Volume 1, Chapter 40, The Dutch and New Sweden
The Kieft administration had witnessed another development annoying to the Dutch West India Company and to the Dutch government,
the settlement by Sweden of arbitrarily proclaimed Dutch territory on the Delaware.
The Delaware and indeed America as a whole presented a vast virgin territory for virtually any settlers of any nationality who wished to emigrate.
But government sovereignty is always jealous of its self-trumpeted monopoly.
In 1633, the New Sweden Company was formed, of equal parts of Dutch and Swedish capital,
as a successor company to one of William Usseling's projects.
The idea was the creation of Peter Minuet, the disappointed, ousted governor of New Amsterdam,
and of Samuel Blumert, a director of the Dutch West India Company, at odds with the controlling interest of that company.
Blumert, who became an agent of the Swedish Crown, was by far the largest Dutch investor.
Of the Swedish investors, three were of the family of Uxen Scherna, the Prime Minister of Sweden.
In the spring of 1638, the first small party of Swedish settlers, led by Minuet, landed
on the west bank of the Delaware and built Fort Christina, now Williamton.
Land was purchased from the local Indians.
The Swedes lived in uneasy coexistence with their neighbors.
The Dutch quickly protested the infringement of their monopoly and Virginia carped at the
and the competition of Swedish fur trade with the Indians.
But the Dutch were constrained from war against New Sweden by the fact that the two countries
were allies in the Thirty Years' War, then raging in Europe.
Dutch colonists planted a settlement 20 miles north of Fort Christina, but characteristically
the Dutch area was thinly populated.
Those who did settle there were soon outnumbered by the Swedes.
By 1640, the Swedish colony had a Lutheran minister, Rev. Rehoris Torquilas. The Dutch
were less tender, however, with the English settlers. In 1640, the leaders of New Haven
Colony, including Governor Theophilus Eaton, formed the Delaware Company in an attempt
to secure prosperity for the colony by promoting settlements on the Delaware. The effort was
Supported Financially by the General Court of New Haven Colony. The first New Haven
settlement on the Delaware took place in the summer of 1641 in southwestern New Jersey.
The small group of settlers began to grow tobacco and trade with the Indians. Promptly
the Dutch troops at Fort Nassau, aided by a Swedish force, invaded the New Haven land,
burned the houses of the settlers and shipped the prisoners to Manhattan.
Meanwhile, Sweden asserted its rampant nationalism by moving to put the New Sweden Company under
Swedish governmental control. In 1641, the Swedes bought out the Dutch investors in the
company, and the following year the Swedish Crown moved in to exert full control over
of the Company's Affairs.
By 1642, New Sweden was under the direct rule of the Swedish Council of State, which appointed
as the new governor the veteran soldier of fortune, Johann Prinz.
Prinz immediately began a campaign of harassment of the small New Haven settlement and its
leader, George Lamberton, whom he forbade to trade without a license.
After this treatment, the New Haven settlement soon collapsed. Flushed with the victory,
Prince established a series of forts, including Fort Elfsborg, near Salem Creek, and Fort
Newcrisum at the mouth of the Schuylkill River on the west bank of the Delaware. By 1644,
New Sweden reached its peak of population, less than 300. This contrasted to a population
in all of New Netherland of 2000. But from that point on, this already small colony entered
into a decline. For one thing, Sweden was interested in tobacco and not in the fur available
in the Delaware Valley. To return to New Netherland proper, we have seen that Peter Stuyvesant
was every bit as rigorous a tyrant as his predecessor, albeit more sophisticated and
and systematic in his depredations. As soon as he took office, he persecuted the critics
of Kieft and threatened to hang anyone appealing his decisions to Holland. He also decreed
that no liquor be sold to any Indians and that none at all be sold on Sunday mornings
or after nine o'clock curfew. Taxes were raised sharply, a new excise was laid on wines and
and Spirits, and export taxes on FERS increased to 30%. When these laws were not observed,
Stuyvesant added corporal punishment to the usual fines. All forms of smuggling and illegal
trading were, of course, forbidden on paying of heavy penalties. Stuyvesant, therefore,
was rapidly acquiring the reputation in the colony of being little different from the
The Hated Kieft, but Stuyvesant elaborated a sophisticated refinement. After enmeshing
the economy in a network of restrictions and prohibitions, Stuyvesant, in return for heavy
fees, sold exemptions from these regulations. In short, Stuyvesant saw that the key to wealth
for a government ruler is to create the opportunity for monopoly privilege, for example by outlawing
and Regulating Productive Activities, and then to sell these privileges for what the traffic can bear.
Stuyvesant's sales yielded him a fortune during his term in office, in currency and in land.
Two levy increased taxes. Stuyvesant, too, was forced to call together representatives of wealthy families of the colony,
In this case, a group of nine men. The nine men were chosen as advisors and judges by eighteen men, who in turn had been elected by Dutch householders of Manhattan, Flatlands and Brooklyn, now northwestern Brooklyn.
In September 1647, Stuyvesant realized that, rather than rule totally alone, it would be far shrewder to share his monopoly gains with the nine men, thus cementing them to his rule and warding off the rise of the sort of serious opposition that had ousted Kieft.
And so Stuyvesant pleased the nine men by restricting the crucial fur trade of the Hudson Valley to the old residents, the new ones needing considerable property to be admitted.
This was later expanded, however, to a fee requirement for all residents, with the fee being a purchase of the approval of Governor Stuyvesant.
After this expansion there was no incentive for the nine men to continue to back the director.
All these various taxes and regulations, however, were generally evaded by shippers and traders, the reaction of traders to harassment and depredation from time immemorial.
These successful evasions benefited the traders and the mass of consumers alike.
The honeymoon with the nine men did not last long, for one thing, Stuyvesant had refused to permit New England ships end New Netherland ports.
In 1648, New England retaliated against all Dutch trade with the Indians, causing considerable economic distress in the Dutch colony.
Another important factor in this distress was the high customs in New Amsterdam and the heavy penalties for evasion imposed there.
Spurred by the withering of commerce subsequent to the New England Regulation,
Averred by the withering of commerce subsequent to the New England Regulation, the nine men
led by their president, Adrien van der Donk, Patron of Yonkers, appealed the Stuyvesant
ruling to Holland. Stuyvesant seized the papers of the nine men, arrested van der Donk and
expelled him from their membership.
At this point, none other than Cornelius Mellon arrived from Holland, brandishing a safe conduct
from the States General as well as a condemnation of Stuyvesant's harsh treatment of Mellon
and Coyder. Chastised temporarily, Stuyvesant released van der Donk and allowed the nine
men to send their petition to the States General. The petition, sent in the fall of 1649, asked
the states general to take over the government of New Netherland from the West India Company
in order to allow local self-government in New Amsterdam and to encourage rather than
restrict trade.
The petition also included a severe indictment of the government of Peter Stuyvesant and
of the Dutch West India Company.
As the petition charged, nobody is unmolested or secured in his property longer than the
The director pleases, who is generally inclined to confiscating.
The petition wisely noted, a covetous chief makes poor subjects.
Oddly enough, Stuyvesant's main support at this time came from a group of English settlers
on Long Island, headed by George Baxter of Graves End, who is Stuyvesant's appointed
English Secretary of State.
The magistrates of the English settlements of Gravesend and Hampstead fawningly expressed
the fervent hope for no change of government, praised the existing strong government and
warned that any democratic procedure in New Netherland would surely lead to anarchy and
ruin.
Three years after the petition, the company's sole concession was to order Stuyvesant to
to grant a municipal government to New Amsterdam.
However, this was only a pro forma victory for the idea of limiting government.
Stuyvesant insisted on retaining the power to appoint all of the municipal officials
and to decree the municipal ordinances.
In foreign affairs, Stuyvesant was cautious and conciliatory regarding the power of the English colonies,
Realizing, as he did, that Connecticut's and New Haven's activities on the Connecticut
River, Westchester and Long Island constituted a potential threat to Dutch rule.
In 1650, Stuyvesant negotiated a boundary settlement with the New England Confederation,
partitioning Long Island at Oyster Bay.
This partition continued to be upheld even after the outbreak of the first Anglo-Dutch
Dutch War, 1652-54. Indeed, the only loss suffered by New Netherland in that war was
Connecticut's seizure of Fort Good Hope, which had been a hopeless enclave in hostile territory
for a long while. The Dutch West Indies Company, however, suffered very seriously from the
Anglo-Dutch War, for England was allied with newly independent, 1640, Portugal, which proceeded
to Reconquer Angola and Northern Brazil, the company's most lucrative possessions. England
was rewarded with rights in the slave trade by the Portuguese. The company's financial
problems were compounded by lack of support from the government and the merchants, who
preferred private trade to the expenses of monopolies and colonial government. Stuyvesant's
on the outbreak of the war, the English settlers were alienated by the company's prohibition
of any but Dutchman in public office. Captain John Underhill organized a one-man rebellion
at Hempstead in Flushing, claiming allegiance to England and denouncing Stuyvesant's tyranny,
The seizure of private land, imposition of heavy taxes, religious persecution, banning
of any election procedures, and imprisonment of men without trial.
Underhill was forced to flee to Rhode Island.
More significant was the disaffection of such former lieutenants of Stuyvesant as George
Baxter.
Baxter's opposition forced the reluctant director to agree to a Lontdog, or popular convention, to meet to discuss public affairs.
The Lontdog met in December 1653 with four Dutch and four English towns represented by 19 delegates.
The Dutch towns New Amsterdam, Brooklyn, Flatlands and Flatbush, the English, Flushing, Gravesend,
Hempstead and Middelburg.
Despite the Partition Treaty of 1650, most of the new settlers of Western Long Island
were English, and many of these settlements had acquired some rights to local self-government
from the Charter of 1640.
Now they were in the forefront of the complaints of arbitrary government.
Ostensibly called to concentrate on the English war, the Lontoc meeting was turned by Baxter,
attracted out of office to the liberal cause, to the most pressing problem, Stuyvesant's
own tyranny.
Baxter drew up and the Lontoc unanimously approved a remonstrance and petition attacking
and all the despotic evils of the existing regime, especially arbitrary government by
the director and his council, appointment of officials and magistrates without consent
of the people, and granting of large tracts of land to favorites of the director.
They also demanded a permanent lontdog with power to raise taxes and help select officials,
and they asserted that the law of nature authorized all men to associate in defense of their liberty
and Property. Here were the very rights of man which Peter Stuyvesant had always despised.
Stuyvesant, like Kieft, had thought his subjects would come together to meet an external threat.
He found them, instead seizing the opportunity to challenge the threat to their life, liberty
and property that they were suffering chronically at home. Stuyvesant, of course, brusquely
He rejected the remonstrance and promptly declared the assembly illegal and ordered it dissolved.
Savison poured his scorn on the law of nature. Only appointed magistrates, not private individuals, had the right to hold political meetings.
We derive our authority from God and the company, not from a few ignorant subjects, and we alone can call the inhabitants together.
Moreover, charged the director the whole proceedings smelt of rebellion.
Stuyvesant was able to continue the arbitrary rule that was crippling and greatly slowing down the development of the colony.
Indeed, the company not only approved the director's treatment of the long dog, but gently chided him for engaging in any sort of dialogue with the rabble.
Encouraged, Stuyvesant expelled Baxter and James Hubbard of Gravesend from their civil offices.
When the latter raised the English flag at Gravesend and both proclaimed their allegiance to Cromwell,
Stuyvesant sent a troop to imprison Hubbard and Baxter.
The director's victory over his opposition was complete.
As we have noted, Stuyvesant's foreign policy, in welcome contrast to Keefe's, was cautious and conciliatory.
When Stuyvesant assumed office, he found Governor Prince of New Sweden constructing many forts on the Delaware River.
To counter this expansionist policy, Stuyvesant built Fort Bavarsreid, now Philadelphia, in
the spring of 1648, across the Schuylkill River from the new Swedish fort, New Crism.
But the rambunctious Swedes twice burned Fort Bavarsreid during that year, and each time
the Dutch simply rebuilt, without retaliation.
Then in 1651, the Dutch built Fort Casimir, Newcastle, below Fort Christina. Strategically
located, it commanded the river approaches to most of New Sweden.
During the early 1650s, friction was building up in Europe between Sweden and the United
Provinces. The Thirty Years War had ended in 1648 and now the two countries would soon
surely this governor, Johann Reising, an associate of the powerful Uxon-Scherena family, must have realized that his time is running out.
Many colony of less than a few hundred souls could hardly have held its own in a war with
New Netherland, and yet inexplicably, rising, suddenly attacked and seized Fort Casimir
in 1654, renaming it Fort Terfaldighet. This provocation was the last straw for the hitherto
patient Dutch who decided to wipe out New Sweden for good.
The following year the Dutch sent seven ships headed by Stuyvesant and quickly forced the
surrender of the two Swedish forts.
The Swedish governor was returned to Sweden.
Most of the Swedish settlers elected to remain, but were forced to take a loyalty oath to
Holland.
New Sweden had ended.
It was now a part of the enlarged New Netherland.
The Delaware Bay area was now governed by the Dutch, who provided the officialdom and
and the Fur Traders but the bulk of the settlers amounting to about 600 by 1659 were Swedes
and Finns who provided the farmers and village governments. Finland was in those years under
Swedish rule and hence many of the Swedish immigrants were Finns. In 1656 there occurred
the fateful separation of the west bank of the Delaware River from Fort Christina Wilmington
and Southward from the rest of the Delaware River Settlements. In short, a separate life
began for the future colony of Delaware. As a direct result of the highly expensive expedition
to conquer New Sweden, the heavily indebted Dutch West India Company in 1656 transferred
its sovereignty over part of this area to its creditor, the city of Amsterdam. Three
Three years later the company transferred the entire West Bank from Fort Christina southward
to Amsterdam. The city of Amsterdam sent out more settlers to its new land, renamed Fort
Christina Altina and named its new colony New Amstel, which was headed by Juan Alrich.
In 1659, all rich was succeeded by Alexander de Gino Llosa, who became the sole governor
of what was later to be Delaware.
The Swedish and Finnish settlers soon found that their lot under Amsterdam rule was much
worse than under New Netherland and the Dutch West India Company.
Their freedom of trade was far more restricted and the city of Amsterdam's officials arrogated
to themselves a tight monopoly of all trade.
Stuyvesant was also bitter at this government rival in his former domain.