Holland; if he died without a will, leaving children or remoter descendants, his estate passed to them. If the intestate left no children, his parents, or if neither of them was alive, his brothers and sisters or their representatives, succeeded. There was no preference of males to females, and no law of primogeniture; but as in the New England colonies, the equal division of estates, among all the children or other relatives, the best foundation of a republic, was the general rule.*

As an inducement to colonization, the Company, at an early day, promised to supply the colonists with blacks; and this, through its commerce with Africa and with nations engaged in the slave trade, it was enabled to do, with little inconvenience. Negro slavery was thus introduced into the Province; but never, perhaps, did it exist in a form less objectionable in itself, or more useful to its subjects, than among the Dutch colonists of New Netherland and their descendants.†

In the first charter of Freedoms and Exemptions it was implied, and in the amended charter of 1640, expressly provided, that the Protestant religion, as expounded by the Synod of Dort, and taught and exercised in the Reformed Church in the United Provinces, was to be maintained by the Company and its Governors; and in the latter document it was declared, that no other religion was to be tolerated or allowed. Yet both before and after 1640, many Protestant families and individuals, not in communion with the Dutch Church, were allowed to settle in New Netherland, and were protected in the enjoyment of their religious rights. The administration of STUYVESANT was less liberal in this respect; or rather, he enforced more strictly than

* O'Callaghan, i. 90. Van Leeuwen's Roman Dutch Law, Book iii. Van Der Linden's Institutes, Book i. chap. ix., X.

+ Articles of Freedoms and Exemptions of 1629, art. 30. O'Callaghan, i. 384, 385. Mrs. Grant of Laggan, in her charming Memoirs of an American Lady, includes in her picture of society in New York a century ago, an interesting notice of African slavery as it then existed in the Dutch families. Within my own memory, much of the patriarchal simplicity and kindness of the institution, as described by her, was to be seen among the substantial farmers of my native township (Kinderhook) and the neighboring country.

O'Callaghan, i. 220.

The Walloons from France and Belgium, in 1624, were allowed to settle on Long Island, on terms more satisfactory than they could obtain in Virginia. O'Callaghan, i. 101. During Kieft's time, and afterwards, many Quakers and other sectaries, to escape persecution in New England, removed to New Netherland. Id. 207. Bancroft, ii. 302. In 1656, a colony of Waldenses, driven by fire and sword from their mountains of Piedmont, found a secure resting place in the valley of the Hudson. Bancroft, ii. 302.

his predecessors, the narrow minded provisions of the charter. With a noble inconsistency, the Company interposed for the protection of the persecuted; reproved the zeal of their deputy; and directed him to grant to the Quakers, and every other peaceful citizen, liberty of conscience and the right of private worship.*

During the Dutch rule, there was, properly speaking, no representative assembly.† Delegates of the commonalty were, however, on two occasions of special moment, during the administration of Kieft, brought into consultation with him and his Council; and the right and capacity of the people to advise in the management of public affairs, were thus explicitly acknowledged by their rulers. In 1647,STUYVESANT and his Council, under the like pressure, and in compliance with the general wish, established a permanent body, "The NINE men," as "tribunes of the people," to give their advice when called on by the Government, and to assist in promoting the welfare of the country. For the constituting of this body, the commonalty of New Amsterdam and other places were to choose eighteen of their "most expert and reasonable persons," from whom the Director General and Council were to select three for the merchants, three for the citizens, and three for the farmers. Like the deliberative assemblies of many European republics, the "NINE men" were only to meet at the call of the Director and Council, one of whom was to preside over them; and were merely to advise upon such matters as should be submitted to them by the Director. Six of this body were annually to leave their seats, which were to be filled by the Direc

Bancroft, ii. 300, referring to the Albany Records. De Witt, in Proceedings of N. Y. Hist. Soc.. for 1844, p. 73.

The articles of Freedoms and Exemptions of 1629, authorised the colonies to appoint each a deputy to give information to the Director and Council; one of which deputies was to be changed every two years; but the colonies were not sufficiently numerous to bring together a number of deputies large enough to constitute an assembly, nor was there one until April, 1664.

The first of these occasions was in 1641, when the "Twelve Men" were chosen by the commonalty, to cooperate with the Director General and Council, in obtaining satisfaction for the murder of a settler by an Indian. After some meetings on this subject, the twelve men proposed various reforms in the administration, when their future meetings were prohibited by K:EFT, as tending to dangerous consequences. O'Callaghan, i. 242-249. The other was in 1643, when in anticipation of the general Indian war which followed the barbarous massacre of the river Indians, perpetrated by the orders of KIEFT, the “ Eight men" were chosen for the purpose of advising the Director General and Council. They continued to act for about a year, and like the twelve proposed many reforms, and not obtaining them, made such urgent appeals to the West India Company as finally to secure his recall. Id. 284, 289, 306, 312.

tor and Council, from double the number nominated by the Commonalty.*

There was thus a gradual approach to the true idea of a free, representative government; and from the progress made before the transfer of the Province to the English, it is reasonably certain, that even without the new impulse given by this event, the inhabitants of New Netherland would soon have come into the enjoyment of constitutional liberty.

With the increase of population in the city and townships, the inhabitants of both claimed a share in the gov ernment; especially in the laying and collecting of taxes. Their complaints and remonstrances, drawn up by Van Der Donck and enforced by his personal appeals, procured, in 1650, a partial compliance with their demands. The States General issued an order, in which, along with other measures for the protection and improvement of the Province, it was provided, that the local government should thereafter be vested in a Director General, a Vice-Director, and three Councillors; the Director and Vice-Director, and one of the Councillors, to be appointed as before. The other two Councillors were to be selected on the part of the States General and the West India Company, from four persons to be nominated by a local convention consisting of the Patroons of colonies, or their deputies, and of delegates from the commonalty; and their terms of service were to be so arranged, that at the end of every two years, the seat of one should become vacant, and his place be supplied by a new appointment, made on the like nomination.†

This concession, though well designed, produced little practical good. The people continued to be harassed by arbitrary taxation, and other oppressive measures. The discontent became general, and at length led, in 1653, to the assembling of a convention of delegates from New Amsterdam, and from Breuckelen and the other Dutch villages in the eastern part of Long Island, chosen freely by the commonalty, but without the permission of the Government. They demanded a reform in several particulars, and especially that no laws should be passed, nor any officers created, without the consent of the people. STUYVESANT and his Council dispersed the assembly, and reprobated its doctrines; and the West India Company approved and

commended their ill judged and obstinate conservatism. In the inception of this movement, as well as in the proceedings of the Convention, the influence of the men and the principles of New England, was palpable and effective. Many of the members had emigrated from the east; the remonstrance of the convention was from the pen of George Baxter, a Englishman.*

The failure of this attempt only sharpened the desire for popular enfranchisement. The commonalty continued to dispute the ordinances of the Director and his Council, and to demand as a right, a share in the government. The encroachments of Connecticut and the claims of Massachusetts on the territory of the Province, the destruction of Esopus, and the fear of further Indian hostilities, compelled STUYVESANT, in November, 1663, to convene delegates from the city and the villages, and to ask the aid of their united councils; but as he proposed no enlargement of civil rights or political privileges, the assembly would do nothing but refer to the States General. In April, 1664, rumors of an intended invasion by the English, increased the perplexities of the Director, and induced him to convene, for the like purpose, a second assembly; but this new source of alarm to the Government, seems little to have disturbed the equanimity of the people. The indifference and inaction of the former assembly were repeated; the public defence was devolved on the authorities in Holland; and as no relief came from that quarter, the way was prepared for the surrender of the Province, in the following Autumn, to the arms of England, and the government of JAMES, Duke of York. The firmness, fidelity, and vigor of STUYVESANT, in the final hour, command our unqualified respect; yet when we consider the course of his administration, and the condition of the country, we can scarcely blame the passive submission of the burgomasters of New Amsterdam to the necessities by which they were surrounded, and we may well excuse the ready assent of the inhabitants at large, to a change of rule. No such indulgence can be extended to the treacherous invasion of New Netherland. In the

* Bancroft, ii. 306, 307, 308. Extracts from the remonstrance, with the names of the signers, may be seen in Thompson's Hist. of Long Island, ii. 111, 112, 2d ed. It may be found entire in Wood's Long Island, p. 164 The proceedings of the Convention will be more fully given in O'Callaghan's second volume. The narrow policy of the Company and the States General, on this occasion, is in striking contrast with the liberality of their concessions in the charter of New Amstel, granted about the same time, and referred to in a former note. Ante p. 14.

history of the royal ingrates, by whom it was planned, and for whose benefit it was perpetrated, there are few acts more base; none more characteristic.*

The articles of capitulation secured to all the inhabiants, their personal liberties and estates, and to the Dutch, liberty of conscience in Divine worship and church discipline, and the enjoyment of their own customs concerning their inheritances. All inferior civil officers and magistrates were to continue, till the customary time of new elections; when new ones were to be chosen by the inhabitants. The twenty-first article expressly provided, that the town of Manhattan should choose deputies, and that such deputies should have free voices in all public affairs, as much as any other deputies;" a provision which clearly implied, that there should be a representative assembly, similar to the assemblies in the other colonies. In the proclamation of

The States General, by the treaty of Breda, concluded July 21, 1667, ceded New Netherland to Great Britain, in lieu of Surinam. After the temporary resumption of the Dutch rule consequent on the retaking of the Province in 1673, it was again ceded by the States General to the English, by the treaty of London, concluded July 9, 1674. These cessions embraced all the territory claimed by the Dutch under the name of Novum Belgium or New Netherland, which, as possessed at the surrender of 1664, extended on the south to the Delaware bay and river. The Dutch settlements in this quarter were on both sides of the river; but the most important were on its west bank, and chiefly within what now forms the State of Delaware. Of these last, the first was begun in 1638, by the Swedes, under Minuits, who, on being dismissed by the Dutch West India Company, had entered the service of Sweden. O'Callaghan, i. 188. Kieft protested against this encroachment on the territory of New Netherland; but without effect. Id. 191, 365-375. Other settlements followed, so that in 1655, when Stuyvesant reduced them to subjection, the Swedes on the Delaware numbered about seven hundred souls. See J. W. Beekman's paper on the Early European Colonies on the Delaware, in the Proceedings of the New York Hist. Soc. for June, 1847, pp. 86-108; a paper which will well reward perusal, not only by the information it contains, but by the very agreeable manner in which it is communicated.

In the east, New Netherland, after long controversy, had been limited by the treaty of Hartford, made in 1650, with the Commissioners of the New England colonies, as to Long Island, by a line from the westernmost part of Oysterbay, south to the sea; and as to the main land, by a line from the west side of Greenwich bay, running northerly into the country twenty miles, and thence as should be afterwards agreed on, but not within ten miles of Hudson's river. This arrangement secured to Connecticut the eastern two-thirds of Long Island, and a correspondent portion of the territories between Hudson's river and the Connecticut. It may be found at length in Thompson's Hist. of Long Island, ii. 305. It was to be in force and to be kept by the parties, " until a full and final determination be agreed upon in Europe, by the two States of England and Holland." It was not ratified by the States General until 1656; (Ib.) but was observed by the authorities of New Netherland, before and after that date; though for some years before the surrender, new difficulties arose between them and their neighbors, from the encroachments of the latter. Smith, i. 12, 13. Dunlap, i. 96-114.