses for importing stores and provisions. Thereafter, there should be fewer delays in securing necessities, and there would be less opportunity for monopolizers to raise prices and impede fair circulation. The merchants now had greater freedom, and external trade increased." The Commissioners, however, could not interfere with proclamations of military and naval authorities, so that local restraints, though not always oppressive, continued and even became more numerous. For instance, all vessels had to report the amount of powder they held, wharves had to be kept clear in winter, and all ships intending to winter near New York had to anchor in Newtown Creek. 24 On the other hand, the Logwood Nicaragua Wood Mahogany Fustick Snuff Cotton Oil Sassafras Elephants' teeth Snake root Snatts Furs, skins, horns, etc Lead

70 10 100 30 34 130 33 16 15

Tons Tons Pieces Tons Casks Bales Casks Tons Tons

25 Casks 20 Tons by special license from Lord Howe

Dry goods to West Indies .. Stores shipped for the use of Inhabitants of Rhode Island by order of the Commander-in-Chief

560 140 200 300 3,000 1,400 500 78 300 3SO 4,ooo 2,200 600 54,000 9,300

£446,900 Rivington, Gazette, Nov. 25, 1778; Stevens, Facsimiles, nos. 1212 and 1226. 22

23

Gaine, Mercury, Mar. 13, 1779.

24

Ibid., Dec. 22, 1777; Rivington, Gazette, Dec. 5-9, 1778.

x28

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

merchants were aided when in June, 1779, the members of the Chamber of Commerce who had remained in the city, secured the consent of Commandant Jones to resume meetings to adjust their frequent mercantile differences." T h e continued growth of trade necessitated more regulation by the military authorities. Passes had to be secured by small craft carrying supplies to or from the c i t y ; 2 6 no vessels could tie up to a wharf without a special permit; ten days were allowed ocean-going ships to unload, load, repair, and fit out, and fifteen days for the disposal of prizes. 27 Shipping suffered, however, in the winter of 1779-80, since vessels could not leave until the latter part of February, and even then navigation was dangerous because of the heavy ice that filled the Hudson. 28 Until January, 1781, the majority of the merchant vessels anchored in the East R i v e r ; after that time most of the shipping used the North River. 29 The reason was this: American whaleboats were becoming more active, and they made it risky for British ships to g o through L o n g Island Sound; so, for safety, merchantmen sailed to the south of L o n g Island and entered the Hudson. In February, 1781, Andrew Elliot announced that he was authorized to collect all duties. This angered New Y o r k merchants and traders, who had not been required to pay any import duties since the arrival of the British, 30 and they did not submit without a struggle. Through their Chamber of Commerce, they addressed Sir Henry Clinton in March, claiming that duties on wines from the Azores were espec25

Col. Rees, of Ν. Y. Chamber of Commerce, 203-04, and passim.

28

Rivirigton, Gazette, July 24, 1779.

27

Ibid., Nov. 27, 1779.

28 Smith, Diary, Feb. 22, 1780; Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 781. 29

Heath, Memoirs (1798 ed.), 271.

30

Rivington, Gazette, Feb. 28, 1781.

COMMERCE AND

BUSINESS

129

ially burdensome, as ships had to g o there in ballast since Parliament allowed exportation only to Great Britain and her dependencies, not to foreign ports. S o instead of being able to exchange home products f o r wines, New Y o r k e r s had to pay f o r them with either bills of exchange or specie. This disadvantage to the merchant, together with the expenses of navigation and high insurance rates, made the cost of importing wine extremely high, and the duty added to it was an appreciable factor. Duties on sugars, indigo, molasses, and coffee were also considered exorbitant. 31 S i r Henry was asked to suspend those duties because, if continued, they would severely diminish the town's supply of those articles and discourage trading interests. Clinton promised to refer the protest immediately to the Secretary of State f o r the Colonies, but nothing came of this appeal. 52 The wharves of the city were taken over by the military authorities as soon as the city fell, and in 1 7 7 9 the Commandant appointed port wardens. Captain Thomas Crowell was warden f r o m the shipyards to the Crane ( S t . James Street and E a s t R i v e r to 986 Water S t r e e t ) ; f r o m there to the F l y Market (Maiden Lane at Pearl Street), Captain Vardill was in charge; the district f r o m the Market to the Old Slip in Hanover Square was the province of Mr. V a n D a m ; and Captain Griffith supervised the wharves from the Old Slip to Whitehall. Their main duties were to guard ships, to look out f o r fires, arrest trespassers, and report any irregularities. 88 N o rent was paid f o r any of these wharves until private Loyalist owners protested in January, 1 7 7 9 , against such summary treatment. Then the Commandant 31 Gaine, Register for 1780, gives the duties on imports: Wines from Madeira and the Western Islands (tun of 252 gallons), £7; White or Clayed Sugars ( 1 1 2 lbs.), £1.7; other sugars, 5s; Molasses (gal.), i d ; Coffee ( 1 1 2 lbs.), £2.19.6; Indigo (lb.), 6d. 32

Col. Rees, of Ν. Y. Chamber of Commerce, 247-51.

33

Gaine, Mercury, Sept. 6, 1779; Rivington, Gazette, Mar. 13, 1782.

J30

N E l v

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

allowed them to take over their own property and to receive the customary rates, provided the docks were kept in good repair, but the military government continued to control those owned by rebels and others outside the lines.34 The high cost of labor and material, however, made it unprofitable, it was claimed, for owners to keep their docks in approved repair at the existing low wharfage rates. Therefore, Commandant Birch, with the advice of the Chamber of Commerce, allowed all who could show certificates from the port wardens that their docks were in order to charge higher rates. 35 In the late spring of 1782, shipping from England declined because English traders were advised by the Secretary of State not to send more goods to New York which might be evacuated at any time since peace was then being discussed.36 Trade, however, gradually became more open between New Yorkers and Americans, and the Loyalists were able to get supplies from their enemies, but it was not until after the formal announcement of peace that such cargoes could be openly sold. May 20, 1783, marked the first legal trade between New Y o r k and an American town since the city had come under British control.37 New York merchants also secured profits from privateering and illicit trading. Privateers from New Y o r k played a dual role during the war. In the first place, they provided a source of income and investment for mercantile interests; they also played their part in helping the British navy keep 34

Ν. Y. City during Atner. Rev., 156. It was also stated that wharves must not be encumbered with unnecessary articles. Gaine, Mercury, Mar. 5, 1781. 35

Gaine, Mercury, Apr. 22, 1782. The rates were: ships up to 100 tons, 3s a day; 100-300 tons, 4s, 6d; those having outside berths to pay one-half these amounts. 36

Penna. Packet, July 24, 1782.

37

Gaine, Mercury, June 16, 1783.

COMMERCE

AND

BUSINESS

the seas free of American warships and privateers. In March, 1777, the Lords of the Admiralty were authorized by Parliament to grant letters of marque to private ships to make reprisals against ships of the rebellious colonies.38 Under this act, at least one hundred and eighty-five privateers were fitted out and sailed from the port of New York with letters issued by Governor Tryon to carry on depredations against the enemy; these ships carried crews aggregating six thousand men.38 Between September, 1778, and March, 1779, New York privateers brought into port one hundred and sixty-five prizes valued at six hundred thousand pounds.40 So it can easily be seen how important this industry became, largely because of the great profits derived from the sale of captured prizes, which allowed many New Yorkers to feather their nests.41 Even the loyal ladies of the city, following the precedent of the Queen and the Marchioness of Granby, contributed to fit out a letter of marque.42 Admiral Howe was opposed to the operations of private ships of war from the beginning, 43 because they deprived the regular navy of seamen. The lure of quick profit caused soldiers and sailors to desert to privateer service. Then came the competition between the royal navy and the increasing number of privateers, in the fall of 1778. The Admiral offered a reward of twenty guineas to any person for information resulting in the conviction of any privateer captain ** Annual Register 19

(1777), 171.

ΛΓ. Y. Col. Docs., V I I I , 772; Valentine, Manual

40

Gaine, Mercury, Mar. 15, 1779. privateers and their captures.

(1870), 175-79.

Ibid., Mar. 22, 1779, gives a list of

41

V, 1086, quoting Lloyd's

42

Rivington, Gazette, Jan. 6, Mar. 3, 1779; Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 757.

Stokes, Iconography, 25-28, 1779· 43

Evening

Post, June

See A Friend of your Country to Lord Viscount Howe on his naval conduct in America (London, 1779).

I 3

2

-V£W

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE 14

who influenced royal sailors to desert. Privateers were thus checked, but not greatly, as the threat of fine or imprisonment was less potent than the enticement of great profits. In June, 1779, Commodore Collier, in charge of British warships at New York, ordered privateers not to anchor outside Sandy Hook nor to land prisoners on Long Island, but first to heave to near the guard ship, for examination. Furthermore, he gave warships the right to come in over the bar ahead of all others, a provision reasonable and necessary during a war. 45 A f t e r the French fleet arrived in America in 1778, its presence required most of the attention of the British navy. In consequence, rebel privateers resumed operations around New York on a greater scale during the summer of 1779· Because of these dangers, New York trade languished for some months, and Loyalist privateer owners were forced to sell as many as six vessels a week.48 Furthermore, the Commander-in-Chief, at the instance of Parliament, ordered the payment of accumulated duties, due on all prize goods condemned since October, 1776, to be paid to Collector Elliot by September, 1779. Thenceforth, agents of privateers were required to make sworn statements of all dutiable goods, and they were weighed and gauged before they could be condemned.47 A shortage of seamen for the royal navy was felt again in the spring of 1780. On complaint of Commodore Drake, Commandant Pattison conscripted not only the regular King's troops, but also the local volunteer companies to fill " R i v i n g t o n , Gazette, Dec. 9, 1778; Apr. 17, 1779; Stevens, no, 543· 45

Rivington, Gazette, June 30, 1779.

4β

Ν. Y. Journal, Sept. 20, 1779; Smith, Diary. Kemble, Journal, I, 186-88. 41

Facsimiles,

Rivington, Gazette, Sept. n , 1779.

V I , Aug. 14, 1779;

See also, ibid., Mar. 1 1 , 1780.

COMMERCE

AND

BUSINESS

133

up the navy's ranks. 4 * This was inadequate, and a year later, " a very hot press " took place in New Y o r k . Several hundred Loyalist citizens, it was said, were seized to man the navy, and three hundred American prisoners, who had been languishing in prison ships, were also pressed into service. 48 Conditions were about the same again in 1782, f o r Admiral Digby then had two men-of-war lying useless in the harbor for want of seamen, although four letters of marque left port at the same time fully manned. 50 The naval branch of his Majesty's service was not at all popular because of the ill treatment of seamen and extremely low pay. Besides, there was more opportunity for both adventure and gain aboard a fast privateer. Despite war and prohibitory regulation, New Y o r k e r s carried on an illicit trade with rebel colonies, which allowed W h i g s and Loyalists to exchange goods which the other side wanted. A t first, the Americans were most active in this contraband trade. Before the war, they were willing to forego luxuries to keep their voluntary non-importation agreements. During the war, however, they desired things which their former friends, the Loyalists, were enjoying in N e w Y o r k , for that city always had some luxuries, no matter how small were the supplies of necessities. While the Americans in rebellion depended on sassafras and sage for their tea, those under British control sipped the best China blends; rebels had to be content with homespun while L o y alists were clad in rich silks f r o m Cathay. 51 The energetic American privateers partially provided for the needs of the rebels by capturing and selling merchant prizes, but these 48

Pattison, Letters, 390-91.

48

New Jersey Gazette, May 9, 1781.

50

Col. Rees, of Ν. Y. Chamber of Commerce, 281.

Mather, Refugees 1909), 209. 51

from Long Island to Connecticut

(New

York,

!34

XEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

did not supply all wants, and the demand for necessities and luxuries exceeded the supply. A s a result, a system of trade grew up, known as the " Illicit or London Trade ", operating from the Thames River in Connecticut to Shrewsbury in Jersey. This throve best in L o n g Island Sound, where the whaleboatmen were the most enterprizing participants. It was carried on ingeniously. Articles most desired by W h i g s were bought in N e w Y o r k , presumably for British sympathizers, ferried to L o n g Island, thence smuggled to Connecticut, and there quickly exchanged for the fresh food which New Yorkers craved. This order was also reversed. Frequently boats filled with provisions set out from Connecticut or eastern L o n g Island for a rendezvous with boats from the city containing English goods. 52 While it is impossible to judge the extent of this trade, it must have been great. A s we have seen, the city was frequently near starvation when Cork fleets were delayed, and the British commanders did not obtain much food by sending foraging parties to neighboring provinces. It is therefore evident that in times of scarcity the city was partly dependent on illicit trade for its meals. British authorities tried to stop this traffic by forbidding the clandestine conveyance of wet and dry goods to the rebels, but they did not seem to object when that trade supplied them with cattle and other fresh foods. So, despite rather half-hearted British efforts to stop it, smuggling continued. American authorities also tried to prevent this traffic, but they also were unsuccessful. 53 Indeed, investigations to determine illicit traders were exceedingly difficult, since both W h i g s and Tories, Americans and British soldiers of almost every rank, and followers of both armies were smugglers; it was impos82 Mather, Refugees from L. I. to Conn., 210. See also, Jones, Hist, of New York, II, 12-13; Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 733.

" M a t h e r , Refugees from L. I. to Conn., 210 et seq.

COMMERCE

AND

BUSINESS

135

sible to push inquiries without involving friends as well as foes. M The British were more hampered by the trade than the Americans. They had helped to start the war by trying to enforce the Navigation Acts. During the war, the authorities had to try conscientiously to carry out the Prohibitory Act and decrees of military commanders; they could not be lax afterwards, when they had been strict before. The extended coast line of Long Island could not be perfectly guarded, and the inhabitants of that island were not all loyal in their sympathies. 55 In May, 1780, the British Commandant had to reissue the order of July 1 7 , 1777, relating to trade with the army, because of the large quantities of goods clandestinely conveyed to the rebels.58 Some of the British officers, however, winked at the trade for their own gain, as the history of Judge Jones and the diary of William Smith show. Toward the close of the war, neither side attempted to prevent this traffic, and by the late summer of 1782, after the signing of the preliminary articles of peace, boats from most of the northern states were admitted to New Y o r k without flags of truce, and auction sales of British goods were openly held twice a week in Norwich, Connecticut. 57 A s before the war, the acts of Parliament forbidding trade with foreign colonies were evaded, and another kind of illicit trade was carried on with foreign ports, particularly with the Dutch Island of St. Eustatius. This forbidden commerce was not a matter of record, and it is not known how 54

Mather, Refugees from L. I. to Conn., 212; Caulkins, Netν London, 522-23; Tallmadge, Memoirs, 33; Gaine, Mercury, Apr. 15, 1782. "Gaine, Mercury, June 28, 1779. 56 57

Rivington, Gazette, May 20, 1780.

Stokes, Iconography, V, 1151, quoting London Chronicle, Sept. 12-14, 1782; Gaine, Mercury, April 16, 1783.

I36

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

much New Y o r k City benefited from this trade. It is clear, however, that the city found several ways to obtain necessities despite Parliamentary enactments, and strict rules of military officials. 58 Turning from the import and export trade, legal and illegal, in which the merchants of New York were engaged, let us consider business within the city. About the only manufacturing was ship building, for during the British occupation, the New York shipyards along the East River were not idle. Several royal vessels were built, among others the Virgin and the Iris.™ It is unknown whether any merchantmen were constructed there during the war; but some must have been, considering the extent of the privateering industry. A s to retail business, the same kinds were continued as before the British occupation, although competition was great and many dealers failed to survive the hard times, particularly the Loyalists from other provinces who had to establish a new trade. One form of business that continued active was the general store, managed directly by the owner or owners in partnership, with few clerks or apprentices. Such stores carried a varied line of goods including both necessities and luxuries to appeal to New York consumers. One of the leading general store owners was Alexander Leckie, of 22 Hanover Square, who advertised frequently in the city press. He sold scarlet, yellow, and white flannels, men's fine shoes and 58

Jameson, "St. Eustatius in the Amer. Rev.," in Amer. Hist. Rev., V I I I . William Smith wrote in his diary for Apr. 21, 1781: " Admiral Arbuthnot has indiscreetly issued blank warrants to merchants for the importation of wines, etc. . . . Dutch bottoms have been employed to bring the articles from Spain to St. Eustatius whence vessels from St. Kitts were to fetch them and bring them h e r e . . . " And the jurist did not hesitate to state that most of the profits went into the admiral's pocket. 59 Stokes, Iconography, 15-17, 1778.

V , 1075, quoting St. James

Chronicle,

Sept.

COMMERCE AND

BUSINESS

137

boots, shoe brushes, handerchiefs of every description, chintz, cambric, lawn, calico, corduroy, satin, Irish linen, stays, silk and cotton hose, gloves, steel razors, umbrellas, carpets, tea kettles, bath stoves, hair powder, and India glue, to mention but a few of his wares.® 0 T h e liquor industry also furnished employment f o r many men, f o r wine and rum were the most popular drinks of the day, and in increasing demand a f t e r the British troops arrived. 6 1 The grocery business 62 was of course extremely important in a city always in need of f o o d ; clothing, hardware, and shipping supplies also had many vendors. The two principal printers in the city, H u g h Gaine and James Rivington, in addition to publishing newspapers, sold books, games, medicine, delicacies, and musical instruments. They must have received a goodly revenue from advertising, f o r Rivington charged a dollar f o r fifteen lines, and half of each issue of his paper was devoted to paid announcements. The editor of the Gazette obtained the exclusive advertising of the theatre after 1780. Scarcity of contemporary source material on these kinds of business, however, makes it difficult to draw definite conclusions. More information is available concerning other occupations, because most of the military and police regulatory decrees were directed against them. Cartmen, the truckers of the city, were engaged in an important industry, inasmuch eo Other general store owners were: Benjamin Waddington and Co., Robert and George Service, Joseph Brewer, Joseph Allicocke, Bell and Hill, Scott and Allingham, William Backhouse and Co., and Smith Ramadge. 61 Leading wine retailers were: Richard Yates, Hugh and Alexander Wallace, Edward Gould, Charles Nicoll, Richard Deane, and Richard Appleby. 62

Leading grocers were: William Burton, Michael Price, Isaac Winslow, Marston and Rapalje Thomas Buchanan and Co., and Jacobus Lefferts.

I38

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

as they were responsible for transporting food and other necessities throughout the town. They were strictly controlled by the military authorities because some had declined to haul or had charged exorbitant sums for their services. Maximum rates went into effect after December, 1777, and cartmen had to obtain police licenses whose number was placed conspicuously on the cart. 83 Not satisfied with these regulations, the police promulgated additional rules in December, 1778. A g a i n the cartmen were warned to obtain licenses and paint their numbers in red on each side of their carts. 64 Feeling that these regulations were inadequate, the police asked the Chamber of Commerce to furnish the Commandant with a fair scale of cartmen's charges, and on the advice of the Chamber, a new set of rates went into effect in September, 1779. T h e penalty for non-observance was imprisonment ; this was now augmented by a fine of forty shillings for overcharging or refusing to haul the first load offered. 65 T o make better time on their trips, cartmen used to ride on their trucks and drive them at full speed through the streets. A s this practice endangered the lives of pedestrians, the Commandant forbade them either to ride on their carts or drive their horses faster than a walk.®8 It would have been futile to disobey these regulations because the police, supported by the military, could easily revoke licenses. Evidently this occupation was overcrowded, for one Thomas Ryan, an industrious man who could earn at times from fourteen to fifteen shillings a day, was often idle. T h e Chamber of Commerce, however, claimed that the average cartman's daily wage was from forty to one hundred shill63

Gaine, Mercury, Jan. 5, 1778.

64

Ibid., Dec. 14, 1778.

65 Col. Rees, of Ν. Y. Chamber of Commerce, 210-14; Gaine, Mercury, Sept. 20, 1779. ββ

Rivington, Gazette, Oct. 21, 1780.

COMMERCE

AND

BUSINESS

139

i n g s , " though this estimate seems too high, considering the testimony of Ryan. Bakers were also well regulated so that the city might be supplied with good bread at a fair price. In January, 1777, the Commandant decided to re-establish the former regulation of a bread assize to meet the complaints of the army and citizenry that prices were too high. Any baker asking more was taken into custody and his bread distributed to the poor.68 T o make this decree more effective, each baker had to put his initials on his loaves so that they could be identified more easily in case of bad flour or short weight. This was but the first of a series of regulations by the military authorities for the protection of consumers. 89 A s a further preventive of excessive prices and poor quality, the Commandant appointed a public inspector of bread to visit the various bakeries and to seize all loaves made contrary to regulation. 70 This was necessary in times of food scarcity. Auctioneers were also controlled by the Commandant and police. In January, 1779, all vendue masters, engaged in the selling of goods at public auction had to obtain police licenses, at the same time swearing that they would not make collusive sales to raise prices. They were also required to give bond for five thousand pounds as a guaranty of good faith. Every licensee had to affix above his door the sign " 's Licensed Auction Room " , and advertise his place of business in the newspapers. Damaged goods had to be specified as such when sold. Provisions, liquors, naval and shipping material, and the goods of deceased strangers 87

Loyalist Transcripts, vol. 41, 222; Col. Rees, of Ν. Y. Chamber of Commerce, 208-09. 68

Gaine, Mercury, Jan. 13, 1777.

89

These proclamations can be found in convenient form in Col. Rees, of Ν. Y. Chamber of Commerce, 349-50. 70

Gaine, Mercury, Mar. 27, 1780.

I 4

0

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

were auctioned off at the Coffee House Bridge; other merchandise, including dry goods, was sold only in the auction room, although permission could be obtained for selling furniture and other household goods in private homes. 71 Other trades in the city involving the public interest were bound and regulated in a similar manner to protect the inhabitants against excessive price, fraud, and poor quality. 72 Among the skilled artisans, there were as before the war, the master tradesmen, journeymen, and apprentices. There was one master workman, for instance, who was both house carpenter and joiner, and employed as many as twenty journeymen and three apprentices. The youngest of these apprentices received six shillings a day. 73 Masters often secured their lesser help from the alms house.74 Mechanics', laborers', and clerks' wages were not standardized. The sixteen journeymen printers employed by James Rivington decided, in November, 1778, that the cost of living had become so high that they could not exist on their low wages, so they petitioned for a three-dollar weekly advance. Fearful that the public might think that they would strike to enforce their demands, they claimed that this was not a result of a combination, f o r none would take advantage of the disturbed conditions; they only wished to exist. How could they, skilled workmen, be happy when common laborers rereceived a dollar a day and rations, and the " lowest mechanics " earned from twelve to fifteen shillings a day? 75 This was the nearest approach to a strike during the military occupation. Orders of the army authorities, the police, and 71

Gaine, Mercury, Jan. 16, 1779: Oct. 23, 1780.

72

Rivington, Gasette, Jan. 20, 1779; British Guards Order Book (1779), Jan. 7, 1779. 73

Loyalist Transcripts, vol. 19, 281.

74

Gaine, Mercury,

75

Rivington, Gasette, Nov. 14, 1778.

May 28, 1781.

COMMERCE

AND

BUSINESS

the Chamber of Commerce took care of all labor disputes by allowing the master a fair profit so that he could pay his men a living wage. No united action by workers was possible under army control. Although the average unskilled worker received ten shillings a day, almost five times as much as before the war, army officials did not favor these increases as they raised the cost of work done for the army and the cost of living for the civilians. Nevertheless, the authorities were divided on the question of whether steps should be taken actively to regulate wages of the ordinary laborer or mechanic.7® Wages in the public departments were in some cases a little lower than those of private employees. All masters received twenty shillings a day, conductors of baggage trains and the like, sixteen shillings, clerks, eight shillings, laborers, four shillings, drivers, three shillings, and black laborers, one shilling, six pence. Artificers, such as farriers, blacksmiths, sawyers, and wheelwrights, earned wages according to their ability, some receiving twelve shillings a day, and others but eight.77 The army departments furnished employment for quite a large number of civilians. T o build and repair galleys, small craft, and the like, the quarter-master's department hired one master carpenter, one foreman, twelve ship carpenters, three caulkers, two joiners, six sawyers, one master and three blacksmiths. F o r the baggage train, it employed one master carpenter, forty-two carpenters and joiners, one master and thirty-three blacksmiths, and seven harness makers, together with four clerks, four storekeepers, forty-six wagon masters and conductors, and forty-nine ordinary laborers. The commissary department provided work for eighteen carpenters, eight coopers, six butchers, 70 77

Ν. Y. Col. Docs., V I I I , 801; Pattison, Letters, 126 et seq.

Minute Book of Gen. Board of British Officers, 216 Duncan, Hist, of Royal Artillery, I, 343.

et seq.;

i 4

2

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

two masons, and one hundred and six laborers. A t the hay and grain depots, one cooper, seven stackers, and sixty-six laborers were kept busy.' 8 Tradesmen and laborers who entered town from captured rebel ships caused a great deal of annoyance to the government. They frequently took the oath of allegiance to the K i n g , and therefore could not be exchanged for the Loyalists. Then, instead of working, they became idlers and vagrants; others, having taken the oath merely to escape close guarding, easily escaped from the city. In this way, the public departments lost as many British subjects as there were men who falsely swore allegiance. T o prevent this practice from continuing, the Commandant ordered the police not to administer any oaths, or give certificates allowing such men to live in town, unless the laborers agreed to enter whatever public department needed men of their trade.™ This regulation not only prevented them from being a care to the city, but also provided workers for the departments. T h e wages of female house servants varied considerably. Laundry maids were paid ten pounds, sixteen shillings a quarter; house maids' wages ranged from four pounds, sixteen shillings, to fifteen pounds, twelve shillings for a three months' period; and sewing women earned ten pounds, sixteen shillings for the same length of service. A charwoman who worked for Sir Guy Carleton at sundry times between August and November, 1783, received ten pounds, eighteen shillings. T h e wages for all of Carleton's servants were paid to one woman; she acted as housekeeper, or conducted an agency through which maids could obtain employment on paying a certain percentage to the proprietress for her services. 8 " 78

Minute Book of Gen. Board of Officers, 50-53, 120-27, 168, 226.

78

Pattison, Letters, 266.

80

Extracts

from Dorchester

Papers.

The agency method had been

COMMERCE

AND

BUSINESS

143

Negroes performed the lowest forms of labor. Many slaves fled to the city after September, 1776, on learning from the many British proclamations that the military authorities would free them from their rebel masters. Ordinary unskilled white laborers in the army departments earned four shillings a day; but the blacks, probably doing meaner and harder work, received only one shilling, six pence.81 One David King, a negro shoemaker, managed to eke out two shillings a day at his trade, while the white worker in the same trade earned five times as much,82 which indicates that the wage scale of blacks was much lower than that of whites in the same business. Negroes also indentured themselves as servants during the war period in New York City. 83 So the war had a dual effect upon the commerce and business of New York City. In the first place, some merchants enjoyed larger incomes from profiteering, army contracts, privateering, illicit trade, and a greater military and civilian population. Secondly, however, the restrictions placed by Parliament on external commerce and by British military leaders on internal business because of the exigencies of war, tended to hamper the ordinary forms of business and labor within the town. Yet these restrictions were not to last, and as we shall see the city recovered its enviable position in the commercial world shortly after the declaration of peace. used in New York before the war by Solomon Griffith in his General Register Office. Gaine, Mercury, Apr. 25, 1774. 81

Minute Book of Gen. Board of British Officers, 210 et seq.

82

Loyalist Transcripts, vol. 41, 555.

83

N.

Y. Miscellaneous Mss. (1777-80), in Ν. Y . Hist. Soc.

CHAPTER THE

VII

P R E S S AND P U B L I C

OPINION

It is not easy to appraise fairly the influence of the press on public opinion during the Revolutionary era. During the British occupation, however, it played a large part in keeping up the spirit of the civilian inhabitants, and, by printing some news and suppressing others, aided the British cause by encouraging the Loyalists. The newspapers of the whole period were not good examples of literary and editorial art, but were not very different in this respect from their contemporaries elsewhere. These publications may be divided into three groups; those printed only in the pre-occupation period, those issued only during the time of British occupation which were the least important, and those which began before the war and continued until the evacuation of the city. The papers of the first group wholeheartedly favored the Whig cause and did everything in their power to promote the cause of the patriots. There was, for instance, the New York Gazette, edited by William Weyman, who had served his apprenticeship under William Bradford, the first important printer in America. Weyman's paper was printed from 1759 until the latter part of 1768. 1 Then there was James Parker, who edited the New York Gazette or Weekly Post Boy from 1742 until 1770. Parker showed his partisanship 1

This and the following accounts of newspapers and their editors are taken from Brigham, "Bibliography of American Newspapers, 1690-1820," pt. viii, in the Ρ roc. of Amer. Antiquarian Society ( 1 9 1 7 ) ; Thomas History of Printing in America (2 v., Albany, 1874) ; Journal of Hugh Gaine, I ; Wall, Samuel Loudon; Paltsits, John Holt. 144

THE PRESS AND PUBLIC

OPINION

145

by adding to the title in November, 1765, " T h e United V o i c e of all his M a j e s t y ' s free and loyal Subjects in A m e r i c a — L i b e r t y , Property, and no Stamps " .

John Holt, a f t e r

failing in mercantile affairs, went to N e w Y o r k where f o r a time he helped James Parker.

I n 1 7 6 6 he branched out f o r

himself by establishing the New

York

Journal.

H e voiced

his feelings ardently in favor of the W h i g s , and he was a g o o d writer.

In 1 7 7 6 he moved to Esopus and then to

Poughkeepsie, where he continued to print his paper.

A t the

end of the w a r he returned to N e w Y o r k , where he died before his press was re-established. in Ireland, started his New

York

Samuel Loudon, born

Packet

in January, 1776,

and devoted its pages to the A m e r i c a n cause.

A t the open-

ing of hostilities, he moved his press to Fishkill, where he kept up the spirits of the W h i g s until the British evacuated New York. press.

T h e n he returned to the city to continue his

T h e r e were several papers of the

pre-occupation

period which lasted f o r only a f e w issues, but, since they did not effect public opinion, they need not be mentioned.

The

second group, exclusively war-time papers, did not seem to be widely read.

F e w copies are preserved today, and no

real criticism of them can be made.

Robertson, Mills, and

Hicks formed a partnership to print the Royal Gazette, eral

and L e w i s edited the New

American

York Mercury

and Gen-

Advertiser.

T h e third group of papers is by f a r the most significant because they g i v e us the best view of war-time conditions. One of the most important was published by H u g h Gaine, w h o was born in Ireland, received his apprenticeship at Belfast, came to A m e r i c a in the 1740's, and settled in N e w Y o r k as a journeyman under James Parker. started the New York Gazette and Weekly

In 1752 he

Mercury,

adding

to his income by printing and selling books at his office in H a n o v e r Square.

H e seemed to wish to keep on the stronger

I 4

6

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

side,2 and at first his press favored the American cause. In September, 1776, when the city was about to fall into British hands, he moved his press to Newark, New Jersey, where he continued to print the Mercury for two months. Meantime, Ambrose Serie edited a paper of the same name simultaneously in N e w Y o r k , until Gaine, deciding that the British would be successful, returned to the city in November. Gaine published his paper there until November 10, 1783, as a loyal supporter of the King. A t the close of the war, he petitioned the N e w Y o r k State Legislature for permission to remain and was allowed to do so, but he discontinued the Mercury, and devoted himself solely to the book trade. Gaine was a good citizen, but as a politician he was unstable. In writing of him, Philip Freneau, the poet of the Revolution, said with his accustomed w i t : As matters have gone, it was plainly a blunder, But then, I expected the Whigs must knock under, And I always adhere to the sword that is longest, And stick to the party that's like to be strongest.3 Though Gaine was an excellent newspaper man, he was not so good as James Rivington, editor of the New York Gazette, which after many changes became the Royal Gazette. Like all editors of the day, Rivington frequently allowed his partisanship to get the better of his good judgment, and he was often so extreme in his support of the King, especially after 1777, that the Americans appropriately called his paper the " L y i n g Gazette ". H e had gained his experience in England, but having lost his money in horse-racing, he decided to try his lot in America, and went first to Philadelphia in 1760. Thirteen years later he moved to New Y o r k , where he established his Gazette. I f Rivington were not a Loy2

Sabine, Loyalists, I, 451.

8

Freneau, Poetus Relating to the Amer. Rev., 232.

THE PRESS

AND PUBLIC

OPINION

Μ7

alist at first, his treatment at the hands of patriot mobs would have made him one. His troubles began when he printed, in the March 2, 1 7 7 5 , edition of his paper, an article to the effect that the Committee of Sixty had proposed to " nominate delegates to the Continental Congress for the approbation of the city and county ". The Committee considered this report of its proceedings " entirely false and groundless '', and commissioned two members to ask the printer for his authority. Rivington replied that he had " published it from common report, but would be more careful in the future and was willing to contradict i t " . The Committee thereupon resolved that rumor should not be printed as fact, particularly as the Committee might fall into bad esteem as a result of the printed report.* Rivington did not take this rebuff calmly, and in his edition of March 16 he intimated that if he were furnished with facts, he would print without error. Not only in New Y o r k did Rivington's paper arouse the anger of the patriots. On March 1 , 1 7 7 5 , the Newport Whigs drew up a resolution against him, stating that he had published many falsehoods likely to spread jealousy and discord throughout the colonies, as well as half-truths which were often misleading.® The charges made in the Newport resolves were reiterated by Rivington's opponents throughout his career. In the Gazette of May 4, 1 7 7 5 , Rivington defended his paper against the charge of being an " engine of tyranny as well as a sink of the most impure productions " Nothing I have ever done " , he wrote editorially, " has ever pro4

4 Amer. Arch., II, 50-51. 4 ibid., II, 10-12. Freehold, N. J., and Ulster County, Ν. Y., passed similar resolutions on March 6th and 14th. 4 ibid., II, 35-36, 132. These show how widely the Gasette was read. • 4 ibid., II, 1 1 1 . 5

I48

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

ceeded f r o m any sentiments in the least unfriendly to the liberties of this continent, but altogether f r o m the ideas I entertained of the liberty of the press and my duties as a printer ".

H e added that in the future he would print

nothing to offend the inhabitants of the colonies in general and N e w Y o r k City in particular.

N o t content with R i v -

ington's plea of repentance, a mob attacked him on M a y 10, and it w a s only through the exertions of t w o friends that he found r e f u g e on a warship in the harbor, although his only crime w a s upholding the liberty of the press, 7 which the city had so ardently advocated in 1734, at the time of the famous Zenger trial.

Later in M a y , Rivington sent an ad-

dress to the Continental Congress, stating that he had tried to be honest, though he might have been w r o n g in his opinions.

Furthermore, he affirmed, his paper had a l w a y s

been ready to print communications f r o m both sides, and it was a well-known fact that the best pamphlets in f a v o r of the A m e r i c a n cause had come f r o m his shop. promised not to offend anyone unnecessarily. 8

H e again T h e Conti-

nental Congress referred his case to the N e w Y o r k P r o v i n cial Congress, which resolved on June 7 that he be allowed to return to his home, and advised N e w Y o r k e r s not to molest him or damage his property. 9 some months.

A l l went well f o r

Rivington kept his promise and tried to con-

duct his paper without g i v i n g offense, but on November 23 a band of Liberty B o y s f r o m Connecticut, headed by Isaac Sears, broke into his office and destroyed his type. 10

As a

result of this attack, R i v i n g t o n suspended publication, and sailed f o r England on January 10, 1776. 1 1 • and July 20, 1780, when a benefit was given for the indispensable prompter, J. Hemsworth. 10 The next season there were thirty-five productions staged between October 11, 1780, and June 11, 1781. Towards the end of 1781, the theatre was extensively decorated, repaired, and aired 1 1 in preparation for the reopening on January 14, 1782, when a run of about sixteen plays began. The year 1782 marked the end of the monopoly of the military players. Although the amateurs of the army and navy gave plays now and then in 1783, Dennis Ryan and his professional company staged most of the performances, beginning June 19. His troupe was not particularly strong, however, and often joined with the military players.12 Ryan's company played three times a week from August 30 until the close of the season, and from October 11 until the 25 it alternated with the military actors.13 The date of the last performance is not known, although it was probably October 25, 1783. On that date, Rivington advertised the " last night but two ", but there is no record of those two being given. The commotion caused by the embarkation of troops and the hurried flight of the Loyalists no doubt turned 16th 17th Richard I I I 18th The Miser, The Mayor of Garratt ioth The Orphan of China, The King and the Miller of Mansfield 20th The Miser, The Old Maid 21 st The Orphan of China 10

Dunlap, Hist, of Amer. Theatre,

11

Rivington, Gazette, Dec. 26, 1781.

146 150

15 8

0 ο

214 φ 123

14 ig 16

ο ο 0

I, 103.

12 See Odell, Annals of Ν. Y. Stage, I, 226-30. Another company of professional actors led by John Henry of Annapolis gave a few performances starting August 1, 1782. Ibid., I, 224; Rivington, Gazette, July 31, 1782. 13

Rivington, Gazette, Aug. 30, Sept. 13, Oct. 25, 1783.

WAR-TIME

DIVERSIONS

175

the people's minds from the theatre. The return of large numbers of Americans before evacuation caused the professional actors to abandon their efforts, and the military actors could not expect to receive applause from their foes, no matter how worthy were their offerings. The plays produced showed the courage of management and actors. The list was long and varied, and the names of some of them will suffice to show that New York had opportunities to witness tragedies, comedies, and farces. Richard III, Tom Thumb, The Rivals, The School for Scandal, The Mock Doctor, The Lyar, The Beaux' Strategem, The King and the Miller of Mansfield, and High L i f e Below the Stairs were among those presented.14 Between the acts there were often musical entertainments.1" Tickets and seating arrangements gave the managers no end of trouble. The boxes and the pit cost eight shillings, while seats in the gallery could be purchased for four. They were sold at the door, at the offices of the leading printers, and at the coffee houses. Those who occupied the most expensive seats had to register for reservations at the house next to the theatre. After registering, they sent their servants, long before the doors opened at five o'clock, to stand in line and then to occupy their masters' seats, so that they would not be taken by others before the seven o'clock performance. These servants were often " turned out and molested " , adding further confusion by leaving the boxes for the pit.2® At first, boxes were charged to the spectator's account; but since some were slow in paying for their amusements, the management refused, after March, 1779, to reserve seats in the boxes unless the tickets were paid for 14 For a more complete list, see the newspapers of the day and the histories of the stage by Ireland, Dunlap, Seilhammer, and Odell. 10 Rivington, Gazette, July 9, 1783. 18 Ibid., Feb. 27, 1779.

ΐγ6

YORK DURING WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

when they were received, " sundry mistakes to the detriment of charity having been occasioned by the former mode " , l T This practice did not work as well as the managers expected, so they decided that those who wished to register f o r box seats should not do so until the play they wished to see was advertised. 28 This, too, was changed, and in 1 7 8 0 it was arranged that a group might subscribe for a box by the season, and have their names printed on the box doors, assuring the owners of their places. 19 Then the busy managers, discovering that certain frauds had arisen in the issuance of tickets, decided that new tickets should be printed f o r each performance, and that these only should entitle the holders to admission. 20 The theatre backers were also embarrassed when " light money " was taken in at the door and therefore tried to dispose of the tickets through the printers and tavern keepers, at the same time discouraging the purchase of tickets in the lobby. The attendance varied, as may be observed in the receipt accounts of the different plays. The largest audience recorded was over nine hundred, and the average seemed to have been about seven hundred and fifty. T h e participation of officers of the army and navy in theatricals was sometimes frowned on in England as being beneath the dignity of his Majesty's service. One newspaper, however, supported the officers by pointing out that a share in the profits was necessary for their livelihood, since N e w Y o r k prices were so high " that an inferior officer with no income but his pay found it more difficult to maintain his position than a private " . 2 1 There is, however, no 17

Rivington, Gazette, Mar. 13, 1779.

18

Ibid., Jan. 28, 1779.

19

Gaine, Mercury, Nov. 13, 1780.

20

Rivington, Gazette, Feb. 3, 1779; Jan. 26, 1780.

" Upcott Coll., V I , 231.

WAR-TIME

DIVERSIONS

177

proof that officers were paid for their acting. Indeed everything points to the contrary, as in the theatre records and in the accounts of the theatre managers printed in the newspapers, no indication of salaries for soldier-actors appears. Yet, although the proceeds might be for charity, the deducted expenses may have included salaries for officers as well as for the actresses. The net proceeds of each performance were given to the charity treasurer of the theatre, who administered their distribution to the poor with the aid of the city vestry. There were also benefit performances for specific needy cases. For instance, Mrs. Tomlinson, " an industrious woman", was rewarded with a special benefit on June 8, 1778, 22 and a " distressed widow with a large family " was comforted by the proceeds of the production of March 23, 1782.28 People were not limited to theatricals for their entertainment. There were times, particularly toward the end of the war, when other curious diversions entered the city. The Reverend Mr. Sayre, assisted by Thomas Mendenhall, gave electrical lectures " every clear evening for three weeks " in the winter of 1781-82, during which the most interesting and instructive experiments were tried.24 The famous Isaac Levy, well known in Europe, performed his sleight-of-hand tricks before his gullible spectators in Roubalet's Tavern, and proved that his hand was quicker than their eyes.2® Several exhibits, to which admission fees were also charged, were calculated to arouse the interest of New Yorkers. H o w wonderful, so said the advertisements, was the " Chinese Umbra ", that great spectacle " with a variety of devices in lovely colors, such as ships sailing on the water, a represen22

Rivington, Gazette, June 3, 1778.

28

Ibid., Mar. 23, 1782.

24

Ibid., Dec. 26, 1781; Feb. 9, 1782.

25

Ibid., Nov. 20, 1782.

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

tation of the sun and moon, with a view of Noah's ark " ! 2 e Interested persons could also witness the " most beautiful, curious, and extravagant productions of nature ", or gaze spellbound at a " curious fish, almost in the shape of a woman, with a head resembling a woman's cap, a pair of stays with a busk and a petticoat", or marvel at the most curious wild beast ever brought to the city.27 Such miracles were offered for the delectation of the citizens! Public concerts were also given to furnish entertainment for the citizenry. The Commandant had the walk in front of the ruins of Trinity Church widened, and arranged a place on the north side of the chancel to accommodate the theatre orchestra. Nearby was erected a stand for any other musicians. There evening concerts enlivened sultry summer nights. Benches were provided for the audiences, and lanterns strung from the trees along Broadway gave a festive glow. This action was for the good of all, but the site was ill-chosen because posts had to be sunk into graves to erect a fence, tombstones were removed, graves flattened, and one vault covered.28 The promenade in front of the ruins of Trinity was lined with seats, which, it was said, were generally occupied by men more interested in fair promenaders than in music.28 There were other concerts not for the general public, but only for the elite. A few of these were given for the benefit of charity, but generally their purpose was to amuse the higher classes and the officers of the army and navy. On January 24, 1778, a " concert of music " was given at the 26 27

Gaine, Mercury, Jan. 1, 1781.

Rivington, Gazette, Jan. 2, 1782; Nov. 27, 17&2; Gaine, June 2, 1783. 28

Mercury,

Smith, Diary, VI, June 3, 1780; Schaukirk, Diary, Aug. 19, 1779; June 5, 1780. 29 Rivington, Gazette, Aug. 16, 1780.

WAR-TIME

DIVERSIONS

179

Coffee House. Later, some gentlemen, "desirous of having musical parties ", subscribed two guineas each for concerts twice a week.40 Nothing further is recorded about these parties, but considering the enthusiasm with which society supported any entertainment, they probably succeeded. A " Concerto Spirituale " in three acts was given in the theatre on March 25, 178ο. 3 1 Although there were few advertisements before 1782, concerts were probably given regularly during the military occupation. The Mercury, on April 9, 1 7 8 1 , stated that there would be neither play nor concert that week, showing that the lack of such entertainment was quite unusual. Public concerts at Roubalet's Tavern were held every Tuesday in 1 7 8 1 . In 1782, eighteen weekly subscription concerts were given at Roubalet's, starting January 19. These musicales, which began at seven o'clock and lasted three hours, consisted of two acts, with a half-hour's intermission. Tickets for these affairs were not transferable, but twenty extra ones were deposited with the tavern keeper so that subscribers might obtain them for their friends at the price of half a guinea by writing their names on the backs of the tickets.32 Another group of subscription concerts began that fall, costing one guinea for the season. On the reverse of the ticket, the owner wrote his name and address so that it could be returned to him when the concert was over. Ticket holders had the privilege of taking two ladies and one gentleman, who must be from out of town. 33 Apparently these musicales were followed by a dance, for in the »0 Rivington, Gazette, Jan. 24, 1778; Nov. 25, 1778. 41

Ibid., Mar. 22, 1780. " Each act will consist of an overture, song, solo, trio song, symphony. The whole to conclude with a grand chorus of the ' Messiah.' The orchestra will be on the stage, which will be properly decorated on this occasion." * 2 Rivington, Gazette, Jan. 16-19, 1782; May 8, 1782. *8 Ibid., Nov. 27, 1782.

l8o

b'EW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

announcement of the concert for February i, 1783, it was specially noticed that there would be none. Concerts as well as plays were given for the benefit of needy refugees and their families, as well as to increase the income of the performers. O n April 27, 1782, there was a performance of vocal and instrumental selections to aid the families of two Loyalists who had sought refuge within the British lines.34 Signor Franceschini, a violinist, and W i l liam Brown, German flute player, received special benefits at the close of the 1783 season. Brown's benefit on August 8 was the last concert in the city before the British w i t h d r e w . " T h e press advertised, for sale and for hire, fiddles, guitars, flutes, French horns, hautboys, fifes, trumpets, bassoons, 34 Rivington, Gazelle, Apr. 27, 1782. spelling preserved) :

ACT

The program was (contemporary I

Sinfonie of Toeschi Quartetto of Davaux for violins Song by Mrs. H y d e — " Soldiers Tir'd of Wars Alarms " Violino Solo Concerto of Borchny Quintetto of C. Bach for flauto Sinfonie of Stamitz II

ACT

Sinfonie of Haydn Quartetto of Kammell for violins Song by Mrs. H y d e — " The Lark's Shrill Notes " Hoboy Solo Concerto of C. Fisher Quartetto of Vanhall for flauto Sinfonie of Haydn III

ACT

Sinfonie of Bach Quartetto of Davaux for Song by Mrs. H y d e — " If Clarinetto Solo Concerto Quartetto of Toeschi for Sinfonie of Mardini 83

violins 'tis joy to wound a lover " of Mahoy flauto

Ibid., June 7, 1783; Aug. 6, 1783.

WAR-TIME

DIVERSIONS

J8I

harps, clarinets, and even a hand-organ producing sixteen tunes. Balls and dances played their part in enlivening the garrison city. The principal occasions for gaiety were the birthdays of the King and Queen, celebrated on June fourth and January eighteenth respectively. Fireworks, parades, elaborate feasts, and dances formed part of the celebration. The festivities on the Queen's birthday in 1780 were typical of all these anniversary gaieties. At noon, a royal salute was fired from Fort George and repeated an hour later by the warships in the harbor. In the afternoon, General Try'on dined the general officers of the garrison. Many toasts were drunk, and the day passed " with the most perfect hilarity ". In the evening, there was a reception at General Tryon's, and a ball given by some officers at Hicks's Tavern for the leading civilians and the garrison forces. The public rooms at the tavern were freshly painted and decorated for the occasion. A Doric pediment enclosing the portraits of the King and Queen topped the main entrance, surrounded with the inspiring words: " Britons, Strike Home ". Baroness Riedesel, the queen of the ball, was driven in state from Tryon's reception to the ball, where a roll of kettle-drums and a blare of trumpets greeted her and she led the grand march on the arm of Commandant Pattison. Minuets, English, and country dances were enjoyed until midnight, when the assemblage adjourned to the supper rooms. On tables decorated with parterres and arbors, with natural and artificial flowers, China images, and other adornments, was spread a repast of three hundred and eighty dishes, on which the merrymakers feasted until three o'clock in the morning." Such lavish display at a time when the poor of the city were suffering from cold and starvation, and when danger from 88

Riedesel, Letters and Journals, 172-73; Rivington, Gazette, Jan. 19, 1780; Gaine, Mercury, Jan. 24, 1780; Schaukirk, Diary, Jan. 18, 1780.

l&2

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

attack was greatest, displeased the more serious-minded members of the community. Pastor Schaukirk believed that two thousand guineas were too much to spend for pleasure when distress was so evident, and Judge Smith thought that the four hundred guineas which the army had contributed to the festivities might have been more suitably used in supplying wood for the poor. Garrison assemblies or dances, to which officers of the army, navy, and public departments could subscribe for two guineas, were held almost every fortnight at Hicks's or Roubalet's Tavern to help the men forget the cares of war. 37 There were also subscription assemblies for both military and civilians. 38 In the spring of 1778, M a j o r Disney, of the British army, managed a series of three dances to which anyone could subscribe f o r one guinea, to be paid upon receipt of the ticket, another indication that both military and civilians were often lax in paying their bills. 39 Loosely and Elms, tavern-keepers near the Brooklyn ferry landing, conducted an assembly every other Thursday, offering special inducements to subscribers in the form of free " music, tea, coffee, chocolate, negus, sangree, and lemonade". 4 0 These subscription dances were not over-crowded, as they were limited to two hundred, 41 probably just enough to cover expenses. Besides plays, concerts, and subscription dances, there were private teas, dinners, and dances. Witness one society belle's engagements for a single week. Miss Eliza Shipton, niece of William Axtell, a staunch T o r y , wrote on April 28, 1780, to her lover, the rebel M a j o r Aquila Giles, then a 87

Rivington, Gazette, Jan. 16, 1782.

S8

Ibid., Jan. 17, 1778.

a® Ibid., Mar. 14, 1778. Ibid., Mar. 15, 1780; Feb. 1, 1783. 41

Gaine, Mercury, Dec. 25, 1780.

WAR-TIME

DIVERSIONS

183

prisoner on parole at Flatbush: " " This evening to a little hop at Mr. Sutherland's . . . tomorrow I am engaged on a visiting expedition, I wish it was over as it is a formidable affair . . . Sunday to dine at Minto," Monday to go to the play with General Phillips . . . on Tuesday we have a party on board the Fanny, and on Wednesday I shall visit your blest retreat". The social whirl kept the ladies more than busy. The men of the army and of the town had many out-ofdoor sports. Cricket was played at Cannon's Tavern, at Corlaer's Hook, on the Green near the shipyards, at the tavern of Loosely and Elms, as well as on other fields. At least two cricket clubs were formed, the Brooklyn and the Greenwich, and in one of their matches, fifty guineas went to the winner. There were also frequent challenges between English and Americans." The " ancient and favorite Irish game of Common " had its devotees, especially among the Sons of St. Patrick, who often played, with a supper at stake, at the Jews' burying ground, where large crowds gathered to witness the game.45 On the same field was played the " ancient and manly game " o f hurling.44 The sport dear to the hearts of all Englishmen, fox-hunting, was frequently indulged in to the joy of men and hounds. Loosely, the tavern-keeper, was the chief agent in furnishing the unhappy victims, for which he paid a generous price.47 As before the war, horse-racing was enjoyed and supported by the sporting gentry. Ascot Heath, five miles east 42

Aquila Giles Manuscripts, in the Ν. Y. Hist. Soc. The city estate of Andrew Elliot at Broadway and Ninth Street. 44 Rivington, Gazette, June 13, 1778; June 17, 1780; July is, 1782; Gaine, Mercury, Sept. 27, 1779; Oct. 28, 1778. 45 Rivington, Gazette, Mar. 16, 1782; Gaine, Mercury, Apr. 1, 1782. 46 Rivington, Gazette, May 11, 1782; Gaine, Mercury, June 4, 1782. 47 Rivington, Gazette, Nov. 4, 1780; Aug. 8, 1781; Jan. 16, 1782. 43

Ϊ84

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

of the ferry landing on L o n g Island, was the site of the principal track. A s many as four consecutive days were given over to racing, the Mercury of February 16, 1781, informs us, beginning April sixteenth. County subscription purses of fifty pounds were the prizes for the first two days, while a " noblemen and gentlemen's subscription purse " of one hundred pounds, together with an equal amount given by the city, provided winners' stakes for the following days. Horses had to be measured at least a week before the opening or else the owners had to pay a double entry fee. The jockeys equipped themselves with a " small saddle, jockey cap, silk jacket, and light boots ". A three-guinea concession fee was paid by vendors erecting booths on the grounds, and a special two-guinea charge for licenses to sell wines and liquors provided for the lesser prizes and miscellaneous expenses. N o stable could enter more than one horse in a single race. In November, 1780, there were three days of racing at Flat Lands Heath. 48 Races were run also along the highways of Manhattan Island, 4 " but because of complaints that this practice endangered the lives of travelers, it was forbidden by the police.80 Other sports were the " royal pastime " of cock-fighting, for which Rivington, the printer, kindly furnished the gaffs, 5 1 and bull-baiting " after the true English manner ". Tavern-keeper Loosely provided excellent dogs to bait his " Taurus " after his guests had enjoyed a dinner " exactly British " , enlivened by songs, particularly " Oh, the Roast Beef of Old England " . " Chess, golf, backgammon, bil48

Rivington, Gazette, Nov. 4, 1780.

49

Gaine, Mercury, Sept. 30, 1782.

50

Rivington, Gazette, Sept. 3, 1783.

61

Ibid., Jan. 25, 1783; Apr. 16, 1783.

52

Ibid., June 20, 1781; Aug. 29, 1781.

WAR-TIME

DIVERSIONS

185

liards, and battledore and shuttlecock were other popular games.53 Card games also had their devotees. Whist was probably the favorite of that period, and Hoyle Improved, or New Maxims for Playing the Game of Whist was in great demand at booksellers." Professional gamblers ran riot in town, and a warning was posted against strangers who tried to entice the unwary into taverns to defraud them of large sums of money. 5 ' Some of the inhabitants, however, looked upon cards as playthings of the devil. One of these was Judge William Smith, who recorded in his diary on April 6, 1780: " General Pattison observed to me that none but my daughter attended the public amusements. I mortified him by saying my wife and I thought ourselves too old. He was astonished, being himself near seventy. . . . I withdrew at eight, after coffee, and he sent his aide-de-camp after me to play a rubber of whist. I told him I never touched cards. . . . Heaven help a nation of triflers!" Bathing for cleanliness, health, and sport could be enjoyed by all. A bathing machine, " upon the plan of those used at Margate and other watering places in England ", was set up on the banks of the North River for those who wished to benefit from salt-water bathing. The rate was one guinea for the whole season, or one shilling for a single dip. This was an innovation of the British officers, who were surprised that people of wealth in the city had made no previous attempt to establish a watering place; " the gentlemen could scarce find a place to bathe in with decency, and the ladies, though [bathing was] of the greatest advantage to their delicate frames ", had been totally excluded. The season at the North River baths ran from June to the beginning " R i v i n g t o n , Gazette, Nov. 14, 1778. " Ibid., July 11, 1778; Oct. 24, 1778; Apr. 29, 1780; Jan. 2, 1782. 53

Gaine, Mercury,

Nov. 8, 1779.

See also Kemble, Journal, I, 609.

!86

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

of October and the hours were from six in the morning until noon." T o please the ladies, Henry Ludlam established a bathing place for their exclusive use in his yard on the North River near the Paulus Hook ferry, at the rate of four shillings " each time " . 5 7 Taverns played a large part in the social life of the city. The best and largest had long rooms which were rented for musical parties, entertainments, and balls, and were also the scene of political meetings, club and fraternal gatherings, and dinners.58 One of these was the City Tavern, known at various times as the Province Arms, the Bunch of Grapes, and the State Arms; it flourished under many proprietors, among them Hull, Hicks, Roubalet, and Capes. Other important taverns were Fraunces's or the Queen's Head Tavern, the Merchants' Coffee House, at Wall and Water Streets, and Loosely and Elms, known successively as the King's Head and Brooklyn Hall. 59 In fact, there were so 58 Rivington, Gazette, Apr. 18, 1778; A u g . 1, 1778. This machine was situated behind Harrison's brewery. The sexes had different hours for bathing.

" Ibid., Aug. 3, 1782. 68 A n idea of the size of a typical tavern may be learned from the description of Fraunces's Tavern, appearing in Gaine, Mercury, Mar. 19, 1781: " A n elegant three-story and a half brick dwelling house, situated in Great Dock Street at the corner of Pearl S t r e e t ; . . . and for many years distinguished as the Queen's Head Tavern; in which are nine spacious rooms, besides five bed chambers, with thirteen fireplaces, an excellent garret in which are three bedrooms, well furnished, an exceedingly good kitchen, and a spring of remarkable fine water therein; a most excellent cellar under the whole, divided into three commodious compartments " See Rivington, Gazette, Apr. 11, 1778, for a description

of Ranelagh, which had eleven rooms. Fraunces's Tavern has been restored by the Sons of the Revoution, and it still remains on the corner of Pearl and Broad Streets, one of the few reminders of Revolutionary days. 58 Other taverns are too numerous to mention. A partial list will give an idea of the names used: The Sign of the Faithful Irishman and Jolly

WAR-TIME

DIVERSIONS

187

many taverns that on January 1, 1780, Commandant Pattison reduced the number which could sell liquor to two hundred.80 As a special attraction, John M'Kenzie, of Ranelagh Gardens, had a band every Saturday to entertain his patrons who were enjoying the evening air in the "superb garden". 41 Mrs. Treville, at the London Coffee House, fitted out a commodious room and provided music, fire, and candles for her guests until ten o'clock,®2 while James Strachan sought new customers by advertising a hair-dresser in attendance." In spite of the war and difficulties of transportation, New York gourmands, civilian and military, had no lack of palatable delicacies. Biscuits, jellies, pickles, India say, mushroom ketchup, Spanish and French olives, Durham mustard, Gloucester cheese, walnuts, anchovies, sweet meats, Russian tongues, cakes, pickled salmon, and currants were advertised for sale by importers and merchants. Joseph Corre was the leading confectioner. He carried a tempting assortment of tarts, mince pies, custards, cakes, macaroons, jellies, blancmange, jordan almonds, and sugar candy. He also acted as caterer, advertised " dinners or suppers dressed abroad ", and furnished entertainment. There were a number of societies and clubs in New York Sailors; Chequor Tavern; Mount Pleasant; Sign of the Ship; Royal Punch House; Sign of the Grand Master; Navy Coffee House; Sign of Lord Cornwallis; Dove Tavern; Bull's Head Tavern; Black Horse Tavern; Sign of the Unicorn; Charing Cross Tavern; Sign of Red Lion; Defeat 11 Brandywine; and Sign of Joseph Brandt or the Indian King. 60

Rivington, Gazette, Jan. 5, 1780.

β1

Ibid., July 15, 1780. Belvoir, built in 1767, was situated on the site of the present 343 Broadway. Its successive owners renamed it the White Conduit House and Ranelagh. e2

Gaine, Mercury, Dec. 1, 1777.

" Rivington, Gazette, May 12, 1779.

ϊ88

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

which continued active during the British occupation. The Marine Society, formed in 1769-70 for "improving maritime knowledge and for relieving indigent and distressed masters of vessels", held its regular quarterly meetings throughout the war. From 1 7 7 6 to 1778 there were 572 members, with a fund of three thousand pounds.64 The St. Andrew's Society, organized in 1756, had a membership consisting mainly of Scotsmen. The Scots also had their Friendly Society and a Celtic or Highland Society. Then the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick observed March 1 7 , the day of their patron saint, while the Sons of St. George celebrated on April 23. There were two lodges of Free and Accepted Masons, which held stated meetings; St. John's Lodge observed the anniversary of St. John the Baptist on June 22, and Lodge No. 2 honored St. John the Evangelist in December. Meetings of all these societies were frequently scenes of merrymaking, with dinners, drinking, and speeches. When ladies were invited, preparations were more elaborate, and there was sometimes music and dancing. 95 Beaux and belles who wished to improve their social graces could learn dancing, fencing, and music from Martin Foy of Dock Street. 98 William Rowland of Glasgow taught drawing. The peaceful art of portraiture was not abandoned during the war; Rowland painted miniatures, 97 and John Colles took the " most striking likeness " in miniature at only a moment's sitting, glazing and framing his work to make it a lasting keepsake.98 John Ramage painted 64

Gaine, Almanac, 1776-78.

45

Rivington, Gasette, Feb. 26, 1 7 8 1 ; June 19, 1782; Dec. 25, 1782; Mar. 14, 1778; Apr. 4, 1778; Gaine, Mercury, Dec. 22, 1777. ββ

Rivington, Gasette, Sept. 18, 1779.

"Ibid., 88

Dec. 6, 1777.

Gaine, Mercury, Nov. 9, 1778.

WAR-TIME

DIVERSIONS

189

miniatures of " all the military heroes or beaux of the garrison, and all the belles of the place " . 8 8 Civilian dress did not change in New York City during the Revolution. The advertisements of clothing, both before and after, contained practically the same styles as those for the war period. The British army, in uniform, did not influence dress, except perhaps to inspire the belles to greater elegance and interest in beautifying their persons. T o add to their charms, the ladies, who attended many gay social functions, could always resort to " Eau de Fleurs de Venice, or Venetian Bloom Water " , which removed wrinkles, freckles, or pimples, and was " without dispute the most excellent cosmetic or beauty wash ever discovered " . Or they might use " Lady Molyneux's Italian Paste which enamelled the hands, neck, and face a lovely white, and made the roughest skin like velvet. It contained no paint, and prevented tan or sunburn. The " Bloom of Circassia " gave a rosy hue to the cheeks, and did not lose its color from perspiration or the use of a handkerchief. 70 A s a further aid to beauty, those who had lost their front teeth could buy new ones from those willing to dispose of their own. Decaying teeth could be treated at home with the amazing little pocket instruments which were bought from the printers. 71 There were a number of private coaches and chaises, some of them very elegant, to carry ladies and gentlemen to their smart affairs or to take them on pleasant drives. One coach was advertised in the Mercury for January 13, 1 7 7 7 : " The body-carriage is painted cream color, with flower-pots on each side and in back. In the latter is a cypher, ' Ο. T. steel springs, the inside, light cloth ". There were also «»Dunlap, Hist, of Arts of Design, I, 267-68; J . H. Morgan, John Ratnage. 70

Gaine, Mercury, Dec. 31, 1781.

71

Rivington, Gazette, Jan. 1 1 . 1783.

igo

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

public coaches, often termed flying-machines, which ran to various parts of the island. 72 In crossing to L o n g Island, one could use the police-controlled ferries, and a stage-boat plied between the city and Perth Amboy twice a week. 73 S o N e w Y o r k City, in spite of the hardships of war, had all the amusements of pre-war days. Indeed, the presence of the British army inspired more gaiety than there was before the war, when the city's social life was somewhat checked by the puritanical attitude of some of its influential citizens. L o n g periods of military activity also gave the officers and men of the army and navy opportunities to enjoy the theatre and concerts, hunting and racing, dinners and dancing, while civilians cooperated in making war less tedious for their military guests and rulers. 72

Rivington, Gazette, Sept. 14, 1782; Gaine, Mercury, May 25, 1778.

" Gaine, Mercury, Apr. 7, 1777.

CHAPTER Χ T H E M I L I T A R Y COOPERATION OF T H E L O Y A L I S T S

THE Loyalist military aid in behalf of the British has sometimes been underrated.1 Some historians have claimed that the Loyalists did not aid much in regular expeditions or even in sorties, but they did help appreciably, even at the beginning when they received no official encouragement from the military commanders. During the first two years of the war, the British army leaders did not consider using provincial troops, nor did they want them, and not until 1777 did their policy change.2 At first, the provincials were employed not for actual fighting, but for supplemental engineering work, such as sapping, or erecting fortifications for the protection of the regular army; or they were enlisted and trained in the British army, under the instruction of regular officers. There was no encouragement to organize separate Loyalist corps, and those that were raised in the Jerseys, in Maryland, Delaware, and North Carolina were quickly suppressed by Continental forces.3 Lack of royal support at the outset, however, did not prevent the organization of distinct Loyalist corps. The first provincial force raised near New York was the New York Volunteers, under Joshua Bangs, which was recruited in Westchester before the British troops reached the vicinity of New York. 4 These volunteers furnished their own arms 1

Van Tyne, Loyalists in the Amer. Rev., 146 et seq.

2

Ibid., 147.

3

Rivington, Gazette, Nov. 10, 1779.

*N. Y. Packet, Apr. 1 1 , 1776.

191

ig2

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

and equipment, escaped to Staten Island when the Continentals moved to New York in force, and cooperated with the Seventh Brigade which attacked the Americans on Long Island in August, 1776.° The important recruiting of Loyalists around New York, however, began in September, 1776, with the raising of three brigades by Oliver DeLancey to defend Long Island from attack." These three regiments were commanded by Colonels Cruger, Brewerton and Ludlow, and served throughout the war in many campaigns. Many other companies and corps originated elsewhere, but they had to depend on the city for many of their recruits, since New York was the chief Loyalist stronghold. Among the organizations which advertised in the city newspapers for volunteers were: the Queen's Rangers under LieutenantColonel Simcoe, the Volunteers of Ireland under Colonel Lord Rawdon, the British Legion commanded by LieutenantColonel Banastre Tarleton, the King's American Regiment led by Colonel Edmund Fanning, the Prince of Wales's American Volunteers under Colonel Mount fort Brown, and the Loyal Americans with Colonel Beverly Robinson commanding. Then there was the 60th Regiment, or Royal Americans, which had been recruited before the war entirely in America. Naturally a leader was necessary, and in February, 1777, Governor Tryon offered his services to the crown as commander of the provincial forces. He was accordingly appointed Major-General of the Provincials, a rank which made him inferior to corresponding officers in the British army. Tryon objected to this and in the following May, he was commissioned Major-General in America, with the command of the 70th Regiment, a ranking satisfactory to 8

Fortescue, Hist, of Brit. Army, III, 182; Winslow Papers, 43.

*N. Y. Col. Docs., V I I I , 687; Brit. Guards Order Book (1776), Sept 29, 1776.

MILITARY

COOPERATION

OF THE LOYALISTS

193

him.7 Other provincial military officers then began to object to their status on the army lists; but it was not until 1779 that an order was issued which stated that provincial officers who served with regulars would be ranked as juniors of the position to which they belonged, and, if wounded, they would receive the same pay as officers in the British army.8 Since the war did not end so quickly as the British generals expected, they began to realize that they needed more help than their regular troops were affording. A new policy was therefore adopted in April, 1777, when Sir William Howe issued a call for provincial troops to aid " his Majesty in restoring peace and order ". As an inducement to enlist, they were promised land in the colonies after two years' service—two hundred acres for each non-commissioned officer and fifty acres for each private." This offer gave the necessary impetus to enrollment, and the work of recruiting went on well. Within two weeks, two new corps were raised on Manhattan and Long Island, one for the Prince of Wales's Volunteers, and the other for the King's Loyal Orange Rangers. The new men received both clothing and a bounty of forty shillings for signing up.10 During the spring of 1777, most of the provincial corps were uniformed, and presented a handsome appearance. Their uniforms contrasted with the red ones of the regular army, being " chiefly green, faced with white " . " Some provincial units attracted men because their leaders were popular among the Loyalists. Certain corps, such as * Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 697-98, 71S, 746. Rivington, Gazette, May 19, 1779. 9 Gaine, Mercury, Apr. 21, 1777. 10 Stokes, Iconography, V, 1046, quoting St. James Chronicle, Apr. 3-5, 8

1777· 11

Gaine, Mercury, Apr. 14, 1777. See Lefferts, Uniforms.. .of the Amer. Rev., for pictures of uniforms of several provincial corps.

IQ4

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

the Queen's Rangers, were allowed by the Commander-inChief the exclusive privilege of enlisting Englishmen and deserters from the rebels; others were limited solely to loyal Americans. The provincial troops, however, derived most of their " value and discipline" from the fact that the majority of recruits were men who had been forced from their homes because of loyalty, and so they had a greater incentive to oppose their fellow countrymen. 12 LieutenantColonel Emmerich undertook to raise six companies of foot soldiers to consist of three hundred and sixty men, and t w o companies of light dragoons of one hundred men in March, 1778, promising that recruits would receive their bounties as soon as they enlisted; by applying to Captain Seton of the corps on L o n g Island, they would get five dollars more, and those who brought horses were to be paid for them. Further to induce enlistment. Emmerich was advertised as an affectionate leader, who saw to it that his soldiers lived like gentlemen and treated the well-behaved like brothers. 18 In spite of the many inducements offered, all these corps had great difficulty in filling their quotas, even though many country people enlisted. 14 This may account for the criticism of Loyalist military cooperation. Colonel Beverly Robinson claimed that, although his regiment was supposed to number five hundred men, he seldom had more than two hundred and fifty in the ranks, and he had the advantage of being able to call on many tenants for aid and allegiance. 18 DeLancey's three brigades never exceeded 707, less than half the expected enrollment. 18 A n estimate of the number of provincial troops may be 12

Simcoe, Journal, 17-20.

" R i v i n g t o n , Gazette, Mar. 9, 1778.

See also Winslow Papers, 16.

11

Montresor, Journal, 421.

15

Loyalist Transcripts, vol. 43, 225.

1β

Onderdonk, Rev. Incidents in Queens

Co., 244.

MILITARY

COOPERATION

OF THE LOYALISTS

195

obtained from a statement made in August, 1781, by the general board of British officers as follows: Jersey Volunteers, 582 men; DeLancey's 3rd Battalion, 157; Loyal American Regiment, 236; American Legion, 170; Volunteers of New England, 2 1 ; Guides and Pioneers, 182; Associated Loyalists, 305; Loyal Foresters, 16; Colonel DeLancey's Refugees, 490; Major Ward's Refugees, 344; King's and Queen's County Militia, 70; and a detachment of absent provincial regiments, 402; or a total of 3,332." Certainly this does not seem large, considering the total number who claimed loyalty to the crown; but these figures did not take into consideration the Loyalists who joined the regular army, nor all of the corps formed by Loyalists, since the account was mainly concerned with New York City. The principal value of the Loyalist corps to the British army was in scouting, skirmishing, and foraging, though they gave some assistance in regular engagements. A few incidents will be sufficient to show their value. On June 29, 1

777, the New York Company of Volunteers marched to White Plains and, after a successful attack, returned with prisoners, cattle, and horses; 1 8 Bayard's and Fanning's Corps behaved nobly in the storming of Forts Clinton and Montgomery on October 6, 1 7 7 7 ; 1 9 Emmerich's Chasseurs were victorious in the skirmish with some Americans and Indians at Kingsbridge in August, 1778; 2 0 on September 5, 1778, Tryon returned with his thousand provincials, who had captured many head of cattle; 21 Lord Rawdon's Corps 17 Minute Book of Gen. Board of Brit. Officers, 84-89. See also Onderdonk, Rev. Incidents in Queen's Co., 244; Gates Papers, in Ν. Y. Hist. Soc.; Stokes, Iconography, V, 1057, 1080. 18

Montresor, Journal, 426.

19

Kemble, Journal, I, 133-34, 138.

20

Montresor, Journal, 511.

21

Ν. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 750.

ige

NEW YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

and Bushkirk's Volunteers accompanied Cornwallis on an expedition into the Jerseys which ended at Tappan with the capture of Lady Washington's Guards, on September 28, 1 7 7 8 . " T w o battalions of DeLancey's Volunteers and two of Skinner's were among the troops which sailed for Florida under General Campbell, in November, 1778, 2 3 and during July, 1779, Farming's Corps, under Tryon's leadership, marched to plunder Connecticut. 21 The Loyalists also helped the British by enlisting in militia companies for the protection of the city. A s early as October, 1776, Tryon planned such a militia, and soon twenty independent volunteer companies were enrolled.2® They served as city guards, and relieved the regular army for service outside of the city. They also guarded military and civil prisoners, and erected fortifications. 2 ® The work of these militia companies can best be illustrated by a survey of the papers of one of the companies, that led by Christopher Benson. 27 One hundred and twelve men voluntarily organized a company in the fall of 1776, calling themselves the First Independent Company of New Y o r k Rangers, agreeing to obey every order or summons of their captain or other superior officers during the war. Each member then fitted himself out with the company's uniform, which consisted of a short red coat with blue lapels, a white-lined cape, and a round buckskin hat with a black feather. Captain Benson had to provide one sergeant, one corporal, and 22

Kemble, Journal, I, 162. " Ibid., I, 165-66. 21 Smith, Diary, VI, July 7-9, 1779· 25 Gaine, Mercury, Oct. 14, 1776; Rivington, Gazette, Nov. 22, 1777; Stokes, Iconography, V, 1041, quoting St. James Chronicle, Dec. 19-21, 1776. 26 Pattison, Letters, 126 et seq.; Kemble, Journal, I, 118; Schaukirk, Diary, June 26, 1780. 2T Christopher Benson Manuscripts are in the Ν. Y. Hist. Soc.

MILITARY

COOPERATION

OF THE

LOYALISTS

eighteen privates at ten o'clock every other day to guard East W h a r f , and he had to furnish his quota of men for engineering work and for prison duty. T h e various encouragements to enlisting in the provincial corps took men from the militia companies and, as their numbers were reduced, the companies consolidated until, by the winter of 1779, the twenty companies had decreased to nine. In that winter the rivers were frozen over, and the city was no longer protected by water against a surprise attack, since the ice was thick enough to support men and guns. Citizens who had joined no military organization were then conscripted to help defend N e w Y o r k against possible attacks by the Americans. O n January 20, 1780, Commandant Pattison ordered every male inhabitant between the ages of seventeen and sixty to enroll at once under the officer in charge of his district. Those who were already enlisted in the commissariat service or in any independent or volunteer company received certificates from their captains. A l l without such certificates had to join the new militia, which must not be confused with the older voluntary militia. A n exception was made for the two hundred and sixty city firemen, whose work was considered as necessary to the safety of the city as military service. One hundred and forty Quakers were also exempted on account of their religious belief, but even they were expected " to exert themselves in cases of emergency " . 2 8 Militiamen disobeying orders were either imprisoned or deported, for disobedience could not be tolerated in time of danger. 29 Indeed, one of the privates in Captain Benson's company was imprisoned for disorderly conduct. T h e citizens did not find any fault with Pattison's order at first, for they themselves had requested him to call them for duty. 80 28

Extracts

29

Rivington, Gazette, Jan. 22, 1780; Pattison, Letters,

from Dorchester

»0 Pattison, Letters, 160.

Papers. 160-61.

j98

SEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPEKDESCE

Commandant Pattison's conscription order resulted in the levying of 2,662 men, who were formed into forty civilian militia companies. The new volunteer companies, formed just prior to the conscripted ones, included the following units: the New York Marine Artillery, one company, 99 men; the Commissariat Loyal Volunteers, two companies, 207 men; Artificers' Ordnance Volunteers, one company, 71 men; Seamen's Ordnance Volunteers, three companies, 1 6 3 men; and the Engineer Volunteers, one company, 1 3 4 men. There were also companies without uniforms: the QuarterMaster-General's Volunteers, one company, 56 men; Barrack-Master-General's Volunteers, one company, 91 men; King's Dock Y a r d Volunteers, three companies, 1 6 1 men; the Royal Navy on shore, 355 men; and a miscellaneous group of seamen armed with pikes, 1 , 1 2 9 men. The nine uniformed " old companies" had a membership of 669. This made a grand total of 5,797· 31 Thus practically all male citizens, whether neutral or Loyalist, were enrolled, either by volunteering or by conscription, for the defence of the city, and were trained in the rudiments of military discipline. " G a i n e , Mercury, July 3, 1780; Rivington, Gazette, Feb. 9, 1780; Pattison, Letters, 161. In October, 1782, a new tabulation of the city militia was made. Extracts from Dorchester Papers. Volunteer Battalion, Lt. Col. Mathews ist Battalion, City Militia, Lt. Col. Walton 2nd Battalion, City Militia, Lt. Col. Wallace 3rd Battalion, City Militia, Lt. Col. Low 4th Battalion, City Militia, Lt. Col. Leake Loyal Commissariats, Capt. Lewis Ν. Y . Rangers, Capt. Benson Ν. Y . Highland Volunteers, Capt. Tolmie Massachusetts Volunteers, Capt. Taylor Old Volunteer Company, Capt. Hardenbrook Marine Artillery, Capt. Ashfield

347 651 414 508 514 140 80 100 67 47 90

2958

MILITARY

COOPERATION

OF THE LOYALISTS

igg

The conscripted militia were not disbanded when danger from attack lessened after the breaking up of ice in the rivers. Instead, they were kept busy with duties similar to those of the first volunteer militia companies. The monotony of guard duty, of prison patrols, and of erecting fortifications was sometimes broken for all the militia by parades. 82 They were partially relieved by regulars from guard duty in June, 1 7 8 0 , " but they continued to be employed in erecting fortifications on Bunker's Hill, starting at six in the morning. Those who were unwilling to work were allowed to hire substitutes.' 4 L i f e for the militiaman continued about the same for the next two y e a r s . " In the summer of 1782 there was active discontent among the citizens at being forced to continue military service; and, " either from rebellious principles or other motives as dishonorable " , many fled to Long Island to avoid duty, despite the efforts of the King's County militia to prevent their crossing to, and remaining on, Long Island." This spirit of dissatisfaction soon spread to all the militia, who refused to serve after August 5 . " Possibly the news that a treaty was about to be concluded partially accounted for this objection, and the citizen watches were forthwith discontinued."8 Formal announcement of the treaty was made in the spring of 1783, but the city volunteer companies and 32 Gaine, Mercury, Aug. 3, 1778; July 9, 1781; Rivington, Gazette, Nov. 22, 1777. 83

Schaukirk, Diary, June 26, 1780.

" Miscellaneous Mss., in Ν. Y . Hist. Soc. 85

Schaukirk, Diary, June 16, 1782; Miscellaneous Mss., in Ν. Y . Hist. Soc. 38 Rivington, Gazette, July 12, 1782. 37

Schaukirk, Diary, Aug. 5, 1782.

38

Von Krafft, Journal, 165.

200

-ViM7

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

IXDEPEXDE.XCE

militia were not disbanded until June,39 after which civilians were no longer required for military duty. The militia, enlisting only for local service, did no campaigning outside of the city. They were untrained in field manoeuvres but improved with experience. 40 They finally became so efficient that William Smith, in his Notes on the American C a m p a i g n " of 1780, wondered why General Knyphausen kept eleven thousand regulars and provincials around New Y o r k when the militia was sufficient for its defence, in view of the fact that Clinton might have used the regulars to good advantage in his southern campaign against Charleston. A t this time the British authorities seem to have returned to their earlier view of provincial troops. Instead of utilizing the militia for city defence and their regular troops elsewhere, they forced some of the militiamen to join the regular army. In April, 1780, two British regiments seized many of the younger men, 41 and a Captain Grinnell, who escaped from the prison-ship Scorpion in New Y o r k harbor, said that on the day of his flight " there was the hottest press ever known ", over seven hundred laborers, clerks, and refugees being conscripted for the British army. 42 This last account might be questioned were it not for the fact that the Hessian V o n K r a f f t also told of similar occurrences. These actions certainly were not conducive to good feeling between the civilians and the soldiers, while the men seized were not likely to be efficient or trustworthy. Despite the ill-feeling of the townspeople, the British regarded impressment as a necessity of war, considering only the immediate gain in numbers of soldiery, 39

Rivington, Gazette, June 10, 1783.

40

Von Krafft, Journal, 118.

11

Ibid., 109.

** Penna. Packet, Aug. 22, 1780.

MILITARY

COOPERATION

OF THE LOYALISTS

2Ol

not the indirect and unfavorable result it would have in antagonizing their civilian and militia supporters. Besides serving on land in the regular army, provincial corps, or militia, the Loyalists helped the British on the water, both by privateering on the high seas, a topic which has already been discussed, and in Long Island Sound. They were particularly useful in the Sound, preventing incursions of Americans on Long Island, and guarding market and supply boats plying to the city. The type of boat used in the waters adjacent to the city and Long Island was known as the whaleboat, which could be propelled swiftly and almost silently through the water. They were small and easily handled, and yet held sufficient men to be effective along the shores held by the enemy. Light enough to be carried by their crews, they were easily dragged on shore and hidden. In some instances, American Whigs carried their boats from Long Island Sound to Great South Bay to give their operations greater range. This whaleboat warfare was carried on by Americans on both sides, loyal and rebel, with the same purposes of obtaining food for their own side and decreasing their enemies' supplies, gaining information, and, in short, harming the opposing side in any way. Later whaleboat raids made the subsistence of Loyalists on Long Island, where most of the skirmishes were carried on, extremely precarious, and seriously interfered with the transportation of food to the city. Another object of the whaleboatmen was to capture prisoners who could be exchanged for fellow-partisans already seized by the enemy. But by far the most important work which these marauders did was to inflict great damage upon the property of the enemy and enemy sympathizers. What started as a legitimate form of naval warfare soon degenerated into indiscriminate plundering of both Whigs and Tories under the cloak of expeditions to destroy enemy

202

A ' £ J F YORK DURING

IVAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

property, or to gain military information; and robbery for individual gain only was the result of many excursions of the whaleboatmen.43 To recount all the expeditions of the whaleboats would involve an endless repetition of like incidents, but a few words about some of them will suffice to indicate what was done. In June, 1778, a force of Americans landed near Flatbush and captured Major Moncrieffe and Theophylact Bache; it was only by leaping from a window that Mayor Mathews escaped.44 The same month, three or four whaleboats attempted to land at Lloyd's Neck, but they were driven off by a detachment of DeLancey's Brigade. 4 ' The following February, twelve rebels landed at Coram and captured two wagons loaded with dry goods. They remained on Long Island several days, committing many robberies.4" In August, 1780, a house in Hempstead was robbed of several hundred pounds, and the same night a woman lost thirty pounds in cash and a wagon worth eighty pounds.47 According to information gained by Judge Jones, when he was captured by whaleboatmen, the Whig and the Tory marauders were more or less in collusion, and never hindered their opponents on a raid that would secure valuable loot.48 The Loyalists suffered more from whaleboat attacks than did the Whigs, for the latter were more energetic, and the British did not carefully guard the extended coastline of 43

Onderdonk, Rev. Incidents in Queen's Co., 252; Mather, Refugees from L. I. to Conn., chaps. 22-25. 44

Rivington, Gazette, June 17, 1778.

13

Ibid., June 29, 1778.

*° R i v i n g t o n , Gazette, A u g . 9-16, 1783; Vindication et seq.; Rep. on Amer.-Mss., I V , 363. 81 Ν. Y. City Loyalists, 3-4.

during

Anter.

Rev.,

144-45;

Harris,

of

Gov.

United

Parr,

9

Empire

*2 Penna. Packet, Sept. 18, 1783; also the advertisements in the New York papers for Aug. and Sept., 1783. M

Rivington, Gazette, Sept. 20, 1783.

EXODUS

OF THE

LOYALISTS

215

this order was not obeyed, for as late as November 2 1 , a contingent sailed for Abaco, while others were still waiting.34 Civilian Loyalists were not the only emigrants to Canada. Before September, 1783, according to Carleton's list, the following provincial corps also embarked for Nova Scotia: British Legion, Queen's Rangers, King's American Regiment, New York Volunteers, Loyal Americans, New Jersey, Volunteers, two of DeLancey's Battalions, Prince of Wales's Volunteers, Pennsylvania and Maryland Loyalists, American Legion, Guides and Pioneers, Black Pioneers, North and South Carolina Volunteers, and North Carolina Independent Company.®5 These Loyalist combatants were also granted land in Canada. According to a report issued by Commissary-General Watson, a total of over twenty-nine thousand, including discharged soldiers and their families sailed from New York in 1783 before the city was finally and officially evacuated. Possibly eleven thousand had left before 1783; of these, probably six thousand made their home in the British Isles, and the others went to Canada. Of the total of forty thousand emigrants about thirty-two thousand were civilian Loyalists, perhaps one-third of whom were originally New Yorkers. According to a semi-official report, of the 29,244 who sailed in 1783, 28,347 went to various parts of Canada, mainly in the neighborhood of St. John, New Brunswick, and Shelburne, Nova Scotia; comparatively few went to Abaco." 31

Ν. Y. Packet, Nov. 20, 1783.

85

Extracts from Dorchester Papers; Winslozu Papers, passim.

Johnston, " Evacuation of N e w Y o r k , " 913, in Harper's Magazine, L X V I I ; Eaton, Ν. Y. Loyalists to Nova Scotia, 172-73; Siebert, Flight of Amer. Loyalists to British Isles, 1 9 ; Siebert, Loyalists of Amer. Rev. to Brit. West Indies; Rep. on Amer. Mss., I V , 271-72, 479; Winsor, Narr, and Crit. Hist., V I I , 185. The places of settlement w e r e : Abaco, 1458; St. John's, 9260; Shelburne, 7923; Annapolis, 1830; Passamaquoddy, 1 7 8 7 ;

2i6

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

A f e w words must be said of the monetary aid which the British government gave the Loyalists after the war. T h e peace treaty left them at the mercy of the American states, especially with respect to the article concerning the collection of debts and recovery of property. Foreseeing that they would receive scant consideration, the Loyalists organized and named a committee of thirteen, one from each colony, to " enlighten the British public and adopt measures of procedure in securing the attention and action of the ministry in their behalf These agents drew up a tract, The Case and Claim of the American Loyalists, impartially stated and considered, printed in London in 1783, which maintained that it was " an established rule that all sacrifices made by individuals for the benefit or accommodation of others " should be " equally sustained by all ". Numerous cases in the works on international law of Puffendorf, Burlamaqui, and Vattel were used to prove that the sacrifices of the L o y alists came within this principle, which also extended to cases in which territory w a s ceded by one sovereign power to another. Then, too, the claimants held that they were as " perfectly subjects of the British State as any man in London or Middlesex " , and so should be entitled to the same relief. T h e y had been called upon by their K i n g to help defend the nation; the peace treaty included no provision for them and so, they claimed, Great Britain should make compensation. Upon the reopening of Parliament, the K i n g spoke of the sufferings of the loyal Americans who had been forced Digby, 129s; Chedabucto, 1053; Cumberland, 856; Halifax, 651; Dartmouth, 480; Island of St. John's, 380; and the rest widely scattered. O f those who went to Canada, 12,383 were men; 5,486 women; 4,671 children over ten; 4,575 under ten; and 1,232 servants. ST Sabine, Loyalists, I, 104; Ryerson, Loyalists of America and Their Times, II, 166. James DeLancey was the New Y o r k agent.

EXODUS

OF THE

LOYALISTS

217

to give up their property and business, and hoped that " generous attention would be shown them ". Early in June, 1783, a bill was introduced into Parliament, and passed without much opposition, for " Appointing Commissioners to Enquire into the Losses and Services of all Such Persons who have suffered in their Rights, Properties, and Professions during the late Unhappy Dissensions in America in consequence of their Loyalty to his Majesty and Attachment to the British Government ". A f t e r much debate over the details of the commission, its powers were finally agreed upon, and John Eardley Wilmot, Daniel Parker Coke, Robert Kingston, Thomas Dundas, and John Marsh were appointed commissioners with power to examine all persons presenting sworn claims, to hear witnesses, and to send for records." Some of the commissioners sat in London to hear the petitioners living in the British Isles, and the rest in Halifax for those who had gone to Canada. The Loyalist claimants were divided into six classes at first: those who had rendered services to Great Britain, those who had borne arms for her, consistent Loyalists, loyal subjects living in Great Britain, those who had joined the British cause after taking oath " to support the American States, and Loyalists who had borne arms for America but later had joined the royal forces. Later three more classes were added: Loyalists sustaining losses only under the Prohibitory Act, loyal British proprietors, and Loyalists still living in the United States. Every appplicant had to furnish proof of his loyalty, and of every loss for which he asked compensation. If the com38 For a full description of the work of this commission, sec Wilmot, Historical View of the Commission for Enquiring into the Losses, Services, and Claims of the Amer. Loyalists at the close of the War between Great Britain and her Colonies in 1783... ; Coke, The Royal Commission on the Losses and Services of Amer. Loyalists, 1783-1785; Loyalist Transcripts.

2i8

HEW

YORK

DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

missioners believed that perjury was being committed, the claimant at once forfeited all hope of recovering his losses. The rules laid down, and the procedure of questioning the witnesses separately, made the inquiry seem more like an inquisition, with the claimants placed almost in the position of criminals on whom the burden of proof rested. This, however, seemed to be necessary, as the Loyalists were prone to overestimate their losses. Had they not been forced to furnish incontestable proof, the British treasury would have been strained to the limit. Under such a system, however, it was said, the unscrupulous were likely to fare best, through the introduction of false testimony, and many worthy persons were deprived of compensation because they did not possess the means to bring their witnesses from America, and their own testimony was not sufficient.8" There \vere 3,225 claims presented in England and Canada, of which 2.291 were examined, the rest being disallowed, withdrawn, or not prosecuted. The total amount of claims presented was £10,583,413, with but £3,033,091 allowed up to March, 1790. Besides this, £25,785 was paid to 204 Loyalists for their loss of office or profession, while other pensions were paid to 588 persons, chiefly widows, orphans, and merchants without means of livelihood, who had lost no real or personal property except debts due to them.40 How some New Yorkers fared may be learned from the following examples, selected at random from the Loyalist Transcripts, in the New York Public Library: 89

Ryerson, Loyalists of Amcrica and Their Times, II, 116 et seq. Wilmot, Historical View of the Commission . . . , 90 et seq. In 1782, £40,280 was allowed to 315 persons for temporary support, 56 receiving £5,595 a year, and 259, £34,695. " These annual allowances were not intended as compensation for their losses, but as temporary provisions for their support till the close of the war." Ibid., 15-23. 40

EXODUS

LOYALISTS

219

Claims for Loss Sum originally of Property allowed Mary Auchmuty £5,098(sterling) £1,400 16,966 Col. William Axtell 9,442 Joseph Allicocke 2,287 Charles W. Apthorp .. 1,899 28,737 Christopher Billopp 5.I7I 210 Robert Bayard 11,047 22,983 William Bayard 65,274 300 7,500 Theophylact Bache 1,762 Peter Berton 665 1,360 4,280 Abraham Cuyler Col. I. Harris Cruger .. 3,472 1,125 24,940 Oliver DeLancey 78,016 Stephen DeLancey 1,744 363 /,38ο 3,400 Andrew Elliott 7,909 Charles Inglis 3,670 Thomas Jones 12,631 5,392 Samuel Kemble 794 87 1,256 Archibald Kennedy 4,855 Isaac Low 5,667 14,897 2,500 7,000 George D. Ludlow 250 David Mathews 2,059 1,000 John Montresor 3-450 61,890 5,000 Roger Morris 20,702 12,361 John Rapalje Beverly Robinson 25,900 John L. Roome 200 1,103 William Smith 1,350 William Tryon 885 6,114

Sum as allowed on Revision

Name

OF THE

£1,580 400 400 310 19,397

928

4,135 5,522

5,195

5,503 10,630 24,764 1,200 990

F o r loss of income, William Smith claimed £2,300, but received only £ 1 , 2 0 0 ; Mayor Mathews gained all of his £400 claim, and Andrew Elliot received £ 1 , 3 0 0 of his demand. While these claims were being examined the Loyalists were doing much for Canada. They built up a country that was practically a wilderness when they arrived, and they formed the foundation of the future Dominion. William Smith became a chief-justice, Gabriel Ludlow, a judge of vice-admiralty, George Duncan Ludlow, a councillor and later a chief-justice in New Brunswick, David Mathews,

220

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

council president at Cape Breton. Beverly Robinson, who was appointed to the New Brunswick council never took his seat, but Charles Inglis became bishop of N o v a Scotia, and Christopher Billopp, assemblyman, councillor, and president of that province. November 25, 1783, was a red letter day for patriotic N e w Yorkers. A s the British troops withdrew from the Battery, and Washington's men marched triumphantly down Manhattan Island to the very heart of the city, thousands of Americans, who had drifted back to town after the news of peace, greeted the victors with open arms. T h e scenes enacted were indescribable, for the elaborate ceremonies, parades, and banquets 41 were supported wholeheartedly by those who had spent seven long years in exile. T h e task of governing the city, abandoned by the British military authorities, was taken up immediately after the return of the American troops by the Council in charge of the Southern District, which included the counties of N e w Y o r k , Suffolk, Kings, Queens and Richmond. T h i s group had been authorized by an act of the State Legislature on October 23, 1779, and was composed of the Governor, the President of the Senate, Chancellor, Supreme Court Judges, Senators, Assemblymen, Secretary of State, Attorney-General, and the County Court Judges. A quorum was seven, of which the Governor must be one. These men were to assume authority " whenever the enemy shall abandon or be dispossessed of the same, and until the Legislature can be convened They were empowered to preserve peace and prevent monopolies, prohibit exportation, billet troops, seize and impress fuel, forage, vessels, horses, and carts, supply markets and regulate prices, control elections, and confine anyone charged with treason. So, for the first time since 41

Rivington, Gazette, Nov. 26, 1783; Holt, Journal, Nov. 29, 1783.

42

Holt, Laws of New York, 2nd sess., chap. 28.

EXODUS

OF THE

LOYALISTS

221

1776, New Y o r k was ruled by an elected body, and it was said " the most perfect regularity and good order prevailed The summary character of this council reminds us of the military government during the British occupation, but it was a necessary measure. The American council had charge only until conditions were settled, and as soon as possible it prepared for a restoration of civil municipal government. On December 1 5 , the Whigs who had returned to the city and who were authorized to vote before the war, elected seven alderman and their seven assistants, forming the Common Council which was to help govern the city in the future." The Act of March 27, 1778, 45 prohibiting Loyalists from voting or holding office was adhered to strictly during the election. On February 5, 1784, James Duane was appointed Mayor by Governor Clinton, taking his oath on the seventh, and thus the municipal government was completed.4® The Council f o r the Southern District then ceased to function. Meantime, a " considerable number of Whig inhabitants " nominated candidates for the State Senate and Assembly on December 1 7 , 1783, and the city was represented for the first time in the state government, which had been operating since the formation of the State Constitution in ι 7 7 7 . " The city quickly returned to normal conditions. Churches, which had not been damaged too badly by the British, were reopened, schools were established or resumed, newspapers were printed, new stores opened, new taverns advertised their vintages, and many more patriots returned to 43

Sparks, Life and Writings of Washington, V I I I , 500.

44

Holt, Journal, Dec. 13-20, 1783.

45

Holt, Laws of New York, ist sess., chap. 16.

48

Doc. Hist, of Ν. Υ., I V , 6 5 1 ; Ν. Y. Packet, Feb. 9, 1784.

47

Holt, Ν. Y. Journal, Dec. 20, 1783.

222

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

48

their old homes. Not all the Loyalists who had lived in the city during the war left at its close, and those who remained were not at first molested personally,49 though their rights as citizens and property owners were affected by laws passed during the war by the State Legislature. F o r instance, on October 22, 1778, the " Act for the Forfeiture and Sale of the Estates who have adhered to the enemies of the State. . . . " named fifty-nine persons, many of them prominent N e w Yorkers. 8 0 Ο f course, this confiscation could not take place within the city until the British troops withdrew, but on April 6, 1784, Isaac Stoutenburg was authorized to sell confiscated estates to the amount of twenty thousand pounds for the " public exigencies and on May 1 2 the State Legislature named seven commissioners to dispose of all the unsold confiscated lands within the city, either privately or at auction." Under this statute, Roger Morris's estate was sold in July for the small sum of £2,250, and in August the sale of James DeLancey's land was begun, which finally brought $ 2 3 4 , 1 9 8 . 7 5 . " In February, 1784, Cadwallader and David Colden, John Watts, Jr., and a few other prominent New Y o r k Loyalists, petitioned the Assembly to remove the acts of banishment against them which 48

Rivington, Gazette, Dec. 6-17, 1783.

49

Corres, and Public Papers of John Jay, III, 95.

50

The act also banished the persons named, and provided for the indictment and trial of all persons of loyalist tendencies within the state whose property would be confiscated if convicted. All crown lands were to be vested in the people of the state. Laws of New York, 3rd sess., chap. 25; Jones, Hist, of New York, II, 510-40; List of Loyalists against whom judgments were given under the confiscation act, in Ν. Y . Public Library. 61

Holt, Laws of New York, 7th sess., chap. 20.

52

Holt, Laws of New York, 7th sess., chap. 64.

53

Liber Deeds, X L V I I I , 451-52; Jones, Hist, of New York, II, 540-49. The DeLancey sale was not completed until 1786. The Morris estate was sold to John Berrian and Isaac Ledyard.

EXODUS

OF THE

LOYALISTS

223

the New Y o r k Congress had passed during the war. It was not until May, however, that, by special legislative permit, twenty-seven Tories were allowed to stay within the S t a t e . " Meantime the Council for the Southern District had passed an ordinance on December 16, 1783, empowering the district commissioners on forfeitures to take possession of all lands forfeited to the State, according to the A c t of October, 1780, which provided for their sale to redeem state bills of credit." B y this ordinance, many of the Loyalists w h o remained were deprived of their property.5® There were t w o other laws passed by the State of N e w Y o r k during the war which affected the Loyalists after it. One was the law of October 22, 1779, " to preserve the freedom and independence " of the State. Because there were within N e w Y o r k persons " holding principles inimical to the Constitution ", as well as " entertaining sentiments hostile to its independence ", who actively engaged on the royal side during the war, the Assembly deprived them forever of the privilege of voting or holding any office within the S t a t e . " This act which supplemented the law of March 27, 1778, already mentioned, has been said by one writer to have disfranchised and deprived of civil rights two-thirds of the male adults in New Y o r k City, Richmond, and K i n g ' s County, nine-tenths of those in Queen's, and one-fifth of those in Suffolk. 5 8 This estimate is by far too high, however, as the emigration of Loyalists has not been sufficiently M

Loyalist Transcripts, I, 345; Greenleaf, Laws of New York, I, 127-59.

Holt, Lows of New York, 4th sess., chaps. 11, 5 1 ; Holt, Journal, Dec. 20, 1783. 55

56 See Loyalist Transcripts, passim, especially vol. 45, 5 et seq.; Ν. Gazetteer, Jan. 21, 1784. 5 7 Holt, Laws of New York, 7th sess., chap. 66; Jones, Hist, of York, II, 549 et seq. 68

Flick, Loyalism,

163-64.

Υ.

New

NEW

YORK

DURING

WAR

FOR

INDEPENDENCE

considered. Perhaps one-third would be more nearly correct for New York City. Another act of the Legislature, which affected Loyalist property after the war, was passed, on March 17, 1783, to grant a " more effectual relief in cases of certain trespasses ". Any inhabitant of the State who had been forced to leave his home on account of enemy invasion, and who had not been voluntarily within the power of the enemy since that time, could bring an action of trespass " against any person or persons who occupied, injured, or destroyed his . . . estate, either real or personal. . . .". 5β This Trespass Act resulted in many suits brought by Whigs against Tories who had occupied their homes in the city, for recovery of rent for the years 1776-1783. The most important case was that of Rutgers vs. Waddington, which was used to test the validity of the law. The Widow Rutgers had fled from the city on the approach of the British in 1776, and as a result was almost penniless. Her property in the city, consisting of a brewhouse and a malthouse in Maiden Lane, had been occupied from 1778 until the close of the war by a large and wealthy brewing firm, one of whose members was Joshua Waddington. For three years Waddington had paid an annual rent of one hundred and fifty pounds to the commissarygeneral by order of the British commandant, and for the other years the brewery had been occupied rent-free. When the British left the city, the American authorities ordered the brewers to pay rent to the son of Mrs. Rutgers. She, however, was not at all satisfied with their arrangement, and filed suit in the Mayor's Court for arrears of rent. Attorney-General Egbert Benson conducted the prosecution, and no less able a lawyer than Alexander Hamilton represented Waddington. A t first the case seemed a simple one for the 59 Indep. Ν. Y. Gazette, Nov. 22, 1783; Ν. Y. City during Amer. Rev., 165.

EXODUS

OF THE

LOYALISTS

225

court to decide, for the evidence favored the widow; but the people failed to take into accounts the logic and clear thinking of Hamilton, who made the issue, not sympathy for a poor widow, but the honor of a nation, bound to maintain its treaty obligations. Could the subjects of one nation sue those of another for property damage incurred while the war was in progress ? The property of Mrs. Rutgers had been used according to the accepted rules of international law, and the treaty of peace included all the damage claims advocated by both sides, thus freeing the British from further payment. " Our external sovereignty existing in the Union, the property of all citizens, in regard to foreign states, belongs to the United States ", said Hamilton. Therefore to make the defendent answerable, " would be a breach also of the Articles of Confederation ". The Mayor's Court, despite the tide of public sympathy, handed down a decision on August 7, 1786, in favor of Waddington, refusing to allow Mrs. Rutgers any rent for the years the Loyalist had paid, and expressed the opinion that the Trespass Act violated the treaty by permitting further claims, although " no state in this Union can alter or abridge, in a single point, the Federal Articles or the treaty ". eo A case which involved less public interest was that against Archibald Hamilton. His land had been seized under the Trespass Act to satisfy the demands of certain persons from e ® Dawson, Rutgers vs. Waddington. This case led to a pamphlet war between Hamilton and Isaac Ledyard, and indignation rose high. The court was censured on the ground that its decision tended to subvert law and order, and would lead to confusion and anarchy, as all acts of the legislature would be at the mercy of the judiciary. But the attempt to have a new court named which would uphold the laws of the state was defeated by a large majority. Ν. V. Assembly Journal, Oct. 27-Nov. 2, 1784. On October 29, 1784, however, Thomas Ivers and others were freed from payment of rent for houses within the city during the occupation. Ν. Y. Assembly Journal, 27-28; Min. Comm. Coun. (1784-1831), I. 8-1i.

226

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

whose land Hamilton had ordered timber to be cut, and whose horses and wagons had been impressed by him while in the line of military duty. He was warned that if he did not appear before the inferior court of common pleas judgment would be entered against him by default. Luckily, the tide of public opinion had changed by the time his case came up, and he freed himself of the charges. 61 But this case shows that the treaty was being flagrantly violated, for it certainly was not in the line of international law to punish a person f o r deeds done in the line of military duty. Despite the Waddington decision, rancor and ill-feeling against the Loyalists continued. In May, 1784, the Sons of Liberty had resolved that Whigs and Tories could never intermingle, nor could the city government be firmly established while so many Loyalists remained in town. The Loyalists, they claimed, competed with the patriots, who were therefore deprived of means of livelihood. 62 Within two years, however, conditions in the city improved, people resumed pre-war prosperity, and hatred and bitterness gradually decreased. John J a y was able to write to Lord Landsdowne in 1786 that disqualified Tories were then sitting in the Legislature, that they had been restored to the practice of law, and that the obnoxious statutes were being less and less rigidly enforced. 63 With the return to peace and civil government, the city resumed its diverse pre-war activities with great optimism for a future more prosperous and progressive than the past. Economically, both within the city and in foreign trade, the city recovered quickly from the war depression. A new 81

Loyalist Transcripts, vol. 46, 5 et seq.; Ν. Y. Daily Advertiser, Aug.

13. 1787. 42

Ρetwa. Packet, Apr. 6, 1784. See also Min. Comm. Coun. (1784-

1831), I, 35-39·

·' Corres, and Public PaPers of John Jay, III, 191-92.

EXODUS

OF THE

LOYALISTS

227

bank, the Bank of New York, was organized in February, 1784, with a capital consisting of seven hundred and fifty shares valued at one thousand dollars each, one-third of which was paid in cash and the remainder was given in mortgages or conveyed in trust. The next month Alexander M'Dougall was elected president, with Hamilton, Waddington, Isaac Roosevelt, and John Vanderbilt listed among its directors." In May, 1785, the Empress of China, the first American vessel to trade with the Chinese Empire, returned to New York with a profit of more than thirty thousand dollars, or twenty percent of the invested capital,®5 and this enterprise showed that New Yorkers were not slow in attempting to regain some of their lost prestige in the field of trade and commerce, where they knew their future lay.88 In November, 1785, there was organized the General Society of Mechanics and Tradesmen. The declared intention of this society was to " promote mutual fellowship, confidence, and good understanding among the various descriptions of mechanics; as far as possible to prevent litigation and disputes among tradesmen; afford relief to distressed members; and to establish funds to enable the society to carry its laudable designs into effect ". The several trades elected delegates to the general committee and each trade had a separate organization which was considered a branch of this M

Ν. V. Packet, Feb. 12, Mar. 18, 1784.

es

Stevens, Progress of Ν. Y. in a Century, 46; Corres, and Public Papers of John Jay, III, 144-49- The Empress of China had left the city on Feb. 22, 1784. ββ In a Broadside, signed Cincinnatus, Dec. 23, 1783, to the electors of the city at large, the author, pleading for the election of proper men for the Assembly, wrote: " Let me briefly enquire into the nature of our local situation, on what the City of New York has to rely, not for her own existence, but for that of the adjacent country? In one word, it is Commerce:—a wide, extended, and universal commerce with all the nations,... merchants, and traders of the world." Broadside in Ν. Y. Hist. Soc.

228

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

committee, to which at first only master workmen could belong ; later the ordinary workers were allowed to join.*7 A smaller organization, the Society of Peruke Makers and Hair Dressers, was formed with twenty-three members about the same time for the same purpose.*8 King's College, which had been practically moribund throughout the war, was revived immediately by its remaining governors, who looked forward to its being even more influential and important than before the war. In March, 1784, the governors petitioned the Legislature for a revision of the charter, at the same time requesting " an extension of the privileges . . . so as to render it the Mother of an University " within the State." On May 1, the Assembly replied by changing the name of King's College to Columbia College, and establishing the " Regents of the University of the State of New Y o r k ". T0 Notwithstanding these activities, there was a business depression, wages soared, 71 the poor increased,72 and the city was in debt. Furthermore, there had not only been a cessation of building and public improvements during the war, but a large and important section of town has been destroyed in the fire of 1776, and this had not been rebuilt during the British occupation. Many shopkeepers and merchants failed, and bad times prevailed. Prices increased, yet ex" Annals of Gen'l Society of Mechanics and Tradesmen in City of N. Y^ 7 et seq.; Hodge, Allen, and Campbell, Ν. Y. Directory and Register, 178g. In 1786, there were 44 members, which increased to 165 in 1792, and to 488 in 1798. After 1789, the society resolved to take no part in elections as an organization. ω

Franks, Ν. Y. Directory, 1786. ** Pine, King's College, 18. 10 Holt, Laws of New York, 7th sess., chap. 51. T1 Ν. Y. Daily Advertiser, Feb. 22, 1786. T2

Min. Comm. Conn. (1784-1831), I, 48-50, 185. In January, 1787, the Society for the Relief of Distressed Debtors was formed.

EXODUS

OF THE

LOYALISTS

229

travagance continued among the upper classes." The city did its best, however, to overcome the disorder and chaos which resulted from the war. Streets were widened; buildings, wharves, wells, and fences were repaired; " C a n v a s Town " , the section burned in 1776, was built up; and efforts were made to lessen the huge corporation debt.74 Within three years the population doubled. At the evacuation, the number of inhabitants was estimated at twelve t h o u s a n d ; " but by August, 1786, the number had mounted to 2 3 , 6 1 4 , " as compared with 21,000 in 1 7 7 1 . B y 1787, the city had practically recovered. Brissot de Warville, in writing of his trip through the United States, said of New Y o r k : " . . . Whilst everywhere in Europe the villages and towns are falling to ruin, rather than augmenting, new edifices here are rising on all sides. New York was in great part consumed by fire in the time of the war. The vestiges of this terrible conflagration disappear; they enlarge in every quarter and extend their streets. Elegant buildings in the English style take place of those sharp roofed, sloping houses of the Dutch. . . . The river is forced back two hundred feet. . . . I see nothing but busy workmen repairing and building " . " ™ Τ. Ε. V. Smith, Ν. Y. City in 1789, 5; Ν. Y. Gazette, Aug. 4, 1786. 74

Sec Min. Comm. Coun. (1784-1831), I, passim, for the various city ordinances calculated to bring the city back to its pre-war condition. 75

Johnson, " Ν. Y . after the Revolution," in Mag. of Amer. Hist., v o l 29,308. 79 Ν. Y. Indep. Journal, Dec. 30, 1786. There were 4360 males and 4360 females under 16, 6141 males and 6746 females over 16, 896 male and 1207 female blacks, and 4 Indians paying taxes.

" D e Warville, New Travels in the U. S. A. performed in 1788 (London, 1794), 128-33. In the Ν. Y. Daily Advertiser, Jan. 9, 1788, a citizen objected to extending the land into the Hudson, as the " Island of New York contains a sufficient quantity of ground for a much larger city than will ever be built upon it."

230

NEW

YORK DURING

WAR FOR

INDEPENDENCE

New York was chosen by the last Congress of the Confederation as the provisional capital of the United States. There on April 30, 1789, in the old City Hall, remodeled as a Federal Hall for the reception of Congress, President Washington was inaugurated. For two years the city, which for seven years had been out of the control of the newly organized American nation, served as its capital. By 1790, New York had become the largest city of the land, and the effects of the war had practically disappeared.

APPENDIX A [PAUL

WENTWORTH]

MINUTES

RESPECTING

P A R T I E S IN A M E R I C A A N D S K E T C H E S OF T H E PERSONS

IN

EACH

STEVENS,

[1778]. Facsimiles, no. 487. PROVINCE

POLITICAL LEADING FROM

The parties in America in the years 1774 and 1775 may be classed under the following opinions: Submission to the Legislative Authority of Great Britain; 2. Restoring the System of 1763; and, 3. A Parliamentary decline of exemption from taxation; 4. Independency from the control of Parliament. . . . In the middle provinces this opinion had many adherents in New York. Yet a Franklin by letting in the numerous distant and inferior counties of Pennsylvania, and the Livingstons of New York and Jersey governed by him to follow the same popular maxim, quite overturned the orderly government, and bore down those who dared to avow the opinion. The second opinion had a very large majority throughout the Provinces and in Congress—DeLanceys, Morris, and Livingstons, etc., etc., etc., supported it. But the absentees of the first class or those who fell into the second, confided too much in the exertions they expected from Great Britain, or were too little jealous of the extreme activity, zeal, and ability of those who listed under the third and fourth opinions—both pointing at the same object, but with more or less ostensibility. Hence the perseverance of a few zealots . . . and their dexterity and policy applied to let in the thin, distant, and needy counties of each Province, to vote equally with the populous, trading, and rich counties; soon induced a majority for the latter opinion and opened roads to the minds of the people little fit to discuss weighty subjects, or easily misled by the variety of interests and inducements which such disorders only could afford them. In 231

APPENDIX

232

A

this state of things, the inertia of the friends to good government, the temporizing spirit of the nation, the evacuation of Boston, the repulse of Sullivan's Island, the agents of France from St. Domingo with ammunition and credits, and the violence of opposition at Home, all conspired against moderation. T h e power of Great Britain was less dreaded, their own more confided i n ; and the people at large not only received the daring opinions in " Common Sense " with an unexpected tameness astonishing even to the authors of them, but were worked up by it to unleash high temper, as fitted them for the impression of the Declaration of Independency in the face of an army not only the best in Europe . . . but exceeding the greatest body the Independents could collect. . . . [PAUL IN

WENTWORTH] EACH

S K E T C H E S OF THE LEADING

PROVINCE,

1774-1775.

Facsimiles,

FROM

PERSONS

STEVENS,

no. 487.

Ν . B. R , means R i c h ; Μ Mediocrity; S. Small fortune; E , Embarrassed; R R , Rank and Riches from the Rebellion. Mr. Clinton, M , a lawyer of moderate abilities, but great zeal,

pushed into government by Robert Gilbert Livingston, R, an invincible Republican—but sensible, assiduous, and of great influence. Mr. Duane, R, an ingenious, artful lawyer and partisan—has great popularity, but has seemed at times to waver. Mr. Jay, R, sensible, cautious, active, and popular. Mr. Beekman, R, avaritious and temporising. Mr. Verplank, R, of great zeal and capacity, fitted to the cause he adopts, is forward in enterprise and supports his party with liberality. Mr. Morris, R, is active and has great influence over this party, is attached to Morris of Philadelphia and Livingston, who are moved by Dr. Franklin (through Jay . . . and the Doctor's son-in-law). John Morin Scott, an unprincipled, restless, avaritious lawyer, very fit for any intrigue. He will always keep his own

APPENDIX

A

233

party agitated, and has influence both in the Council and the Field. William Smith, a lawyer of great intrigue and publicity, has great knowledge of the party's and much reading, is an independent republican in Church and State in his heart, but has the address to pass for a Loyalist, and avoid any ostentatious part on the proper side. I believe, from circumstances which accidently fill my view, that he has been a secret adviser and correspondent to the Congress, is ambitious and avaritious—would prefer certain gratifications to speculative pursuits. Few men are so able, if he could be trusted. The party for Great Britain, on whom I shall not orate or relate —Col. Philips—Col. Axtell—the DeLanceys—David Colden —Judge Willet—Elliot—John Livingston—Cruger—the Bayards—Apthorp—Wallace—the Whites—etc., etc., etc.,

APPENDIX

Β

RESIDENCES AND POINTS OF INTEREST DURING THE BRITISH OCCUPATION (Compiled

from

Contemporary

Adjutant General's Office Affleck, Commodore Allicocke, Joseph AUingham, Amiel, J. Amory, M r . Appleby, Robert Apthorp, Charles W a r d Arnold, Benedict Artillery Stables Asley, Attwood, A u l d , George Axtell, William Backhouse, William Barclay, Andrew Barclay, Dnncan Barr, John Barrack Master General's Office Barracks (17th Dragoons) Barrow, James Barrow, John Bell, Belvoir (White Conduit House) Blaau, Waldron Blackwell, Bogle, James Bowman, Bowmaster, Capt. Brandt, Henry Brick Church 234

Newspapers,

etc.)

Broad St. 48 W a l l St. 201 Water St. 179 Queen St. 5 W a l l St. and 37 Hanover Sq. In the Fields Catherine St. Bloomingdale 82 Pump St. Near St. Paul's 35 Hanover Sq. 8 or 207 Water St. 19 Golden Hill West side of Broadway Water St. 25 Queen St. 12 Hanover Sq. SS Queen St. John St. ι Bowery Lane 58 Broad St. 16 K i n g St. 21 Queen St. 341 Broadway Little Dock St., near Exchange PI. 236 K i n g St. 3 Beekman St. 521 Hanover Sq. Dock St. 46 William St. Nassau and Beekman Sts.

APPENDIX

Β

235

Bridewell Buchanan, Thomas Ball, Mr. Bull's Head Tavern Burling, Samuel Burnside, Burton, William

Great George St. 212 Queen St. 87 Broadway Bowery Road Peck's Slip 174 Queen St. 58 Broad St.

Calderwood, John Campbell, General Carrow, John Cheesman, Robert City Hall City Tavern Clinton, Sir Henry Cochrane, John Codner, Coffee House Coffee House Bridge Coles, John Colles, J . Commandant's House Commander's Secretary's Office Commissary General's Store· Corre, Joseph Cortlandt, John Cortlandt, Philip Cowan, Cowenhoven, John Cox, Mr.

44 Queen St. 46 Wall St. Nassau St. 60 Smith St. Wall and Broad Sts. Broadway and Little Queen St. Beekman House n o Water St. 521 Hanover Sq. Wall and Water Sts. Queen and Water Sts. 6 Broadway 20 Golden Hill 3 Wall St. 3 Broadway 98, 127, 133, 164, 165 Water St. 17 Hanover Sq. West side of Broadway John St. 234 Queen St. 14 Queen St. 82 Broadway

Dastuge, Dr. Davis, John Davis, John Deal, Samuel Deane, Richard Deere, Delafons, John DeLancey, Oliver DeLancey, Stephen Digby, Admiral Dominick, Francis Dominick, George Donaldson, Samuel

276 Broadway Little Queen St. 63 Maiden Lane Broad and Duke Sts. North River 3 1 Little Dock St. 217 Water St. Bloomingdale 30 Nassau St. 10 Hanover Sq. 104 Water St. and Cherry St. Water and Cherry Sts. 50 King St.

236 Douglas, James Douglas, William Eden, Medcef

APPENDIX

Β

230 Queen St. 230 Queen St.

Eddy, Charles Eddy, Thomas

Golden Hill 163 Water St. 163 Water St.

Elliot, Andrew Evans, Martin

Broadway and 9th St. 181 Queen St.

Farrington, Fay, Martin Fields ( T h e )

321 Dock St. Present City Hall Park

First Baptist Church First Presbyterian Church Frazer, William French Church

Gold St. Wall St. 55 Maiden Lane K i n g St.

Friends' Meeting House

Queen St.

Galbreath, Gaspardo, Dr. Bartholinus Gautier, Joseph Gemmil, Matthew

228 Queen St. 12 Nassau St.

General Post Office Goelet, Peter Goold, Edward Graham, James Graham, Greenwich Hospital Office Gross, Michael Grundy, George Hallet, James HargTave, William Harrison, Hart, Jacob Härtung, Daniel Hecht, Fred. William Hegeman, Peter Henderson, Robert Henshaw, Mrs. Hentz, John Henry Herlitz,, Hill, Hodiard,

44 Queen St.

162 Queen St. 43 K i n g St. Opposite 18 Broad St. Hanover Sq. 34 Hanover Sq. Fly Market 853 Hanover Sq. 215 Water St. Chatham St., near Tea Water Pump 162 Queen St. Broadway Broad St. Haaover Sq. and 35 Water St. 25 Water St. 166 Queen St. Queen near Chapel St. 125 Queen St. ι Mill St. 64 Beek man St. 38 William St. 236 K i n g St. 21 Queen St. 853 Hanover Sq.

APPENDIX H o w e , Sir W i l l i a m

3

Β Broadway

Hutchinson, 35 H a n o v e r

Sq.

Inglis, Charles Broadway Jamieson, Neil Jarolomus, Jacob

Water

Jenkins,

Near Tea Water

Pump

John and N a s s a u

Sts.

Richard

Jones, D r .

St.

W e s t side o f 172 Q u e e n

Keeler, Kennedy

House

ι

Broadway

St.

Broadway

Kerr, William

4 B r o a d St.

Kenyon, William

190 Q u e e n

K i n g ' s College

13 W a l l

King's Head Tavern

45 B r o w n j o h n ' s

Knox,

234 Q u e e n

St

St.

Kollock, Shepard

22 H a n o v e r

Kortright,

Dock

Law,

Lawrence

Henry

Sq.

St.

53 W a t e r

St.

Lawrence,

44 Q u e e n

St.

Leadbetter, James

95 W a t e r

St.

Leckie, Alexander

44 Q u e e n

St.

Lee,

234 Q u e e n

Lefferts, Jacobus

Water

St.

St.

Lente, C h r i s . L e w i s

205 W a t e r

Lenzi,

63 W a l l

Philip

St.

St.

Levy, Joshua

16 B r o a d

St.

Levy, Samuel

23 F e r r y

St.

Likly, John

6 Mill

St.

Livingston, John

North

River

Lloyd,

37

Edward

Broadway

Lorentz, M r .

203 W a t e r

Lossberg, General

7 Wall

St.

St.

L o w , Charles

11 G r e a t D o c k

L o w , Isaac

Dock

Lowrear,

Edward

Lynch,

Wharf

St.

St.

St.

Nassau

St.

2 Duke

St.

M'Causland,

M u r r a y ' s W h a r f and W a t e r St.

M'Clean, John

32 M a i d e n

M'Clenachan, John

95 W a t e r

M'Cree, George

202 Q u e e n

Lane St. St.

APPENDIX Μ'Clean, Donald Macnair, Main G u a r d Malcolm, Michael Mallet, Dr. Marsh, G . Marston, Mason, George Maule, Thomas Mayor's Office Medecine Stores Melville, D a v i d Mennye, J . Mill, Thomas Mitchell, Andrew Moravian Church Morris, Roger Morse, Colonel M u r r a y , Lindley Murray, Negro Barracks New Gaol

Β

205 Water St. 976 Beekman Slip Broad St. 12 Cruger's Wharf West side of Broadway 12 Broadway Wall and Smith Sts. E n d of Harlem Lane 29 Queen St. Wall St. 6 - 8 Old Slip 47 Great Dock St. Gold and Beekman Sts. 1 7 - 1 8 Warren St. 227 Queen St. Fulton St. 160th St. and East River 10 Wall St. 209 Water St. Queen St.

N'ooth, D r .

10 Church St. Chatham St. Fulton and William Sts. 8 Great Dock St.

Oakman, Henry Old Ale Brewery Old John St. Church Old Punch House Ordnance Office

12 Great Dock St. Maiden Lane John St. near Nassau St. 25 Chatham St. Opposite St. Paul's

Panton, Francis Pay Office Pell, J o h n

38 Wall St. 21 Maiden Lane 181 Queen St. 16 Great Dock St. 1 3 Duke St. 3 1 Little Dock St. Hanover Sq. 68 Bowery Lane IS Wall St. ι Smith St. K i n g George St. Broad St.

North Dutch Church

Pollock, Ponsonby, J . Pope, Porteus, John Powder House Price, Michael Price, Proctor, William Provincial Secretary's Office

APPENDIX

Β

Public Guard House

as Wall St.

Queen'· Head Tavern

Cherry S t

Randall, Thomas

West side of Broadway

Rapalje, Rattoon, Thomai

Wall and Smith Sts. 58 Elbow St.

Reardon, Reinsen, J o h n

Murray's W h a r f and Water St. 30 Water S t

Richmond Hill Riddell, Alexander Rivington, J a m e s

Charlton and Varick Sts. 523 Hanover Sq.

Robertson, Charles Robinson, Beverly Rogers, Rose, Joseph Rowland, William Royal Artillery Hospital Ruremont Rutherford, St. George's Chapel St. Paul's Chapel Salmon, Scotch Presbyterian Church Scott, Seix, Michael Service, George Service, Robert Shackerly, Mrs. Shoemaker, Mr. Sign of Happy Man Sign o f Prince of Wales Sign of Unicorn Smith, Hugh Smith, James Smith, Robert Snodgrass, Andrew Sommerendyke, Mr. South Dutch Church Sparling, Peter Speir, John Stevens, Joseph Stewart, John

239

Wall and Queen Sts. 57 King St. 21 King St. Queen St. 135 Water St. 59 Wall St. 24 Broadway 54th St. and East River West side of Broadway Beekman St. Broadway and Fulton St. I Smith St. Cedar St. 179 Queen St. 214 Queen St. 23 Wall St. and Coffee House Bridge 23 Wall St. 84 Broadway 18 Wall St. Near Brownjohn's W h a r f Near Fly Market Golden Hill 21 Little Dock St. Mulberry St. 54th St. and East River 14 Hanover Sq. Near Tea Water Pomp Garden near Broad St. Chatham St. 8 Gold St. 16 Broadway Cruger's W h a r f

24ο

APPENDIX

Β

Stnyvesant, Nicholas Superintendent General's Office

Bowery (and Ave. and loth Si ) Wall St.

Tally-Ho

Nassau and K i n g Stl.

Taylor, Tea Water P n m p Temiere, M. Theatre R o y a l Thomson,

Next to 25 Chatham St. 10 F a i r St. John St.

174 Queen St.

Tompkins, Thomas Torrance, William Tronson, Jeremiah

228 Queen St. Bowery Lane 3 Fletcher St. 21 Great Dock St.

Urqohart,

16 Great Dock St.

Wadding-ton, Benjamin Wagon Y a r d Walton, William Webster, Charles Webster, Mrs.

Queen St. Behind Bridewell 156 Queen St. 32 Maiden Lane 62 Wall St. 41 Smith St. 36 Maiden Lane 234 Queen St. 15 Υητι Pnm's Wharf 9 Greenwich St. 9 Pearl St.

Wilkes, Wilkins, Robert Wilkinson, Winslow. Isaac Wirth, Valentine Withers, Mrs. Yates, Richard Younghusband,

Princess St. 35 Water St.

APPENDIX

C

A L I S T OF FARMS ON N E W Y O R K ISLAND, 1780, FROM A S M A L L NOTE-BOOK

KEPT BY E V A R T BANCKER, IN N E W

( F r o m Bancker

SURVEYOR

YORK

Coll. of Mss., in Ν . Y . Hist. Soc.

A l s o printed in

Ν. Y . Hist. Soc. Quarterly Bulletin, A p r i l , 1917.) WEST SIDE OF BOWERY LANE AND BLOOMINCDALE ROAD Miles I.

Acres I. James DeLancey 2. Nicholas Bayard 3. Mrs. Tucker 4. Stephen Bayard 5. Elbert H e r r i n g 6. Mathew Buys

200 8

7. D a v i d Provoost

8

8.

8

Perry

9. A n n Pers II. 10. James Lawrence

6

11. William Williams

4

12.

4

Rikeman

13. A n d r e w Elliot, Esq.

40

14. Mrs. Brevoort

4

15. Jacob Bushart

4

16. Smith Heirs 17. John Onsterman 18. Richard Allen

30 I

19. L a d y Warren 20. John Horne

35

WEST SIDE OF BOWERY LANE, NORTHWARD a i . Benjamin H a g g e t

4

22. Isaac Varian

35

23. W i l l i a m D e W i t t

36

24. D . H . Mallows

6

241

APPENDIX

242

C

Miles

Acret »5. M r i . V a n O r d e n 26.

"

40

"

140

27. J o h n L a k e

100

28. M e t c a l f E a d e n

30

39. M r s . R e e s

30

IV. 30. M r s . H o p p e r

90

31. Cozines Heirs

125

32. J a m e s D e L a n c e y

300

V. 33. J a c o b H a r s e n

90

34. C o r n e l i u s H a r s e n

60

35. T u n i s S o m e r e n d y k e

130

36. M a j a r B a y a r d

170

37. John V a n Courtland

10

38. J o h n O r c h a r d

186

39. C h a r l e s W a r d A p t h r o p , E s q

200

40. W i d o w S t r i k e r

40

41. H u m p h r e y Jones

150

42. B e n Homeland's H e i r s

300

EAST SIDE BLOOMINGTON ROAD, SOUTHWARD IN RETURNING 43. B e n V a n de W a t e r

100

44. A r o n a n d J a c o b W e b b e r s

10

GREAT KILLS AND GREENWICH ALONG THE NORTH RIVES, NORTHWARD 45. M a t h e w H o p p e r H e i r s 46. Y e l l i s

Mandivele

Heirs

47. R e m R a p e l i a

90 35 30

48. J o h n M c A d a m

30

49. J o h n M . Scott

90

50. M a r y C l a r k 51. Yellis Mandivele H e i r s

60

52. J o h n M . S c o t t

40

53. L a d y W a r r e n 54. Y e l l i s M a n d i v e l e H e i r s

4

55. W i l l i a m B a y a r d , E s q

5

56. J a m e s J a u n c e y , E s q 57. A n t h o n y R u t g e r s H e i r s 58. J o h n J a y

4 21 3

APPENDIX EAST

SO«

BOWXBY

EAST

RIVU,

C

L A N X , AND

243 ALONG

NOKTHWASD

Miles I.

Α eret 59. Hendrick Rntgers

80

60. James DeLancey 61. Per* Van Cortland

14

63. Minthorns Heirs 63. Peter Stivesant

300

64. John Bebout 6$. James Duane

37 17

66. 67. 68. 69. 70.

John Watts, Esq Ann Lake John Vaughan Pegg K i p Cath. Taller

7 26 26 26

7t. 72. 73. 74.

Samuel K i p John K i p John V a n Viech Lady Warren

43 4a 5

75. 76. 77. 78.

Van der Hoof David Devoor James Beekman Peter Clopper

8 10 20 8

II.

III.

IV.

EAST

SIDE B O W E R Y L A N E , ETC., A N D

HAXLIM

BOUNDS

79. David Devoor 80. Timothy Hunt

2$ I·

81. Eve Provoost 82. Peter Vanzandt

20 40

83. William Beekman's Heirs

30

V.

84. John Hardenbrook

16

85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90.

90 37 30 30 30

David Provoost John Devoor Derick Lefferts Nathaniel Marston Heirs Jacob Leroy Jacob Walton

APPENDIX

244

C

Miles VI. ς ι . Ben W a l d r o n 92. Mrs. W a l d r o n 93. D a v i d W a l d r o n 94. S a m u e l ISenson

95. Benjamin Benson VII. 96. Lawrence Benson 97. Andrew M a g o w n 98. Lawrence K o r t w r i g h t VIII. 99. Peter B a s h i n g 100. Lawrence K o r t w r i g h t 101. Hendrick V a n Bramen ioa. Lawrence K o r t w r i g h t 103. Adolph Benson 104. M a r l i n e s S c h o o m a k e r

105. A d o l p h Meyre 106. Mrs. D a y 107. John Meyre IX. 108. John DeLancey 109. D a v i d Provoost 110.

Falkner

i n . Coll. Maunsel X. 112.

Watkins

113. Coll. Morris XI. 114. John Somerendyke 115.

Oblinus

XII. 116. Blasee Moore 117. John Cartwright NEAR KING'S

XIII.

118. W i l l i a m Dvkeman 119. Jacob D y k e m a n (late)

BRIDGE

"1 f

XIIII. 120. William, John, and Jacob N a g e l 1 2 0 ^ . Caleb Heyat

APPENDIX

C

245

Milts

Α erIi East from the Road Back to Hailzm 121. 12a. 123. 124. 12$. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131.

Aaron Meyer Abraham Meyer John Sickle« Lawrence Meyer Aaron Boshing John Livingiton Mrs. Meyer Lawrence Benson Peter R. Livingiton John Bogert Mrs. Roome John Dykeman John Hardenbroolc Lawrence Benson George Stanton Leonard Lespnard Jacob *\ John v Nagel William )

140 4 300 5 200 5 40 (before included) 1% 70

APPENDIX

D

T H E USE OF HOUSES (From Ref. on Amer. Mts., IV, 37-28.) Letter from Robertson to Carleton, New York, April

11,1783.

Pursuant to an order of Sir Henry Clinton of March 3, 1778: " that there are many houses and stores in this city belonging to persons not under the protection of Government which are occupied by merchants and others not entitled to quarters as constituting part of the Garrison, and whereas large sums of money are requisite towards assisting the poor, lighting the lamps, repairing the pumps, cleaning the streets, etc., etc." " And there being no reason why the aforesaid persons should not pay rent for the houses and stores they occupy, his excellency appointed David Mathews, Esqre, Mayor, and twentysix more gentlemen to act as overseers of the poor. And he authorized and appointed John Smyth to call on and receive from all persons not entitled to quarters, the half year's rent ending the first of May then next to come, to be applyed as directed by a majority of overseers, who were to render an account to the police." On my arrival here I found this order in force, and practised under the direction of General Pattison, Commandant of the city. On General Pattison's departure, finding the method directed by Sir Henry Clinton perfectly consonant to that which my instructions directed me to observe, in case the Commanderin-Chief, by setting any part of the country at the King's peace had suffered this case to devolve on me, when Sir Henry Clinton desired me to carry the spirit of my instructions into execution not in the character of Civil Government but of a General Officer, subject to his orders, I continued the practise I found 246

APPENDIX

D

247

instituted, with this difference, that I gave free entry into the vestry to all the respectable citizens, and I subjected the payments to be made by the Treasurer to more cheques. The receipts and payments, after being examined by men of character and well versed in accounts, have been stated in books I now put into General Birch's possession. . . . The houses have been preserved by being put under the care of persons interested in their preservation, and as the produce has been applyed for purposes absolutely necessary, and which otherwise must have been an expence to the crown, the amount is a public saving. I found that the distance from some parts of Long Island, and the expence of living at New York made most of the inhabitants of that isle rather suffer wrong than apply to the courts of New York for redress, and that the want of courts on Long Island left every licentiousness and crime unpunished. These considerations led me to institute a Court of Police on Long Island, with such amendments as observations made me think proper. Happily, the gentlemen who were chose for judges have executed whatever I could hope for them. Justice and equity and order have taken place there, and a want of the rules which are instituted for guarding liberty have been little felt, while delay and expence have been entirely avoided. The farms and derelict houses have, agreeable to my instructions, been employed and divided among distressed refugees; such as could be applyed to the advantage of these, have been let for their benefit, or for the payment of judges and officers of the police on Long Island. I leave in General Campbell's hands accounts of all the moneys that have been received or paid. The books show the distribution of all the houses and farms, the names of all that have been provided for, and will give an idea of the advantages that have been derived from the cultivation of these farms. The houses which have hitherto covered refugees, will, when returned to their owners, be found in a better condition than they would have been without this regulation. . . .

248

APPENDIX

D

L I S T OF BARRACK HOUSES IN T H E GARRISON OF NEW

YORK,

S H O W I N G STREET AND NUMBER OF HOUSE AND BY W H O M OCCUPIED.

SELECTED AT RANDOM

( F r o m Rep. on Amer. Msi., 3 Broadway

I l l , 305-06.)

( N o date.)

Secretary's Office of Commander in Chief

24 B r o a d w a y

Royal Artillery Hospital

8a B r o a d w a y

Mr. C o x of the Board of Refugees

87 Broadway

Mr. Bull, Clerk of Church

8 Great D o c k St

Dr. Nooth

10 Hanover Square

Admiral Digby

17 Hanover Square

Admiral Digby's Secretary's Office

98, IJ7, 133,164, '65 Water St.

Commissary General's Store»

a$ W a t e r St

Jacob H a r t , Refugee

53 W a t e r St

Mr. L a w , Capt. of the Port

203 W a t e r St

Mr. Lorentz, Hessian Paymaster

Mill Street

Stores and Stables

3 W a l l St

Commandant's House

7 W a l l St

General Lossberg

10 W a l l St

Col. Morse, Chief Engineer

18 W a l l St

Mr. Shoemaker of Philadelphia

as W a l l St

Public Guard House

48 W a l l St

Commodore Affleck

6a W a l l St

Mrs. Webster, Refugee

I B o w e r y Lane

Barracks of 17th Dragoons

68 Bowery Lane

Powder House

10 Church St

Negro Barracks

6, 7, 8 O l d Slip

Medicine Stores

Hunter's Q u a y and Burnet's Quay

Commissary General's Stores

E X A M P L E S OF R E N T S OF HOUSES BELONGING TO PERSONS O U T OF THE L I N E S ( F r o m Birch's

Account

Book,

in Ν. Y . Hist. Soc.) Rent

James G r a h a m occupied home of James Duane in Fly M a r k e t . . . .£IA Thomas Tompkins "

" "

"

Henry Rutgers in Bowery L . . .

John Porteus

"

"

H e n r y Remson in Hanover Sq.. . 37

James Smith

"

shop

"

Victor Bickers in Mulberry St. . 10

Richard Yates

"

home

"

Estate of Andrew Gautier in

Neil Jamieson

"

"

"

R . G. Livingston in Water S t . . . 30

Princess St

IOJ.

5

50

ioj.

APPENDIX SPECIMEN (From Mitcellaneout MR. CHARLES 1777

To

Ε

BILLS

Mis. in Ν . Y . H i l t Soc.)

NICOLLS JOHN

CHRISTIAN

PUNTZIUS

£ March 5.

To making Watches Coat To Buttons To silk twist, shalloon, & stays To sleeve lining

To

PETER MARSELES,

d.

ο ο ο ο

ig 3 5 3

ο ο 9 ο

ι

ίο

9

DR.

To a Days work @ 16/

1

12

ο

To To To To To To

2 ο ο ο ο ο

14 a 3 s 2 ο

10 6 6 10 2 6

5

ι

4

1 I ο

16 ο 5

ο ο Ο

3

ι

0

To Chair Boddy

4

10

o

To A Bolster 6/ to A pair shaft irons 2/ To 4 spoks @ 2/, to a fellow 3/ To Nailing on three tire @ 2/

ο o ο

8 11 6

Ο 0 ο

5

IS

ο

94 feet of Inch boards @ /7 ι Pair of Hinges ι Closet Lock S lb. Nails @ 1/2 a/00 tacks @ 1/2 2/5 Clonts

M R . C H A R L E S N I C K E L S , D R . , TO A L E X A N D E R O G S B U R Y

To 1 pr. of Boots shoed To I pr. of slippers Το ι pr. Shoes for your boy mend

H U M P H R E E J O N E S TO F R A N C I S S A W Y E R ,

DR.

Rec'd a Draught on Mr. Griffiths for the Above in full. Jan'y

13, 1 7 7 9

FRANCIS

SAWYER

249

APPENDIX

250 Sept. 14, 1779.

" T o o k Lodging* at Mr». Clark's. 3 Chambers, I Parlour, Kitchen, Winecellar, nse of the Hall, a Coach House, Barn, and Stables. 4S Gu. for 6 months."

Feb'y 2$, 1780 Charles Nichols Ferkin Butter i8 lbs. Cheese

Ε

Bot. of Samuel Mabbett £ 6 2

67 lbs. @ 2/ 3/6

9 April is, 1777 Mr. Charles Nicoll 3 Pipes of Madeira Wine ι Quarter Cask of Do. 13 Galls. Do. ι Hhd. Cont'g 42 Gallons

s. 14 6 °

d. ο 3 3

Bot. of Richard Yates @ £95 @ 10/9 @ 13/4

£

s,

d.

285 15 6 28

ο ο 19 ο

ο ο 9 ο

334

19

9

An Accurate Account of Wines Sold in the Company of Nicoll, Taylor & Co. from April the twenty third 1777 to the first of May 1778 inclusive. Madeira Red Port Lisbon Sundries (Rum, Porter, etc.) Spirits

£

s.

d.

2867 602 950 160 197

11 14 16 2 17

i'/i 10 ο ο ο

4779

ο

I I Vi

APPENDIX

F

SHIPPING AT NEW YORK (From Stevens, Facsimiles, no. 1059) " Ν. Υ., 5th Oct'r (1778). In Consequence of the Circular Letter to the Several Departments employing Shipping, the Reports are agTeeable to the following abstracts: Vessels Tons For the Quarter Master General's Department In the Navy Victualling Department To the Army Do. In the Commissary Gen's Dept. taken up at Ν. Y In the Transport Dept In the Ordnance Do In the Barrack Master Gen'l's Dept

58 37 33 52 146 15 20

4,759 8,242 10,419 4,329 40,881 4,497 2,025

361

75,154 4/12

In the Merchants' service

261

35,773 1/8

Total of Shipping

662

110,927 6/12

Total in h. m. Service

3/12

1/12 1/12 1/12

SHIPPING LICENSES ( F r o m Stevens, Facsimiles,

no. 1187)

" Aggregate Account of Vessels and Mdze. for which outward Permissions and Licenses were granted at the Superintendent's Office from ist to 16th October, 1778 agreeable to a Proclamation issued the 26th of September, 1778—, By their Excellencies His Majesty's Commissioners. Vessels, viz. Brigs, Schooners, and Sloops Registered Tonnage Supposed l/s short of their real tonnage Real tonnage by adding to the registered tonnage Hands which includes officers, men, boys, and blacks

52 7,695 10,260 447

18 Vessels obtained permissions to go besides the above 52 loaded, but were stopped by the Admiral." 2SI

APPENDIX G T H E DELIVERY OF RECORDS ( F r o m Rep. on Amer. Mss., I V , 457-58)

Letter from Andrew Elliot to Sir Guy Carleton, Ν. Y., Nov. 15, 1783. A s the delivering up of this place to the Americans is so near at hand, I must beg leave to request that your Excellency will be pleased to favour me with your instructions in regard to the disposal of the books and papers belonging to the port and police offices, both of which were established by and were always under the sole controul of the Commanders in Chief of His Majesty's Army in America, and of which offices I have had the honour to be at the head ever since their establishment. I have just finished arranging the books and papers of the Port Office, and agreeable to the wish you expressed when I last had the honour of conversing with Your Excellency on this subject, in enumerating the books and papers, I shall take the liberty of mentioning my ideas as to the disposal of them. Two books comprehend all the outward and inward entries of vessels to and from the ports of the United States of America, since the 19th of April last, when this port by your Excellency's orders, was opened for the American trade; at that time a new set of books were begun, in which no entry is made but of these vessels; the papers connected with the first mentioned set of books are cockets from Great Britain and Ireland, which are very numerous and bulky; as these only express the brokers' names who shipped the goods for the merchants, their being left here can be of no bad tendency to any individual, and perhaps a reference to them on some future occasion may be found necessary; I would propose lodging them with Mr. Seton, who 252

APPENDIX

G

253

remains here, and has always transacted the business of this office, and to whom such a reference would naturally be made. T h e clearance from the West Indies, and those that attended the licensed vessels, as also the manifests both outward and inward, together with the certificates relating thereto, might be attended with risque to individuals if they were left here, and if carried home can be of no use as their contents are fully expressed in the books. I would therefore propose destroying all these and carrying the books away. The books opened the 19th of April as mentioned above, as they contain only the inward and outward entries of the American trade, may with their manifests be left in the office being of no consequence. The certificates on which registers have been granted if left here would be fatal to many individuals; I would therefore propose destroying these, as the registers granted are all recorded in the books which ought also to be carried away. In regard to the police, as their transactions were reported daily to the commandants, the only papers of that office are in possession of the Mayor, consisting chiefly of the different securities taken at the police, and the determinations of the Chamber of Commerce of such matters as were by the police referr'd to that B o a r d ; there is a necessity, either for these papers being carried home or destroyed, as they would be of bad consequences, should they fall into the hands of the Americans. A s soon as I am honoured with your Excellency's directions, they shall immediately be complied with. Endorsed: " H . Q., Ν . Υ . , 1 ith Nov., 1783—Approved by the Commander in C h i e f ; and M r . Elliot will please to give directions for its being carried into execution."

BIBLIOGRAPHY P R I M A R Y SOURCES MANUSCRIPTS

Most of the manuscript material is to be found in the N e w Y o r k Historical Society and in the N e w Y o r k Public Library. T h e most important papers are listed. In the N e w Y o r k Historical Society: Abstract of Forage issued at Corlear's Hook from the 23rd to the 29th June, 1783. Kept by Stephen Jarvis of the British Army. An Account of Receipts and Disbursements of Cash belonging to the Publick Funds of the City of New York from the 15th April to 31st July, 1783, Inclusive, under the Direction of Brig. Gen'l Birch, Commandant of the City of New York, &&. With a General Statement of said Accounts previous to that Period left by his Excellency Lieut. Gen'l. Robertson, late Governor, &&. Aquila Giles Letters. British Guards Orderly Book, 1778. Commissary's Day Book of the British Army, 1777-1779. Extracts from Lord Dorchester Papers in the Library Royal Institution, London. (Copied in Summer of 1880 by George W . W . Houghton.) Head Quarters, Staten Island, 1781, Orderly Book. Letter Book of Henry Davies, Victualler of the British Fleet in New York, 1780-1782. Letter Book of Daniel Weir, Commissary General, stationed at New York, Sept. 9, 1778-April, 1780. New York Day Book, 1777-1782. Glassford, Gordon, Monteith & Co. A l s o Glassford and Henderson in Account with Neil Jamieson, 1777-1779· New

York Miscellaneous Manuscripts, 1775-1783. A collection of letters, bills, notes, and broadsides of the period. Order Book of the Brigade of Guards, 1779, Commanded by Gen't Edward Mathew. Order Book of the 17th Regiment of Foot, British Army, Oct. 11, 1776 to Dec. 28, 1776. Lt. Col. Charles Mawhood in Command. Receipts of the Treasurer of the Theatre Royal, John St., New York, A. D. 1779. Theatre Royal, 1778. Trinity Minutes.

254

BIBLIOGRAPHY

255

In the New Y o r k Public Library: Batch's Loyalist Letters. (Transcripts made by George Bancroft.) Bancker Manuscripts. A miscellaneous assortment of data and surveys, part of which are in the New Y o r k Historical Society. The Emmet Collection. Both manuscript and printed sources the most important of which is the List of New York Loyalists against whom judgments have been rendered under the Confiscation Act. The Diary and Papers of William Smith. The Diary of Jabes Fitch. Transcript of the Manuscript Books and Papers of the Commission of Enquiry into the Losses and Services of the American Loyalists held under Acts of Parliament of 23, 25, 26, 28, and 29 of George III, preserved amongst the Audit Office Records in the Public Record Office of England, 1783-1790. PRINTED

WORKS

PUBLIC D O C U M E N T S , RECORDS, CALENDARS, A N D

LAWS

Dawson, Henry B., ed., Report on the City Finances during the Revolution (in Proceedings of Board of Aldermen, L X X X I V . ) Egerton, Hugh E., ed., The Royal Commission on the Losses and Services of American Loyalists, 1783 to 1785, being the Notes of Mr. Daniel Parker Coke, M. P., One of the Commissioners during that Period. Oxford, 1915. Force, Peter, comp., American Archives: a collection of authentick records, state papers, debates, and letters and other notices of publick affairs; forming a documentary history, 9 vols. Washington, 1837-53. Ford, Worthington C., et al., ed., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789; edited from the original records in the Library of Congress, v. 1-25. Washington, 1904-22. Hastings, Hugh, ed., Ecclesiastical Records, State of New York, 7 vols. Albany, 1901-16. , Public Papers of George Clinton, first Governor of New York, 10 vols. Albany, 1899-1914. O'Callaghan, Ε. B., ed., Documentary History of the State of New York, 4 vols. Albany, 1849-51. , Documents Relative to the Colonial History of the State of New York, 15 vols. Albany, 1856-87. Stevens, Benjamin F., ed., Facsimiles of Manuscripts in European Archives Relating to America, 25 vols. London, 1889-98. • , Facsimile of the Unpublished British Head Quarters Coloured Manuscript Map of New York and Environs. London, 1900. Stevens, John Α., Jr., ed., Colonial Records of the New York Chamber of Commerce, 1768-1784. New Y o r k , 1867.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

256

Wilmot, John Eardley, Historical View of the Commission for Enquiring into the Losses, Services, and Claims of American Loyalists, at the Close of the IVar between Great Britain and Her Colonies in 1783, with an Account of the Compensation Granted to Them by Parliament in 1785 and 1788. London, 1815. , Burghers of New Amsterdam and Freemen of New York. (Ν. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll.) New York, 1885. , Calendar of Council Minutes, 1668-1783. ( I n Ν . Y. State L i b r a r y Bulletin 6.) Albany, 1903. , Calendar of Historical Manuscripts relating to the War of the Revolution, 2 vols. Albany, 1868. , Journals of the Provincial Congress, Provincial Convention, Committee of Safety and Council of Safety of the State of New York, 1775-I777, 2 vols. Albany, 1843. , Laws of the State of New York, vol. i, 1777-84. Albany, 1886. Also the various editions published by H o l t and Greenleaf. , Minutes of the Committee and of the First Commission for Detecting and Defeating Conspiracies in the State of New York, Dec. 11, 1776-Sept. 23, 1778. ( Ν . Y. Hist. Soc. Coll.) 2 vols. New York, 1924-25.

, Minutes of the Common Council of the City of New York, 1675-1776, 8 vols. New York, 1905. , Report on American Manuscripts in the Royal Institution of Great Britain. ( P r e p a r e d by the Hist. Mss. Commission and known as the Carleton P a p e r s ) , 4 vols. London, 1909. DIARIES, LETTERS, JOURNALS, AND MEMOIRS

Allen, Ethan, Narrative of Colonel Ethan Allen's Captivity. P h i l a delphia, 1799. Barclay, Sidney, ed., Grace Barclay's Diary, or Personal Recollections of the American Revolution. New York, 1866. Burnett, E. C., ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress, vols. i-iv. Washington, 1921-28. Bushnell, Charles I., ed., Crumbs for Antiquarians, 2 vols. New Y o r k , 1864. Coghlan, Mrs., Memoirs of Mrs. Coghlan, Daughter of the Late Major Moncrieffe. New York, 1795. Crevecoeur, Hector St. J., Letters of an American Farmer. Philadelphia, 1793· Curwen, Samuel, Journals and Letters, 177s to 1783. Boston, 1864. Custis, G. W . Parke, Recollections and Private Memoirs of Washington. Philadelphia, 1861. Eddis, William, Letters from America, Historical and Descriptive, comprising Occurrences from 1769 to 1777 inclusive. London, 1792.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

257

Ford, Paul L., ed., Journals of Hugh Gaine, Printer, 2 vols. New York, 1902. Ford, Worthington C., ed., Correspondence and Journals of Samuel Blachley Webb, 3 vols. New York, 1893. , Writings of George Washington, 14 vols. New York, 1889-93. Graydon, Alexander, Memoirs of His Own Time. Philadelphia, 1846. Heath, William, Memoirs of the American War. New York, 1904. Johnston, Henry P., ed., Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, 4 vols. New Y o r k , 1890-93. Laughton, Sir J. K., ed.. Letters and Papers of Charles, Lord Barham, Admiral of the Red Squadron, 1758-1813 ( N a v y Records Society), 2 vols., 1909-10. Lodge, Henry Cabot, ed., Complete Works of Alexander Hamilton, 9 vols. New York, 1885-86. Moore, Frank, ed., Diary of the American Revolution, 2 vols. New York, i860. Pettengill, R. W . , ed., Letters from America, 1776-79; being letters of Brunsivick, Hessian, and Waldeck Officers with the British armies during the Revolution. Boston, 1924. Riedesel, Mrs. General, Letters and Journals relating to the War of the American Revolution. Albany, 1867. Schaukirk, Edwin Gustav, Moravian Journal during the Occupation of New York City by the British (in Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, 1877 and 1886, and in Johnston, Campaign of 1776, part 2). Simcoe, John Graves, Simcoe's Military Journal. A History of the Operations of a Partisan Corps called the Queen's Rangers, commanded by Lieut. Gen. J. G. Simcoe during the War of the American Revolution. New Y o r k , 1844. Sparks, Jared, ed., Writings of George Washington, 12 vols. Boston, 1837. Stone, William L., ed., Letters of Brunsivick and Hessian Officers during the American Revolution. Albany, 1891. Tallmadge, Benjamin, Memoir of Colonel Benjamin Tallmadge. New York, 1858. Thacher, James, Military Journal during the American Revolutionary War. Boston, 1823. Van Schaack, H. C-, ed., The Life of Peter Van Schaack, embracing selections from his correspondence and other writings daring the American Revolution, and his exile in England. New York, 1842. Webb, J. Watson, ed., Reminiscences of General Samuel B. Webb of the Revolutionary Army. New York, 1882. Wheeler, Margaret W., ed., Letters on the American Revolution, 1774-76. New York, 1925.

258

BIBLIOGRAPHY , Letters and Papers of Cadwalader Colden ( Ν . Y . Hist. Soc. Coll.), 9 vols. New Y o r k , 1876-1923. , Montresor Journals (Ν. Y . Hist. Soc. Coll.). New York, 1881. , The Journals of Lieutenant Colonel Stephen Kemble (Ν. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll.), 2 vols. New York, 1883-84. , Official Letters of Major General James Pattison (Ν. Y . Hist. Soc. Coll.). New York, 1875. , Journal of Lt. John Charles Philip Von Κ rafft ( Ν . Y . Hist. Soc. Coll.). New Y o r k , 1882. MISCELLANEOUS

SOURCES

Almon, J., ed., The Remembrancer, or Impartial Repository of Political Events, 17 vols. London, 1775-1784. Beatson, Robert, Naval and Military Memoirs of Great Britain from 1727 to 1783, 6 vols. London, 1804. Dawson, Henry B., ed., New York City during the American Revolution ( Ν . Y . Mercantile Library Association). New York, 1861. Dawson, Henry B., ed., Rutgers vs. Waddtngton. New York, 1866. Dunlap, William, History of the American Theatre, 2 vols. London, 1833. Ford, Paul L., ed., Orderly Book of the Maryland Loyalist Regiment, June 18, 1/78-October 12, 1778. Including general orders issued by Sir Henry Clinton, Baron Wilhelm von Knyphattssen, Sir William Erskine, Charles Lord Cornwallis, General William Tryon, and General Oliver DeLoncey, Kept by Capt. Caleb Jones. Brooklyn, 1891. Freneau, Philip, Poems Relating to the American Revolution. New Y o r k , 1865. Jones, Thomas, History of New York during the Revolution War ( Ν . Y . Hist. Soc. Jones Fund), 2 vols. New York, 1879. Onderdonk, Henry, Jr., ed., Documents and Letters Intended to Illustrate the Revolutionary Incidents of Queens County, New York. Hempstead, L. I., 1884. , Revolutionary Incidents of Suffolk and Kings Counties. New Y o r k , 1849. Raymond, Rev. W . O., ed., Winslow Papers, A. D. 1776-1826. St. John, Ν . B., 1901. Smyth, J. F. D., A Tour in the United States of America..., 2 vols. London, 1784. Stedman, Charles, History of the Origin, Progress, and Termination of the American War, 2 vols. London, 1794. Stokes, Isaac N . Phelps, ed., The Iconography of Manhattan Island. 6 vols. New Y o r k , 1915-28. Upcott, William, Esq., comp., Newspaper Cuttings Relating to America, 1668-1840 (in the Ν. Y . Hist. Soc.).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

259

, Annual Register, 1774-83, 10 vols. London, 1775-85. , Orderly Book of the Three Battalions of Loyalists commanded by Brigadier General Oliver DeLancey, 1776-78. List of New York Loyalists, compiled by William Kelby ( Ν . Y . Hist. Soc. Jones Fund). New York, 1917. , Vindication of Governor Parr and His Council against the Complaints of Certain Persons who fought to engross 275,000 Acres of Land in Nova Scotia. London, 1784. , A Letter from Lieut. Gen. Sir Henry Clinton, Κ. B., to the Commissioners of Public Accounts. London, 1784. , Minute Book of a Board of General Officers of the British Army in New York, 1781 ( Ν . Y . Hist. Soc. Coll.). New Y o r k , 1916. Gaine, Hugh, ed., New York Gazette and Weekly Mercury. Rivington, James, ed., New York Royal Gazette. A l s o published under various titles. Also many other newspapers, broadsides, manuscripts, documents, maps, etc., in the New Y o r k Public Library, the New Y o r k Historical Society, various historical magazines and periodicals, as the Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography and the Magazine of American History. SECONDARY

WORKS

Abbott, Wilbur C., New York in the American Revolution. 1929.

New York,

Andrews, Charles M., The Colonial Background of the American Revolution. New Haven, 1924. , Guide to the Manuscript Materials for the History of the United States to 178s, in the British Museum, in Minor London Archives, and in the Libraries of Oxford and Cambridge. Washington, D. C., 1908. , Guide to the Materials for American History to 1783, in the Public Record Office of Great Britain, 2 vols. Washington, D. C., 1912-14. Bayles, William H., Old Taverns of New York. New Y o r k , 1915. Becker, Carl L., History of Political Parties in the Province of New York, 1760-1776. Madison, Wis., 1909. Belcher, Henry, The First American Civil War, 2 vols. London, 1911. Bennett, William H., Catholic Footsteps in Old New York. New York, 1909. Booth, Mary L., History of the City of New York. New York, 1859. Bolton, Reginald P., Relics of the Revolution; the story of the discovery of the buried remains of military life in forts and camps on Manhattan Island. New York, 1916. , Washington Heights, Manhattan, its eventful past. New York, 1924. Bolton, Robert, Jr., History of the County of Westchcstcr, 2 vols. New York, 1848.

26ο

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Calver, William L., Belt Plates and Badges of the British Army in the American Revolution (in Ν. Y . Hist. Soc. Quarterly Bulletin, Jan. 1925)· , The British Army Button in the American Revohtlion (in Ν. Y . Hist. Soc. Quarterly Bulletin, April, 1923). , Distinctive Buttons of Loyalist Corps in the American Revolution (in Ν. Y . Hist. Soc. Quarterly Bulletin, Jan., 1929). Channing, Edward, A History of the United States, vol. iii. New York, 1912. Columbia University, A History of Columbia University, 1734-1904. New York, 1904. Cross, A. L., The Anglican Episcopate and the American Colonics. NewYork, 1902. Curtis, Edward E., The Organisation of the British Army in the American Revolution. New Haven, 1926. Dawson, Henry B., The Sons of Lil>erty in New York. New York, 1859. , Westchester County, New York, during the American Revolution. Morrisania, 1886. Deveraux, Eugene, Andrew Elliot, Lieutenant-Governor of Neiv York (in Pennsyhania Magazine of History and Biography, 1887). De Voe, Thomas F., The Market Book, containing an Historical Account of the Public Markets in the Cities of Neil1 York, Boston, Philadelphia, and Brooklyn. New York, 1862. Disosway, Gabriel P., The Earliest Churches of Neu· York and its Vicinity. New York, 1865. Dix, Morgan, ed., A History of the Parish of Trinity Church, Part I. New York, 1898. Duncan, Francis, History of the Royal Regiment of Artillery, 2 vols. London, 1879. Eaton, Arthur W. H., The New York Loyalists in Nova Scotia (in the Grafton Magasine of History and Genealogy, Feb., 1910). Eelking, Max von, The German Allied Troops in the North American War of Independence, 1776-83. Albany, 1893. Egerton, Hugh E., The Causes and Character of the American Revolution. Oxford, 1923. Eilet, Mrs. E. F. L., Domestic History of the American Revolution. New York, 1850. Fay, Bernard, Notes on the American Press at the End of the Eighteenth Century. New York, 1927. Fiske, John, The American Revolution, 2 vols. Boston, 1891. Flick, Alexander C., ed., The American Revolution in New York; Its Political, Social, and Economic Significance. Albany, 1926. Flick, Alexander C., Loyalism in Neiv York during the American Revolution. New York, 1901.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

261

Fortescue, John W., A History of the British Army, vol. iii. New York, 1902. Hardie, James, The Description of the City of New York. New York, 1827. Harris, Edward, United Empire Loyalists. Toronto, 1897. Hufeland, Otto, Westchester County during the American Revolution. White Plains, 1926. Janvier, Thomas Α., In Old New York. New York, 1894. Johnston, Henry P., The Battle of Harlem Heights, September 16, 1776; with a review of the events of the campaign. New York, 1897. , The Campaign of 1776 around New York and Brooklyn; including a new and circumstantial account of the battle of Long Island and the loss of New York 1irith a review of events to the close of the year. Brooklyn, 1878. , Evacuation of New York by the British (in Harpers New Monthly Magazine, vol. lxvii, 1883). , New York after the Revolution (in Magazine of American History, vol. xxix, 1893). Keenleyside, Hugh L., Canada and the United States. New York, 1929. Lamb, Martha J., History of the City of New York, vol. ii. New York, 1877. Lefferts, Charles M., Uniforms of the American, British, French, and German Troops in the War of the American Revolution (Ν. Y. Hist. Soc. Jones Fund). New York, 1926. Mather, Frederick G., The Refugees of 1776 from Long Island to Connecticut. New York, 1909. Moore, George H., Origin and Early History of Columbia College. New York, 1890. Moore, Nathaniel F., An Historical Sketch of Columbia College. New York, 1842. Nevins, Allan, The American States during and after the Revolution, 1775-1789· New York, 1924. Odell, George C. D., Annals of the New York Stage, vol. i. New York, 1927. Peterson, Arthur E. and Edwards, George W., New York as an Eighteenth Century Municipality. New York, 1917. Pine, John B., King's College, now Columbia University. New York, 1896. Kiker, James, Evacuation Day, 1783; with Recollections of Captain Van Arsdale of the Veteran Corps of Artillery. New York, 1883. Ryerson, Egerton, The Loyalists of America and their Times, 1610-1816, 2 vols. Toronto, 1880. Sabine, Lorenzo, Biographical Sketches of Loyalists of the American Revolution, 2 vols. Boston, 1864.

202

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Schlesinger, Arthur Μ., Colonial Merchants and the American Revolution. New York, 1917. Seilhamer, George O., History of the American Stage during the Revolution and After. Philadelphia, 1889. Siebert, Wilbur H., The Flight of the American Loyalists to the British Isles. Columbus, O., 1911. , Legacy of the American Revolution to the British West Indies and the Bahamas (in Ohio State University Bulletin, vol. xvii, no. 27, April, 1 9 1 3 ) . , Loyalist Refugees of New Hampshire (in Ohio State University Bulletin, vol. xxi, no. 2, October, 1916). , Siebert, Wilbur H., Refugee Loyalists of Connecticut (in Transactions of Royal Society of Canada, ser. iii, vol. x, 1916. Singleton, Esther, Social New York under the Georges. New York, 1902. Smith, Thomas Ε. V., The City of New York in the Year of Washington's Inauguration, 1789. New York, 1889. Sonneck, O. G., Early Concert Life in America, 1731-1800. Leipzig, 1907. Stiles, Henry R., The Civil, Political, Professional, and Ecclesiastical History, and Commercial and Industrial Record of the County of Kings and the City of Brooklyn. New York, 1884. Stone, William L., History of New York City. New York, 1872. Todd, Charles B., Story of the City of New York. New York, 1902. Trevelyan, George O., The American Revolution, 6 vols. New York, 1909-14. Tyler, Moses C., Literary History of the American Revolution, 2 vols. New York, 1898. Valentine, David, ed., Manual of the Common Council of the City of New York, especially the volumes for 1865-70. Van Tyne, Claude H., The American Revolution, 1776-1783. New York, 1905· , The Loyalists in the American Revolution. New York, 1902. , The War of Independence. Boston, 1929. Warburton, A. B., A History of Prince Edward Island from its Discovery in 1534 until the Departure of Lt. Gov. Ready in A. D. 1831. St. Johns, Ν. B., 1923. Watson, John F., Annals and Occurrences of New York City and State in the Olden Time. Philadelphia, 1846. Wilson, James G., ed., The Memorial History of the City of New York from its first settlement to the year 1892, 4 vols. New York, 1892-93. Winsor, Justin, ed., Narrative and Critical History of America, 8 vols. Boston, 1888.

INDEX Aldermen, how elected, 12-13 ϊ after war, 221 Alsop, John, 37 Amusements, pre-war, 18; during occupation, 170-190 Anglicans, position before war, 15; as Loyalists, 155; during war, iS7-i6i Apthorp, Charles Ward, on governor's council, 68; loses wood, 118 Ashfield, Vincent, 55 Assembly, Provincial, how elected, 13; suspended, 28; attitude toward Congress, 38-39; loss of power, 41 Associated Loyalists, 203-206 Auchmuty, Samuel, A n g l i c a n leader, 155; death of, 158 Auctioneers, 139-140 Axtell, William, 158, 182, 207 Bache, Theophylact, 55, 202 Backgammon, 184 Bakers, fines for, 102; business regulated, 139 Balls, 181-182 Bathing, 185-186 Battledore and Shuttlecock, 185 Billeting, during occupation, 85-87; use of churches for, 161-164; in college, 167 Billiards, 184 Billopp, Christopher, 207, 220 Birch, Samuel, 53 Bloomingdale, 12 Blowers, Samson, on judicial committee, 72; on Associated Loyalists, 204 Board of Claims, 90, 210 Books, destroyed by soldiers, 57; for sale, 169 Booth, Benjamin, 33 Bowling Green, 11 Bradford, William, 144 Brevoort, Henry, 55 British Army, during Stamp Act, 27; leaves city, 44; in campaign of 1776, 47-48; unruly, 57"58;

numbers during war, 75; provides work for civilians, 141-142 Brooklyn, 12 Bull Baiting, 18, 184 Bunker's Hill, 199 Business, pre-war, 16-17; effect of Stamp Act on, 26; during Townshend Acts, 29; before British attack, 46; during war, 55, 120143; after war, 226-227 Canada, see Evacuation Canvas Town, 82, 229 Card Games, 18, 185 Carleton, Sir Guy, commander-inchief, 70; on civil government, 70; appoints judicial committees, 72; aids poor, 93; encourages Loyalists, 211-212; during evacuation, 212-218 Carlisle, Frederick Earl, peace commissioner, 60; on cost of living, 106-107 Cartmen, 137-139 Celtic Society, 188 Chamber of Commerce, formation of, 17; revived, 55-56; on food, 110; helps shippers, 128; on wages, 138 Charities, 91-94 Charity School, pre-war, 18; sermons to aid, 158, 165; number of pupils in, 164 Chess, 184 Civil Government, pre-war, 12-14; replaced by military, 48-53; struggle for restoration of, 6073; post-war, 220-221 Clergy, 155-165 Clinton, Sir Henry, commanderin-chief, 60; on civil government, 65-66; removed, 70; regulates prices, 99, 103 Coaches, 189 Cock Fighting, 18, 184 Colden, Cadwallader, 22, 23, 25, 30 Commandant, duties of, 53; incumbents, 53; regulates housing, 263

264

INDEX

84; sets prices, 99, 113; regulates wages, 138 Commerce, pre-war, 16; effected by Prohibitory Act, 56; during war, 122-129; and privateering, 130-133; post-war revival of, 227 Commissioners for Restoring Peace, first group, 49; second group, 60; investigate military government, 61-63; help trade, 125-127 Committee of Correspondence, formed, 21; during stamp controversy, 25-27; as Fifty-One, 36-37 Committee of Fifteen, 34-35 Committee of Fifty, 40, 46 Committee of Fifty-One, 36-37 Committee of One Hjjndrwi, 40 Committee of Mechanics, formed, 37; resolutions of, 37; favor independence, 46 Committee of Sixty, elected, 3738; names delegates, 39; and Rivington, 147 Committee to Detect Conspiracies, 43 Common, 183 Common Council, composition of, 13; control of business by, 17; during war, 53; post-war, 221 Concerts, 18, 178-180 Continental Army, recruits in New York, 45; in campaign of 1776, 47-48 Continental Congress, First, advocated, 36; election of delegates to, 37; Association of, 37 Continental Congress, Second, provided for, 38; delegates appointed to, 39; disarms Loyalists, 42; d e c l a r e s independence, 46; opinion on burning city, 79; and Rivington, 148 Cooper, Myles, leaves New York, 42; as college president, 167 Corn vs. Brownjohn, 69 Cosmetics, 189 Council for Southern District, 220-223 Council, Provincial, how appointed, 13; during war, 67-68 Courts, 65-72 Coxe, Daniel, on judicial committee, 72; on Loyalist board, 204 I Cricket, 183

Cruger, John Harris, mayor, 25; on governor's council, 68 Cunningham vs. Forsey, 22 Currency Act, 21 Dances, 18, 182 Declaratory Act, 27 DeLancey, Oliver, on governor's council, 68; raises brigades, 192 Delicacies, 187 Docks, 129-130 Doctors, 95, 204 Dress, 189 Duane, James, 37, 221 DuBois, Peter, appointed to police, 54; opposed to Mathews, 64 Eden, William, peace commissioner, 60; reports to Germain, 61-63 Education, pre-war, 18; during occupation, 164-169 Elliot, Andrew, appointed to police, 54; customs collector, 54; superintendent of exports, 56; lieutenant-governor, 66; on governor's council, 68; collects duties, 128 Evacuation, 207-220 Exports, see Commerce Ferguson, Adam, 61 Ferries, 190 " F i e l d s " , The, 11 Fines, 91-92 Fire Companies, controlled by officials, 56; organization of, 5860; exempted from military service, 197 Fires, of 1776, 79-82; of 1778, 82-83 Food, 98-111 Fort George, 11, 24, 26 Fox Hunting, 183 Franchise, in 1769, 13 Franklin, Benjamin, 152 Franklin, William, on Clinton's council, 66; head of Associated Loyalists, 203 Freeholders, 13 Freemanship, 13 Fresh Water Pond, 96, 118 Friendly Society of House Carpenters, 17 Fuel, 111-118 Gage, General, 23

INDEX Gaine, Hugh, varied business of, 137; as editor, 145-146 General Society of Mechanics and Tradesmen, 227 Gentry, Landed, 14 Giles, Aquila, 158, 182 Golf, 184 Governor, Provincial, how appointed, 13; loss of power, 41; during occupation, 53 Grenville, George, plan for revenue by, 19; and Sugar Act, 20 Grocers, 137 Hagget, Benjamin, 55 Hallet, James, 55 Hamilton, Alexander, as Anglican, 155; defends Waddington, 225; as bank director, 227 Hessians, see British Army Hickey Plot, 43 Holt, John, 145 Horse Racing, 18, 183-184 Houses, number in city, 12; style of, 11-12; number burned in 1776, 80; in fire of 1778, 82; problem during occupation, 8490; not to be demolished, 89; rents of, 86; effect on health, 96 Howe, Richard Lord, at Sandy Hook, 46; tries to conciliate, 47; as peace commissioner, 51 Howe, Sir William, in campaign of 1776, 47-48; as peace commissioner, Si; character of, 51; regulates commerce, 123-124; calls for provincial troops, 193 Hurling, 183 Illicit Trade, as source of food, 99; during war, 133-136 Imports, see Commerce Impressment, in 1764, 22; during war, 133 Independent Companies, 196-198 Industry, see Business Inglis, Charles, as Anglican leader, 155; as writer, 156 ; helps church, 158; rector of Trinity, 158; attainted, 160; after war, 220 "Inhabitants", 15 Insurance, 123 Jay, John, 37- 155. 226

265

Johnstone, George, 61 Jones, Thomas, as lawyer, 31; against profiteering, 101; on medical profession, 95; on whaleboat warfare, 202 Jones, Valentine, 53 Kempe, John Tabor, 66, 70 Kings College, books destroyed, 57; during occupation, 166-169; as Columbia College, 228 Labor, see Mechanics, Wages Lawyers, 14, 22, 26, 31 Lee, Charles, 45 Lewis, Francis, 36 Liberty Pole, 27 Libraries, 169 Lieutenant-Governor, how appointed, 13 Lispenard, Leonard, 37, 169 Livingston, Philip J., 87 Livingston, William, 14 Lott, Abraham, 33 Loudon, Samuel, 145 Low, Isaac, chairman of merchants, 36; as vestryman, 55; on judicial committee, 72 Ludlow, Gabriel, 55, 219 Ludlow, George Duncan, as judge, 68; after war, 219 Loyalists, origin of, 31; on FiftyOne, 37; on Sixty, 38; after Lexington, 39; on One Hundred, 40; disarmed and mistreated, 4243; number of during occupation, 76-78; proclaim allegiance, 77; difficulty in housing, 79-85; military aid of, 191-206; evacuation of, 207-220; secure financial aid, 210; legislation against, 221-226 M'Dougall, Alexander, 34, 37, 45 M'Evers, James, 23 Marine Society, 188 Markets, 105-106 Martin, Josiah, 66, 203 Masons, 188 Mathews, David, as mayor, 40; in Hickey Plot, 43; acting mayor during occupation, 53; appointed to police, 54; as vestryman, 55; escapes capture, 202; after war, 219-220

266

IN

Mayor, how appointed, 12; as Tory, 39-40; loss of power, 40; during occupation, 53; after war, 221 Mechanics, pre-war wage of, 17; attitude toward Townshend Acts, 29; wage of during war, 140143; post-war activities of, 227228 Medicines, 95-96 Merchants, position of, 14; and Stamp Act, 25; during Townshend Acts, 29-31; in war period, 122; after war, 226-237 Middle Class, power of in city, 14; during Stamp Act, 25; and Townshend Acts, 29 Military Government, 48-57 Militia, City, 196-200 Mohawks, 33, 35 Montgomery Charter, 12-13 Montresor, 23 Moore, Sir Henry, 25 Morris, Gouverneur, 36 Morris, Roger, on governor's council, 68; inspector of claims, 93; estate sold, 222 Morris, Mrs. Roger, 114 Nationalities, pre-war groups of, 15 Navigation Acts, 19 Newspapers, during war, 144-152; and public opinion, 152-154 New York Gasette, see Weyman, William New York Gazette and Weekly Mercury, see Gaine, Hugh New York Gazette or Weekly Post Boy, see Parker, James New York Journal, see Holt, John New York Packet, see Loudon, Samuel Night Watch, 57-59 Non-Importation, 29 Novelties, 177-178 Oothout, John, 55 Painters, 188-189 Parker, James, 144-145 Pattison, James, appointed commandant, 53; prevents mistreatment of civilians, 87; conscripts civilians, 197 Peace, Treaty of, effect on trade, 130; effect on militia, 199; effect on Associated Loyalists, 206

Pigot, Robert, 53 Police, Department of, duties of, 54-55; fails to keep order, 57; internal discord in, 64 Poor, increase before war, 17-18; during occupation, 90-94; benefits for, 177; helped by Board of Claims, 210; after war, 228 Population, in 1763, 1 1 ; in 1771, 75; during occupation, 76-78; at evacuation, 229; in 1786, 229 Presbyterian, before war, 15; during occupation, 155, 161 Privateering, 130-133 Prohibitory Act, effect on government, 49-50; and foreign trade, 120-121; effect on business, 126127 Provincial Congress, elected, 41; power of, 41; opposes Loyalists, 43; names committee, 43; approves independence, 46; helps Rivington, 148 Provincial Corps, 191-196 Public Opinion, in papers, 152-153; in diaries, 153-154 Quartering Act, 21 Regulating Act, 33 Religion, before war, 15-16; during occupation, 155-165 Rent, 85-88, 92-93 Rhinelander, Frederick, 55 Rivington, James, varied business, 137; helps workers, 140; trouble with Whigs, 147-148; as editor, 146-152 Robertson, James, appointed commandant, 53; as governor, 66; on Clinton's council, 66; on religious situation, 161 Robinson, Beverly, raises corps, 194; after war, 220 Royal Gazette, see Rivington, James Rutgers vs. Waddington, 224-225 Ryan, Dennis, 174 St. Andrew's Society, 188 St. Eustatius, 38 Sanitation, 96 School, pre-war, 18; during occupation, 164-169 Scots' Friendly Society, 188 Scott, John Morin, 14

INDEX Sears, Isaac, leader of Sons of Liberty, 36j attacks Rivington, 148 Sects, before war, 15-16; during occupation, 155-165 Sharpe, Richard, 55 Shaw, Charles, 55 Shaw, George, 55 Sherbrook, Miles, 55 Shipping, pre-war, 16; importance of during war, 122-124; privateering, 130-133 Ship ton, Eliza, 158, 182-183 Sickness, 94-96 Smith, William, one of " triumvirate", 14; named chief-justice, 64; favors civil government, 6667; on Clinton's council, 66; on governor's council, 68; on judicial committee, 70; attitude toward seizures, 114-115; on religious situation, 155; opposes military in churches, 162; after war, 219 Smyth, John, vestry treasurer, 55; collects rents, 86 Smythe, Frederick, 63, 66, 70 Societies, 187-188 Society of Peruke Makers, 228 Sons of Liberty, formed, 24; and Townshend Acts, 28; Association of, 34; against landing tea, 35; and Port Bill, 36; election of Fifty-One, 36; attack Rivington, 148; post-war attitude, 226 Sons of St. George, 188 Sons of St. Patrick, 188 Sports, 183-185 Stamp Act, 23-27 Stamp Act Congress, 23-24 Stores, General, 136-137 Sugar Act, passed, 20; effects New York, 21 Taverns, to close early, 58; as social centers, 186-187; number of limited, 187 Taylor, Willet, 55 Taxation, 54, 85 Tea, 28-35 Tea Water Pump, 118 Theatre, contributions of to charity, 93-94; pre-war attitude toward, 170; during occupation, 171-177

267

Tories, see Loyalists Townshend Acts, 27-30 Trinity Church, burned, 80-81; efforts to rebuild, 160 "Triumvirate", 14, 23 Tryon, William, governor, 41; in Hkkey Plot, 43 ; war governor, 51; given judicial powers, 65; regulates prices, 102-103; issues letters of marque, 131, 206; appointed major general, 192; plans militia, 196 Van Alstyne, Jeronymous, 55 Van Horn, Augustus, 55 Van Schaack, Peter, 31 Vestry, City, pre-war election and duties, 13; appointed during occupation, 55, takes care of housing, 84-90; collects fines, 91-94; money secured from rents, 92-93 Vestry, Trinity, during occupation, 160; and charity school, 165 Waddell, William, 68 Wages, before war, 17; during occupation, 140-143 Wallace, Hugh, 68 Walton, William, appointed judge, 68; on judicial committee, 72 Washington, George, commanderin-chief, 44; leaves for Boston, 45; fortifies New York, 47; loses city, 48; and fire of 1776, 79; dealings with Rivington, 149; on evacuation day, 220 Water Supply, 118 Weyman, William, 144 Whaleboat Warfare, 201-203 Whigs, origin of, 3 1 ; on FiftyOne, 37; on Sixty, 38; after Lexington, 39; on One Hundred, 40; on Fifty, 41; leave city, 76; as Presbyterians, 155; return to New York, 89; legislate against Loyalists. 222 Whist, 185 White, Henry, 33 Willet, Marinus, 44 Wilmot, John Eardley, 217 Wine Sellers, 137 Wood, 111-118 Yates, Richard, 55