The officials of Brooklyn[39] who acted from 1700 were as follows:--

Hendrick Vechte was trustee from 1700 to 1726.

Jacob Hanssen was trustee from 1700 to 1708.

Cornelius Vanduyk was trustee from 1700 to 1726.

John Staats was trustee from 1709 to 1726.

Samuel Garritson (or Gerritse) was town clerk in 1714 and 1715.

Adrian Hegeman became town clerk in 1727, and served in that capacity until 1752.

Joramus Rapelye (Rapalje), Jacobus Leffertse, and Rem Remsen, acted as trustees from 1727 to 1752, a continuous and unbroken board.

Adrian Hegeman came from an old family, and was doubtless a son of Adriaen Hegeman, who, as schepen or schout in 1661, signed the pet.i.tion to the Director-General of the Council of the New Netherlands, praying that a.s.sistance might be given to pay Carol Van Beauvois for teaching school, digging graves, running on errands as messenger, etc., referred to in a previous chapter. His salary as clerk was thirty-three and one third pounds per annum, or about $160 in our money.

On the death of Bellomont (in 1701) the administration devolved upon Lieutenant-Governor Nanfan, until the appointment of a new Governor.

Nanfan at the time was temporarily absent in Barbadoes, and in consequence a sharp and bitter contest took place as to the management and control of the province. The anti-Leislerian party claimed that Colonel William Smith, being senior member of the Council, should exercise authority. The Leislerian or democratic party a.s.serted that the same course should be pursued as at the time Sloughter died, which consisted in the election of a temporary chairman. The discussion waxed warm, and would have led to disastrous results, had not Lieutenant-Governor Nanfan opportunely arrived to quell the disturbance.

Nanfan was a strong exponent of the Leislerian policy, and warmly espoused that party's cause. The a.s.sembly convened by him possessed his spirit, was actuated by the same motives, and enjoyed the confidence and support of Leisler's friends.

During the absence of Nanfan and while the Government was without a head, Peter Schuyler and Robert Livingston supported and sustained the pretensions of Colonel Smith, senior councillor, to be considered the temporary ruler of affairs. Livingston was one of Leisler's most determined enemies, and had been execrated as such by Milburne in his dying words. At this time Livingston held the very important office of Secretary of Indian Affairs and Collector of Customs. The new a.s.sembly caused his removal, and required him to furnish his accounts for examination. Not being able to produce them, he was denounced and charged with being a defaulter. His expulsion from the Council followed, together with confiscation of his property and effects for the benefit of the province.

It seemed as if the enemies of Leisler were to be brought quickly to punishment, and that the martyr's friends were to enjoy the sweets of revenge. The feuds which existed between the two parties in the affairs of the colony produced the same confusion in the munic.i.p.al affairs of the city. In the Board of Aldermen each party had its adherents, and the contentions between the two equaled in intensity of hate the feeling manifested between the contending parties in the war of the Rebellion.

Some of the aldermen refused to take the oath of office at the hands of Mayor Noell, and he appointed others in their place. The friends of Leisler refused to act or to recognize the power of the Mayor to make new appointments. To enable an appeal to be taken to decide the question, the Aldermen took a recess, and the city was virtually without a government for a month. The court to whom the matter was referred held that the Mayor possessed the authority to act in the premises by filling vacancies, and thereupon the new officials took their seats. The Board thus became equally divided between the two parties. The Mayor belonged to the aristocratic or anti-Leislerian party, and had the casting vote.

This proceeding on the part of the Mayor created intense excitement, and threatened the peace of the city.

Lord Cornbury, a nephew of Queen Anne, who had just ascended the throne, was appointed to succeed Lord Bellomont. Bayard, who had labored to secure the conviction and execution of Leisler and Milburne, having prepared the act under which they were executed, upon hearing of the appointment of Cornbury, transmitted papers to him and to Parliament, strongly condemning the Leislerians and abusing Nanfan and his administration. Nanfan, learning of the action of Bayard, immediately arrested him and his a.s.sociate, John Hutchins, for treasonable acts in vilifying the administration. Bayard had the misfortune to be tried under the same act which he had prepared for the benefit of Leisler. The act provided "that any person who should endeavor by any manner or way, or upon any pretense, by force of arms or otherwise, to disturb the peace, good, and quiet, of the province, should be esteemed rebels and traitors, and should incur the pains and penalties which the laws of England had provided for such offenses."

Bayard had enforced this law without semblance of pity, but with rancor and hatred in his heart toward Leisler and Milburne. His own hour had come! As he had meted out to others, so he himself was to receive. He could expect no clemency. Bayard was indicted for treason and rebellion, for inciting the soldiers in the fort against the const.i.tuted authorities, and for inducing his friends to sign libelous pet.i.tions and addresses. Great exertions were made to secure his acquittal, without avail. He was tried, found guilty of the offense, and sentenced to death. Hutchins met with a similar fate. Leisler was not allowed opportunity to appeal for a reprieve, but Bayard and Hutchins received more merciful treatment. Governor Nanfan gave them a reprieve until the matter could be presented to the King and his wishes ascertained. In the mean time Lord Cornbury arrived, and exercised executive clemency by their release. Bayard was again taken in favor by Cornbury, who denounced the Leislerians and identified himself with the party in opposition. The judge who pa.s.sed sentence on Bayard was obliged to leave the country, having by his conduct incurred the displeasure of the Governor and Council.

Cornbury's administration was intolerant toward every religious and educational advancement. He embraced every opportunity which presented itself to rob and plunder the treasury, and enrich himself thereby.

Although his opportunities for enrichment were great, yet he possessed no capacity for saving that which he secured. His recklessness and licentiousness caused him to become deeply involved in debt, and rendered him unpopular with the people; public sentiment was, indeed, strongly against him. This fact, in connection with his general and reckless disobedience of orders, caused his recall in 1708. His creditors, who had looked upon his advancement to the position of Governor as a golden opportunity to secure their claims, feeling keenly the disappointment of not receiving their just dues, and becoming greatly incensed against him, on his return to England had him arrested and cast into prison, where he remained until the death of his father, whom he succeeded in the peerage.

The condition of the negro slave at this time was one of degradation.

The negro's privileges were circ.u.mscribed, and strict laws were enforced concerning his habits and movements. In order to pa.s.s the gates the slaves were obliged to obtain permission of their masters, and were not allowed to meet together. They could not own property, and there were no means provided whereby they could obtain their freedom. If an owner desired to give his slave his freedom, he was liable to pay a heavy fine for transgressing the law. These burdens daily increased. The traffic in slaves became more and more popular as a business.

In order to supply the demand, a public market for slaves was opened in New York in 1711. It was located at the foot of Wall Street, and it was the practice to bring all the slaves who were to be sold or hired to this market, where they could be inspected as so many cattle by parties desiring to bid. So strict were the ordinances pa.s.sed concerning negroes that they were not allowed to appear in the streets at night unless they had a lighted lantern. All who violated this regulation were committed to jail, and kept in confinement until a fine of eight shillings was paid. The master or owner of the slave on paying this fine enjoyed the privilege of requiring the authorities to give the offending slave thirty-nine lashes at the public whipping-post. It was not unnatural that these regulations should breed among the negroes at times a spirit of rebellion. They committed many murders in retaliation for injuries received.

At Newtown, in 1707, an entire family was murdered by the slaves. On being apprehended, the murderers acknowledged their offense, and gave as a reason for committing the crime that they had been prevented from going out on Sunday. The punishment inst.i.tuted for the murderous acts of slaves was calculated to fill them with fear and dread. They were even "tied to stakes and burned alive, broken on wheels, or suspended to the limbs of trees and left to perish." Seldom in the world's history has so much inhumanity been manifested towards slaves as in the early days of the colonies.

In 1706, Lord Cornbury issued the following proclamation to the justices of the peace in Kings County:--

By his Excellency, Edward, Lord Viscount Cornbury, Captain General and Governor in Chief of the provinces of New York and New Jersey, and the territories depending thereon in America, and Vice Admiral of the same, etc.: Whereas, I am informed that several negroes in Kings County have a.s.sembled themselves in a riotous manner, which if not prevented may prove of ill consequence; you and every one of you are therefore hereby required and commanded to take all proper methods for seizing and apprehending all such negroes in the said county, as shall be found to be a.s.sembled in such manner as aforesaid, or have run away or absconded from their masters or owners, whereby there may be reason to suspect them of ill practices or designs, and to secure them in safe custody, that their crimes and actions may be inquired into; and if any of them refuse to submit themselves, then to fire on them, kill, or destroy them, if they cannot otherwise be taken; and for so doing this shall be your sufficient warrant. Given under my hand at Fort Anne, in New York, the 22d day of July, 1706.

CORNBURY.

Furman, in his "Antiquities," refers to the condition of slaves on Long Island, and bears testimony that as a general rule they were peaceable and well behaved. He says that they were much attached to the families to which they belonged. Many now living can bear testimony to this fact.

When slavery was abolished in New York it was provided that all who had reached a certain age should remain with their owners and be provided during life with proper support and care. The writer can now call to mind many old negroes who never obtained their freedom. They loved to talk of "ma.s.sa" and the boys. They considered themselves a part of the family, and often idolized their owners. The master had in them true, warm friends, ever ready to fight his battles and take his part.

The aged negroes loved to sit in the chimney corner and tell to the children the history of the family. They would narrate in glowing language the incidents of the past, and always had eager listeners. They were rarely sold or separated from the family. When a son or daughter was married, a slave became a portion of the dowry or outfit. At times when estates were divided it became necessary to dispose of them. Furman says "that in an inventory taken on the 16th of December, 1719, in Kings County, of the estate of a deceased person, a negro wench and child were valued at 60, while five milk cows, five calves, three young bulls, and two heifers were collectively valued at 20."

New York was visited during the time of Lord Cornbury with that terrible scourge of the human race, yellow fever. It was brought from St. Thomas and spread rapidly. Physicians seemed powerless to prevent its ravages.

It was an epidemic long remembered and dreaded by the citizens of New York. All who could get away fled either to Jersey or Long Island. Lord Cornbury, with his retinue, took up his residence in Jamaica, Long Island. In order to afford suitable accommodations for so high a dignitary as the Governor, the Presbyterian minister of the village cheerfully gave up his parsonage to his use, removing himself to a smaller and less pretentious house.

[Ill.u.s.tration: BROOKLYN CHURCH AND DUFFIELD HOUSE, 1776]

In return for this act of kindness, Cornbury was guilty of a very contemptible trick toward the Presbyterian minister and church. The Governor was an uncompromising supporter of the Established Church of England, and was ready at all times to advance her interests. The Presbyterian church of Jamaica was strong and prosperous. Its popularity made the few Episcopalians in the village jealous and anxious to secure the property. The presence of Cornbury induced them to take possession of the building on a Sunday afternoon between services. This act resulted in violence between the parties, each of which claimed t.i.tle.

The pews were torn out, and the turmoil was only quelled by the appearance of the Governor, who decided that the Episcopalians were ent.i.tled to possession.

A law suit followed, and the Episcopalians kept possession until 1728.

The sheriff also seized the parsonage and land, and leased it for the benefit of the Episcopal Church. Cornbury, having been kindly treated by the minister, rewarded the act of courtesy by surrendering the house into the hands of the Episcopal rector, who took possession and occupied the house when Cornbury returned to New York.

Cornbury was succeeded in 1710 by Robert Hunter, who was a man of fine abilities, good character, possessed of excellent business qualities, and of a varied experience. He was one who in our day would pa.s.s for a very good Yankee. He was born of humble Scotch parents, who had not the means to supply him with an education. He was in a great measure a "self-made" man. When very young he was apprenticed to an apothecary.

This employment not suiting his taste, he ran away and enlisted in the army as a private. Possessing honesty and perseverance, and withal having a desire to please his superior officers, he soon gained their affection and good will, and was placed in the line of promotion. His manliness gained him friends everywhere, and in a short time the poor Scotch lad rose to the rank of a brigadier general. He was now thrown into the society of the cultivated and refined.

Hunter married an heiress, through whose instrumentality he was appointed Lieutenant-Governor of Virginia. He started for his new field of labor in 1707, was captured by a French cruiser and taken back to Europe as a prisoner. He was exchanged after having been a prisoner only a short time. What at first seemed to be a hardship in his case proved a blessing, and the precursor of higher honors. Upon being released the Queen removed the gall from the bitterness he had endured by bestowing upon him the position of governor of the provinces of New York and New Jersey.

Hunter considered it a paramount duty on his part to enforce the requirements of the Crown. In acting in accordance with their wishes he was compelled to oppose every manifestation of republican feeling on the part of the people, and to ally himself with the aristocratic party. He chose his councillors from this party, but was careful to select men of intelligence and power. Among his first advisers might be mentioned Gerardus Beekman, Rip Van Dam, an honest and successful Dutch merchant; Killian Van Rensselaer, whose family were patroons on the Hudson. The Huguenots were represented in his Cabinet by John Barbarie and Frederic Philipse. Hunter was deeply interested in the Huguenot element of the population.

Governor Hunter had a fixed desire to acquire additional territory for his Queen. He projected an expedition to conquer Canada, and used his influence to induce New England to join in the enterprise. This was in 1711. It was a measure which met with hearty acquiescence in New York.

The attention of the a.s.sembly was brought to the subject, and at once an appropriation of ten thousand pounds was made to defray the necessary expenses. The a.s.sembly issued bills of credit, and they may be said to be the beginnings of paper money in our country, as such notes had never before been used in the colony.

In 1712, after the failure of the expedition for conquest, rumors of an intended negro rebellion were heard on every side. It was noticed that the movements of the slaves were mysterious, and the general opinion was that the slaves intended to cause a riot; and a natural alarm spread through the communities on Manhattan Island and on the Brooklyn side of the river. These fears were not unfounded. The smouldering fire burst out into a flame. Property was destroyed, one house was burned, and several white men were killed. It was resolved to make a general arrest of the negroes. Nineteen were taken, tried, and executed for their connection with the disturbance.

In 1713, the war between England and France terminated by the treaty of Utrecht, which put an end to the effort to conquer Canada.

Hunter's health failing, in 1719, after a term of nine years, he was obliged to seek a change of climate, and returned to England, leaving the administration of affairs in the hands of his trusty friend, Peter Schuyler. He bade adieu to New York in July, 1719, bearing with him the good wishes of the people.

Schuyler's official career was short, lasting but one year. His long residence and connection with public matters proved of service to himself and the people he governed, and rendered his short administration eminently successful. He exercised great influence with the Indians, having ever shown himself to be their friend and protector, and having on many occasions interceded with them, and thereby saved the settlement from invasion and destruction. One of his princ.i.p.al and most worthy acts was the restoration of friendship between the whites and Iroquois Indians, which gave him deserved popularity.

The next governor was William Burnet, a son of the celebrated Bishop Burnet. He arrived on the 17th of September, 1720, immediately a.s.sumed control and entered upon his duties as governor of the combined provinces of New York and New Jersey. He was a man of education and ability, and above all things else was thoroughly honest. He readily saw that the wisdom and prudence of Hunter had been beneficial to the colony, and he resolved to follow the same course his predecessor had pursued. One of his first acts was to continue the a.s.sembly which had been convened by Hunter, and he kept it in existence for eleven years.

The a.s.sembly manifested its confidence and gratification by voting him a revenue for the succeeding five years.

It was soon after the opening of Burnet's administration that the people of Brooklyn and Kings County began to give signs of annoyance and agitation over encroachments made by private owners upon the king's highway leading from the ferry, and now represented by Fulton Street.

This highway, as we have seen, had been laid out in 1704, by the duly const.i.tuted commissioners, and it was provided "that it was to be ffour rod wide and to continue forever."

In April, 1721, the General Sessions of the Peace for Kings County held its term, and, after a due consideration of the question, indictments for encroaching on the "common highway of the King leading from the ferry to the church," were found against John Rapalje, Hans Bergen, and others. It appears very singular that these indictments were obtained at the instance and upon the complaint of two of the indicted parties.

The complaint on which this indictment was obtained was as follows:--

Flatbush, April 19, 1721. John Rapalje and Hans Bergen of the fferry desires of the Grand Jury that the Commissioners own being should be presented for not doing there duty in laying the King's highway according to ye law, being the King's highway is too narrow from the ferry to one Nicolus Cowenhoven living at Brooklyn, and if all our neighbours will make ye road according to law, then ye said John Rapalje and Hans Bergen is willing to do the same as aforesaid, being they are not willing to suffer more than their neighbors. As witness our hands the day and year first above written.

JAN RAPALJE.

HANS BERGEN.

These men were governed by a desire that all should fare alike, demanding that the law should be enforced without fear, favor, or partiality.