44. The Beginning of Andros' Rule in New York

Sir Edmund Andros arrived in November 1674. Almost immediately he renamed New York and its towns, reappointed the old English magistrates, confirmed previous land grants, and again proclaimed the Duke’s Laws throughout the province. Andros also confronted a problem: the revolutionary towns on eastern Long Island. Having been liberated by Connecticut troops, these long-time rebellious towns—expecially Southold, East Hampton, and Southampton—now proclaimed themselves to be part of Connecticut. Andros threatened to deal with these towns as if they were in outright rebellion. He successfully insisted that Winthrop give up any claim to the Long Island towns and managed to intimidate the protesters. One Long Island critic was sentenced to a severe whipping for writing “seditious letters.” Confronted by force majeure as well as the royal charter, the Long Island towns reluctantly succumbed.

In that era, a change of regime often meant imposition of a loyalty oath, and Andros decided the following spring (1675) to impose on all an oath of allegiance, similar to the one imposed by Nicolls a decade earlier. But the Dutch burghers of New York City remembered that Nicolls had promised them religious liberty and other rights against oppression, and that Nicolls had readily agreed to a proviso that his forced loyalty oath would not impinge on these rights protected by the articles of capitulation. The leading Dutch burghers of Manhattan, headed by the original leader of a decade before, Cornelius Steenwyck, now urged the same proviso upon Andros. But the Dutch burghers soon found that Andros was no Nicolls. Andros promptly charged them with inciting a rebellion. The stunned burghers—including such leaders as DePeyster, Kip, Bayard, and Beekman—asked for permission to sell their estates and leave New York. Andros’ answer was to send eight of them to jail for “mutinous” and inflammatory behavior. When their case came to trial in October 1675, Andros shrewdly reduced the charge to trading without having taken the oath of allegiance. Facing confiscation of their goods, the burghers scrambled to take the oath and secure remission of the penalty, and the other rebellious citizens of Manhattan followed their example.

The Long Island towns, in the meanwhile, found none of their longstanding grievances abated. Indeed, their troubles were greater now under the tyrannical Andros. Andros insisted on payment of fees to confirm land titles and subsequent payment of the hated annual quitrent. The Long Island towns, led by Southampton and Southold, insisted, as they had before, that the freemen were entitled to their lands, by Indian purchase and subsequent settlement and use. But Andros refused to be lenient and in fact threatened to confiscate all the lands and throw them open to all would-be occupiers. It was only then, in 1676, that the towns reluctantly complied. But even then the quitrents that Andros levied on these towns as a penalty for their resistance could only be collected by force.

One significant development of this era was the widening of libertarian discontent over the oppressive policies of the central government, from the Long Island towns to other parts of New York. Such Dutch towns as Kingston speedily grew delinquent in payment of the newly imposed quitrents. The Long Island towns again led in vigorous opposition to taxes imposed by the Andros administration. Once again they dragged their heels in contributing toward the upkeep of Fort James, this time in 1674. Further, they resisted paying for the construction of a fort in their own Oyster Bay. During King Philip’s War of 1675–76, Andros did not dare impose higher taxes on Long Island, but asked instead for voluntary contributions. And as early as 1676 Huntington was already over a year behind in payment of its property tax to the province, and various towns continued to refuse to pay excise taxes on liquor. Eastern Long Island also continued to press for a popular assembly, but here again, the significant new factor was the spread of the desire for an assembly to the rest of the colony. The merchants of all the towns began to see an assembly as their only hope of reducing the burden of new and higher customs duties, and of gaining the rights and liberties of their colonial neighbors. The Duke of York, however, flatly rejected the idea as “of dangerous consequence, nothing being more known than the aptness of such bodies to assume to themselves many privileges which prove destructive to, or very oft disturb, the peace of the government....” And so New York continued to be the only English colony without a representative assembly.

The same English ship that brought Major Andros to America also brought Philip Carteret, returning as governor of New Jersey, at least of its northeastern—and overwhelmingly the most populous—half. The governor, under instructions from Sir George Carteret, reconfirmed the interpretation of the original Concessions, issued in 1672, therewith expanding the powers of governor and Council at the expense of the Assembly. Land grants made by Carteret were confirmed, and those by Nicolls disavowed. All were required to obtain their land titles from the governor and pay the imposed quitrents. Nicolls’ patentees were to receive 500 acres of land each. The old magistracy was returned to power. However, an act of amnesty, or “oblivion,” was adopted in the first Assembly of 1675, pardoning all rebellious and treasonable offenses made during the time of troubles, from 1670 to 1673.

From the very first meeting of the New Jersey Assembly in 1675, however, the deputies resumed their objections, and demanded joint sessions of the governor’s Council and the Assembly. And yet, the same Assembly imposed penalties up to and including banishment for such “crimes” as speaking contemptuously of officials. The original law forcing every male to equip himself with arms and ammunition, and to undergo military training for four days a year, was reconfirmed. Every town was commanded to maintain a fort. There were no exceptions for Quakers, who were virtually nonexistent in Eastern New Jersey.

Until 1675 there had been no levy in New Jersey to pay a salary to the governor, but now, along with the general increase of taxes, special appropriations for this expense were voted by the Assembly. In addition, a voluntary subscription was authorized for the salary in arrears. When subscriptions lagged, the Assembly directed each town to appoint a committee to raise the amount, and a lag in response was to be met by a compulsory levy on the town. The subscription was now clearly less “voluntary” than before. Even so, the Assembly voted, in the fall of 1676, a tax for the governor’s salary, payable in wheat, peas, and tobacco. Taxes in general were payable in wheat, tobacco, and other agricultural staples.

Although no jurisdictional clashes occurred in these years between New York and New Jersey, troubles were in store. For instance, the Duke of York, at the very time he regranted northern New Jersey to Sir George Carteret, also appointed Andros as governor of all the land from the Connecticut to the Delaware rivers! This manifest contradiction could not hope to remain dormant and unresolved forever.

We have already touched on the remarkable change in the political fortunes of the Quakers. A similar shift occurred in New York itself. The Duke of York appointed, along with Andros, William Dyer, a Quaker and son of William and Mary Dyer of Rhode Island, as collector of the port of New York. Further, Andros, an Anglican, had a lieutenant governor who was a Catholic, Anthony Brockholls. These appointments reflected what has been called a “peculiar” alliance among Quakers, Catholics, and high Anglicans during the Restoration era. The alliance was not so peculiar, however, if we remember that these three groups had been persecuted in England, and in English and Dutch America, by a common enemy—Calvinism.