John Pell of the Manor of Pelham Helped Settle the 1683 Border Dispute Between the Province of New York and the Colony of Connecticut

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.

Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.

Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

John Pell arrived in Boston in 1670 and quickly made his way to the Colony of Connecticut to claim his inheritance from his deceased uncle, Thomas Pell, of the Manor of Pelham.  Unlike his uncle, John Pell moved to the Manor of Pelham to live there permanently.  It is believed he lived temporarily in a farmhouse built by his uncle on today’s Rodman’s Neck until he completed construction of his own Manor House near the location of today’s Bartow-Pell Mansion Museum. 

In very short order John Pell became a notable citizen and a respected Justice of the Peace and member of the General Court of Assizes in the Province of New York.  When Pell first arrived on the scene from England, however, the Province of New York and the Colony of Connecticut already had been embroiled in a boundary dispute for decades.  That boundary dispute erupted yet again in 1683.  Provincial Governor Thomas Dongan selected John Pell of the Manor of Pelham and a handful of others to serve as New York's commissioners to settle that dispute.

Border Tensions Between New Netherlands and the English Colonies

During the time the Dutch controlled New Netherland (including New Amsterdam on the Island of Manhattan), there were disputes over the border between New Netherlands and the Colony of Connecticut and other English colonies.  With English settlers pressing southwestward toward Manhattan and Dutch-sanctioned settlers pressing northeastward into areas including today’s Throggs Neck and Yonkers, in 1650, Dutch Director-General of New Netherlands, Petrus Stuyvesant, traveled to Hartford to negotiate a border with the governor of the Colony of Connecticut, Edward Hopkins.

Stuyvesant essentially traded Connecticut land claims (the New Netherland claim encompassed the full length of the Connecticut River and as far east as Narragansett Bay) in order to get a clear boundary on Long Island.  Stuyvesant and Hopkins agreed on a Connecticut line fifty Dutch miles west of the mouth of the Connecticut River.  On Long Island, a line would be drawn south from the westernmost point of Oyster Bay, through modern Nassau County.  Although the Dutch West India Company approved the treaty, the English royal authorities never ratified it.  Thus, the border remained in question and the so-called “Treaty of Hartford” remained a source of tension between the Dutch and English for many years. 

Efforts in 1664 to Settle the New York – Connecticut Boundary

In 1664, England took control of New Netherland from the Dutch.  Even before that, English settlers in Connecticut and those in the New York region were battling over the boundary that would separate the two colonies.  King Charles II of England sent Richard Nicolls to serve as Governor of the Province of New York and to lead a group of royal commissioners sent with him to “end unneighborly and unbrotherly contentions” regarding the border between New York and Connecticut.  The Commissioners met with the then-Governor of the Colony of Connecticut, John Winthrop, and a group of Connecticut commissioners.

In December, 1664, colonial authorities announced an agreement to place the boundary line running north-northwest at the mouth of the Mamaroneck River.  Long Island, however, was placed entirely within the Province of New York.  The new line on the mainland, however, was well west of the line that would have been established by the Treaty of Hartford had that treaty been ratified by English royal authorities. 

The Dutch Retake New York, Lose It, and Governor Edmund Andros Arrives

For a short time in 1673, the Dutch retook New York.  Because the 1664 agreement had actually added large swaths of land to Connecticut on the mainland up the Hudson River, Connecticut did not want the 1650 line proposed by the Treaty of Hartford to govern.  For a short period, Connecticut resisted any suggestion by the Dutch that the 1650 line governed the boundary between Dutch-controlled lands and Connecticut.

In early 1674, however, Dutch and English authorities signed the Treaty of Westminster that, among other things, returned New Netherland to the English.  Governor Edmund Andros arrived in New York in 1674 with a new royal patent for the Province of New York claiming all lands up to the Connecticut River – well within the Colony of Connecticut as denoted by the line agreed to by the commissioners as announced in December, 1664.  Thereafter:

“Gov. Andros showed a markedly aggressive tack in his negotiations with Connecticut. In May 1675, Andros sent a letter asking for land west of the Connecticut River under the Duke's new patent.  When Gov. Winthrop objected, Andros sent a representative in June to demand Connecticut's submission, threatening to send soldiers against any rebellion.  During this time of high tensions between the colonies, King Philip's War broke out in 1675.  Andros attempted to use this to consolidate lands under the Duke's [new] patent [that granted lands all the way to the Connecticut River to New York]. At the start of the war, Andros sent troops to Fort Saybrook, nominally to defend.  However, Winthrop's troops arrived first, and held the fort themselves.  Andros requested that Winthrop temporarily relinquish Connecticut's claim to the area in order to strengthen the united defense.”

Source:  “Border Disputes Between New York and Connecticut” in Wikipedia:  The Free Encyclopedia (visited Jun. 25, 2016).

New Governor Thomas Dongan Arrives in 1683 and Settles the Matter – Again

In 1683, a new Governor arrived in the Province of New York.  He was Thomas Dongan.  One of Governor Dongan’s first official acts was to move to try to settle the border dispute with Connecticut – again.  It was during this time that Justice of the Peace John Pell of the Manor of Pelham became involved. 

During the autumn of 1683, likely at the urging of Governor Thomas Dongan, Justice John Pell issued a warrant requiring constables of Rye, Greenwich, and Stamford to appear before the General Court of Assizes in New York in October.  During that court session, Governor Dongan pled to the court that Connecticut had violated the 1664 agreement.  He also issued a letter to Governor Robert Treat of the Colony of Connecticut warning that “If you do not submitt to let us have all the land within twenty miles of Hudson’s River, I must claime as far as the Duke’s Pattent goes; which is to the River Connecticut.  There is land enough for us all, and I love not to do my neighbors ill offices.”

Source:  "GOVERNOR DONGAN TO GOVERNOR TREAT" in Trumbull, J. Hammond, ed., The Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut May, 1678 – June, 1689; With Notes and an Appendix Comprising Such Documents from the State Archives, and Other Sources, as Illustrate the History of the Colony During the Administration of Sir Edmund Andros, pp. 329-30 (Hartford, CT:  Case, Lockwood & Co., 1859).

Representatives of the two colonies agreed to a new border similar to the one that exists today, placing the settlement of Rye in New York and the settlements of Greenwich and Stamford in Connecticut.  The Province of New York appointed a commission of four respected citizens, one of whom was a surveyor, to survey and place the new line.  Those commissioners were John Pell of the Manor of Pelham, John Youngs, Robert Vauqellin, and Phillip Welles (the surveyor).  The Colony of Connecticut, in turn, appointed a commission to join the New York Commission consisting of Major Nathan Gold, Captain Jonathan Sellick, Ensign Daniel Sherman, and Mr. John Harriman (a surveyor).

On Wednesday, October 4, 1684, the commissioners of the two colonies  met in Stamford.  According to a report filed by the New York Commissioners the following February (February 23^rd):

“Wee went to Lions Point on ye east side of Birom River and from ye mouth of sd River where itt falls into ye Sea, we measured up the said River and found itt to be one mile and halfe and twenty rodds, bearing North halfe Easterly, and so came to a great Rock stone at ye Wading Place, where the road cutts ye sd River, and from thence directed our course North North West, six miles and a halfe, and there marked DRCC [In the form of a diamond with “D” containing a hooked line through it at the top and then, in clockwise order: “R” “C” and “C”] three white oake trees as in the margeant; thence directed our course West and by North seven miles and one hundred and twenty rodds, which brought us to ye Northernmost end of a Reach of Hudson’s River, which bears as we judged South and by West a quarter Westerly, and North and by East a quarter Easterly, which above-said line falls upon the sd Reach about Three miles above Frederick Philips upper Mills over against Tapan, and ye said River bearing North as to itts generall course upwards, we conclude the above mentioned West and by North line to be the shortest from sd Three marked Trees to Hudson’s River, and having unanimously concluded that part of the Sound from Lions Point Easterly to beare East North East, we did from said Trees at eight mile distance run a parallel to the Sound, vizt. East North East twelve miles, and still continued ye said Twelve Mile line East North East one mile and sixtyfour rodds, which then gave twenty miles from Hudson’s River, and is eight miles North North West from ye Sound.  Then finding the Oblong of twelve miles East North East and eight miles North North West did deminish sixty one thousand foure hundred and forty acres from ye twenty miles from Hudson’s River, we added to ye abovesaid twenty miles upon ye East North East line, three hundred and five rodds more, to run at yt additional breadth, parallel to Hudson’s River, till it meets with the Mathethusetts Line, which we demed one hundred miles distant from our eight mile line, which severall courses, with theire destances, together with the three hundred and five rodds added, doe clearly appear in ye Platt by the surveyers drawne and hereunto annexed; which addition of three hundred and five rodds we refer for itts confirmation and ratification to the two Governments from whence we are imployed; and that the above written is a true report of our proceedings, we have this tenth day of October, one thousand six hundred eighty and foure, subscribed our names in Standford.”

Source:  See full text of report and citation below.

Though John Pell and his colleagues did their part to settle the boundary lines, disputes over the line between New York and Connecticut continued for nearly another hundred years – long after the death of John Pell of the Manor of Pelham. 

Portrait of John Pell.

NOTE:  Click on Image to Enlarge.

Diagram Depicting New York and Connecticut Border

Disputes Between 1636 and 1776.  Source:  

“Border Disputes Between New York and Connecticut” in

Wikipedia:  The Free Encyclopedia (visited Jun. 25, 2016).

NOTE:  Click on Image to Enlarge.

*          *          *          *          *

“REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONERS AND SURVEYORS, FOR LAYING OUT THE LINE BETWEEN CONNECTICUT AND NEW YORK.

[Col. Boundaries, II. 46.]

Pursuant to a Commission from the Right Hon ble Thomas Dongan, Governour Generall of all his Royall Highnesses Territories in America, &c., bearing the date the 26^th day of September, 1684.*  [Footnote “*” reads:  “* Doc. Relating to the Hist. of N. York, III. 356.”]

Wee underwritten did upon the first Wednesday of this instant October meet, at ye towne of Stanford, Major Nathan Gold, Capt. Jonathan Sellick, Ensigne Daniel Sherman, Mr. John Harriman † Surveyor commissionated at a Generall Court held att Hartford, as by theire comission they produced bearing date May the eighth, 1684, doth fully appeare.  [Footnote “†” reads:  “† Mr. John Harriman, (grad. H. C. 1667,) had previously been employed by the General Court to make observations for determining the Colony’s north bounds, and the correction of Woodward & Saffery’s line.  See p. 33 ante.”]

Wee went to Lions Point on ye east side of Birom River and from ye mouth of sd River where itt falls into ye Sea, we measured up the said River and found itt to be one mile and halfe and twenty rodds, bearing North halfe Easterly, and so came to a great Rock stone at ye Wading Place, where the road cutts ye sd River, and from thence directed our course North North West, six miles and a halfe, and there marked DRCC [In the form of a diamond with “D” containing a hooked line through it at the top and then, in clockwise order: “R” “C” and “C”] three white oake trees as in the margeant; thence directed our course West and by North seven miles and one hundred and twenty rodds, which brought us to ye Northernmost end of a Reach of Hudson’s River, which bears as we judged South and by West a quarter Westerly, and North and by East a quarter Easterly, which above-said line falls upon the sd Reach about Three miles above Frederick Philips upper Mills over against Tapan, and ye said River bearing North as to itts generall course upwards, we conclude the above mentioned West and by North line to be the shortest from sd Three marked Trees to Hudson’s River, and having unanimously concluded that part of the Sound from Lions Point Easterly to beare East North East, we did from said Trees at eight mile distance run a parallel to the Sound, vizt. East North East twelve miles, and still continued ye said Twelve Mile line East North East one mile and sixtyfour rodds, which then gave twenty miles from Hudson’s River, and is eight miles North North West from ye Sound.  Then finding the Oblong of twelve miles East North East and eight miles North North West did deminish sixty one thousand foure hundred and forty acres from ye twenty miles from Hudson’s River, we added to ye abovesaid twenty miles upon ye East North East line, three hundred and five rodds more, to run at yt additional breadth, parallel to Hudson’s River, till it meets with the Mathethusetts Line, which we demed one hundred miles distant from our eight mile line, which severall courses, with theire destances, together with the three hundred and five rodds added, doe clearly appear in ye Platt by the surveyers drawne and hereunto annexed; which addition of three hundred and five rodds we refer for itts confirmation and ratification to the two Governments from whence we are imployed; and that the above written is a true report of our proceedings, we have this tenth day of October, one thousand six hundred eighty and foure, subscribed our names in Standford.

JOHN YOUNGS

JOHN PELL

ROBERT VAUQELLIN

PHILLIP WELLES Surv r. *  [Footnote “*” reads “* The names of ‘Nathan Gold, Jonathan Sellick, Daniel Sherman and John Herriman, Commr’s for Connecticut,’ are also subscribed to this report, -- as published in the Report of the New York commissioners, (1857) App. O. p. 118.”]

Millford, February the 23d, 1684-5.  The Report made by the within mentioned persons is this day assented unto, and ratified by us; & it is ordered that it be recorded in the books of Record for both Governments, as witnesse o r [our] hands.

[Signed] Tho: Dongan

[Signed] Robert Treat

Witnesses.

J. PALMER

J. SPRAGGE

JOHN YOUNGS

NATHAN GOLD

WM JONES

JOHN ALLYN

JOHN NASH

WILLIAM PITKIN.”

Source:  Trumbull, J. Hammond, ed., The Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut May, 1678 – June, 1689; With Notes and an Appendix Comprising Such Documents from the State Archives, and Other Sources, as Illustrate the History of the Colony During the Administration of Sir Edmund Andros, pp. 337-39 (Hartford, CT:  Case, Lockwood & Co., 1859).

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.

Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak." 

John Pell of the Manor of Pelham Sought No Taxation Without Representation

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

Typically, when we students of American history think of American colonists chaffing at British taxation without representation, we think of the 1750s, 1760s, and 1770s together with such developments as the Sugar Act, the Stamp Act, the Tea Act, the Boston Tea Party, and the like.  Rarely do we think of John Pell, nephew of Thomas Pell who acquired Pelham lands from local Native Americans, when thinking of the American movement against taxation without representation.  However, it turns out that John Pell was directly involved in one of the earliest efforts by American colonists to protest against taxation without representation by English Royal authorities as early as 1681.  The story, it turns out, is a fascinating one.  

Portrait of John Pell of the Manor of Pelham.

The Province of New York Was in Crisis

In 1681, the Province of New York was in crisis.  The English Governor of the Province, Edmund Andros, was an effective but imperious ruler who was exceedingly unpopular among colonists in New York.  His political opponents in the colony filed with the Duke of York a series of charges against Andros alleging that he engaged in private business deals for personal gain at the expense of the Duke and exhibited favoritism toward Dutch businessmen in the colony at the expense of English colonists.  The Duke of York recalled Andros to address the charges and sent a representative to the colony to investigate them.  Andros left the Province in January 1681.  As he left, he charged Anthony Brockholls (also, "Brockholes") with administration of the provincial government in his absence.  Brockholls was a military man who served as Commander-in-Chief in the Province of New York.  In the absence of Andros, Brockholls served as Acting Governor.  

The provincial government of New York was centralized with power concentrated in the role of the Governor.  There was no elected Assembly to which the colonists might elect local representatives to give them a true voice in provincial government.  Instead, there was a General Court of Assizes comprised of the governor, his council, Justices of the Peace, various magistrates and representatives of New York City and Albany, and a few others.  Although this was deemed a court that handled criminal and civil matters, it had quasi-Executive and quasi-Legislative aspects.  Regardless, it was closely controlled by the Governor and men he appointed.  

In 1681, Brockholls was the Acting Governor.  He had, however, neither gravitas nor the respect of the English colonists.  To make matters worse, the colonial economy deteriorated at about this time due in part to poor harvests in 1680 and 1681, bringing further pressure to bear on Provincial leaders.  

With the economy slowing, New Yorkers -- particularly New York merchants -- chafed even more than usual over what they considered to be oppressive taxes imposed on them without their consent.  New York merchants were particularly incensed over customs duties levied by the Duke of York beginning in 1674.  That year, the Duke levied the new customs duties for a period of three years.  Three years later, in 1677, the Duke issued a simple letter to Governor Andros directing a three-year extension of the duties.  Colonists were incensed, not only because the hated duties had been extended, but also because they viewed the extension by letter to be arbitrary, capricious, and yet another form of taxation without representation.

The second three-year extension period expired in November, 1680.  Governor Andros was still in England dealing with the complaints brought against him.  He failed to deal with the issue either before he left New York or while in England.  Although New York merchants were seething with anger over the customs duties, Brockholls was not particularly adept at managing unrest.  At the time of the expiration of the second three-year term, no instructions had been received from the Duke of York regarding whether to continue to collect the duties or not.  

Unauthorized Extension of Taxation -- Without Representation -- Incenses Colonists

The Mayor of New York City at the time was William Dyre.  He also served as collector of the customs duties.  As customs officer, "Dyre had a reputation for quickness in bringing charges against those trying to avoid the customs, except when ships belonging to the governor's friends were involved."  Christoph, Peter R. & Christoph, Florence A., The Andros Papers 1679-1680:  Files of the Provincial Secretary of New York During the Administration of Governor Sir Edmund Andros 1674-1680, p. xx (Syracuse University Press, 1991).  

When the second three-year period expired, New York merchants refused to pay the customs duties and discharged their cargoes while ignoring customs officials.  Believing that he was obligated to collect and forward the customs duties until instructed otherwise by the Duke of York, Dyre pursued the merchants.  He collected the tax from some and detained the goods of others for non-payment.  The merchants were infuriated, believing that Dyre no longer had any authority to collect such customs duties.  They obtained Dyre's arrest on the charge of high treason -- a capital offense.

Dyre is Indicted and Trial Begins

Dyre's principal accuser was a man named Samuel Winder.  Samuel Winder was an attorney for Edmund Gibbons of London.  Winder first sued Dyre on behalf of Gibbons for illegal detention of cargo for customs.  Winder won the case and next posted a bond of five thousand pounds -- an extraordinary sum -- so that criminal proceedings alleging high treason could begin against Dyre.  Dyre was hauled before a special session of the General Court of Assizes in late June, 1681.   Present among the various members of the General Court of Assizes was John Pell of the Manor of Pelham in his capacity as a Justice of the Peace in the North Riding of the Court.  As one scholar has recorded:

"The court of assize must have met with an air of expectancy and excitement.  For the first time an official representative of the proprietor [the Duke of York] was on trial.  All of the justices were present, as were all of the aldermen.  The court was dominated by local leaders of importance such as Thomas Delaval of Esopus, Major Thomas Willett, John Pell, and Captain John Youngs of Long Island, and James Graham of the city.  Of the twenty-five members of the court, only six were Dutch.  Before Dyre could be brought to trial, a grand jury was called to hear the evidence of Winder.  Only one Dutchman, Cornelius Steenwyck, was on the jury.  Englishmen dominated the court and the jury, and the whole session became their affair."

Source:  Ritchie, Robert C., DUKE'S PROVINCE -- A Study of New York Politics and Society, 1664-1691, p. 158 (Chapel Hill, NC:  The University of North Carolina Press, 1977).

Against this backdrop, on June 29, 1681, the special session of the General Court of Assizes began.  The Grand Jury was empaneled and twenty-one witnesses against William Dyre were sworn and provided testimony.  Soon the Grand Jury returned a bill of indictment against Dyre, charging that he:

"Traiterously Maliciously and advisedly Plotted, and Contrived Innovacons in Governmt, and the Subversion and Change of the Known antient and fundimentall Laws of the Realme of England by Virtue of which Arbitrary and Unlawful Power he the said Wm Dyre (Together with others some false Traitors Unknowne) hath any times Since the first of November Last Past Establish't and Imposed Unlawfull Customes and Imposicons on the Goods and Merchandizes, of his Majtis Leighe People trading in this Place by force Compelling them to Pay the same, and hath Imployed and made use of Souldiers to maintain and Defend him in these his Unjust and Unlawfull Practises Contrary to the Greate Charter of Liberties, Contrary to the Peticon of Right and Contrary to other Statutes in those Cases made and Provided, and Contrary to the Honor and Peace of ye most Soverigne Lord the King that now is his Crowne and Dignity."

Dyre did not want to wait until the next regular session of the court the following October to address these serious charges.  He demanded an immediate trial of the charges.  That trial began two days later on Friday, July 1, 1681, at 2:00 p.m.

The jury was empaneled and sworn.  Dyre opened with an insightful move.  He demanded to know what law authorized the court to proceed against him in the matter.  He argued that if the court believed its authority to conduct the proceeding stemmed from its authority granted in letters patent by the Royal authorities in England, then it could not try him in the case because his own authority to collect customs duties and taxes likewise stemmed from authority granted to him in precisely such letters patent by Royal authorities in England.  Thus, as Dyer argued to the court, "one Parte Could not trye the other."

According to the minutes of the special session, upon hearing Dyer's argument, the court "withdrew."  After a spirited debate, the court returned and announced a unanimous order in the case.  Noting that Dyre had questioned the power and authority of the court to address the matter, the court directed that Dyre be sent to London immediately in a departing ship where the matter would be prosecuted as the Duke of York and his advisors directed.  The order further directed that Samuel Winder would prosecute the matter against Dyre in London "pursuant to his Recognizance of five thousand pounds."

The General Court of Assizes further appointed a committee of five of its members including John Pell of the Manor of Pelham to prepare a statement of the charges and supporting evidence against Dyre to be submitted to English authorities in London.  

No Taxation Without Representation

What transpired next was remarkable.  Yet it was a development about which American History texts are remarkably silent.  

On Saturday, July 2, 1681, the General Court of Assizes reconvened.  The court announced that at the time the Grand Jury that indicted Dyre returned its indictment, it also had delivered to the court a written statement signed by every Grand Juror.  It further noted that the members of the Grand Jury desired to have the statement read in open court.  

The statement lamented the treatment of colonists in New York by the provincial government, strongly inferring that taxes without any form of representation was a principal complaint.  The statement further demanded that the Royal authorities permit the establishment of an Assembly elected by local freeholders to govern with the Governor of the Province of New York.  

Even more remarkably, the General Court of Assizes directed the High Sheriff to prepare a petition to the Duke of York and Royal authorities in England to authorize establishment of such an Assembly elected by local freeholders.  Once the petition was prepared, the Clerk of the Assizes signed it on behalf of the members of the body and forwarded it the the English authorities.  The petition read as follows:

"To his Royll Highs James Duke of Yorke and Albany, Earle of Ulster &c.  The Humble Peticon of the Councell of this yor Royll Highs Collony of New Yorke, the Aldermen of the Citty of New Yorke and Justices of the Peace assembled att A Special Court of Assize holden in the said Citty on the twenty ninth Day of June 1681.

SHEWETH.

That wee yor Royll Highs most humble and obedient Servants Assembled together by Virtue of yor Royll Highs Authority Establisht in this yor Collony had In open Court Presented to [our] Consideracon A Request from the Grand Inquest humbly Craveing the Conjunction and Assistance of this Court to make a submisive addresse to yor Royll Highs therein Representing the Greate Pressures and Lamentable Condicon of his Majties Subjects in this yor Royll Highs Collony and alsoe Prescribeing for the only Remedy and Ease of those Burdens that an assembly of the People may be Establisht by a free Choice of the freholders and Inhabitants of this yor Royll Highs Colony the which Request wee haveing maturely and Deliberately weighed and considered and haveing full Assureance of yor Royll Highs good Gracious and Reall Intentions to Encourage and Advance the Ease Benefitt and Advantage of Trade and the Merchants and Inhabitants of this yor said Collony and the removeall of all things that might obstruct or hinder the same to us particularly signified by yor Gracious Commission Given to John Lewin Gentlm yor Royll Highs Agent & Servant hear Beareing Date the 24th of May, 1680 which with Greate Joy and Generall Sattisfaccon was Received and Published Expecting and Longing for the happy Event of such yor Royll Highs Grace and favour the Enjoymt of which wee have not as yett Attained too finde [our] selves Encouraged and obliged to Concur with the said Grand Inquest and In all submissive Manner to prostrate att yor Royll Highs feette the miserable and Deplorable Condicon of the Inhabitants of this yor Highs Collony who for this many years past have Grond Under unexpressible Burdens by haveing an Arbitrary and Absolute power Used and Exercised over us by which a yearely Revnue is Extracted from us against [our] Wills [our] trade Greviously Burdened with undue and Unusuall Customes Imposed on [our] merchandize wthout [our] Consents [our] Libertyes and freedomes Intharled and the Inhabitants wholly shutt out and Deprived of any share Vote or Interest in the Government to thier Greate Discouragement and Contrary to the Laws, Rights, Liberties and Priviledge of the Subject soe that wee are Esteemed as and Become A Reproach to [our] Neighbors in other his Majties Collonyes who flourish under the fruition and Protection of his Majties Unparalleld forme and method of Governmt in his Realme of England the Undoubted Birth right of all his Subjects which necessitates us In Behalfe of the Inhabitants of this yor Royll Highs Collony to become humble supplicants and suiters to yor Royll Highs Praying and wee Doe hereby humbly and Submissively with all obedience pray and beseech yor Royll Highs that for the Redressing and Removeall of the said Grevences the Governmt of this yor said Collony may for the future be settled and Established Rulled and Governed by a Governor Councell and Assembly which Assembly to be Duly Elected and Chosen by the freeholders of this yor Royll Highs Collony as is Usuall and practicable with the Realme of England and other his Majties Plantations which will give Gen: Ease and sattisfaccon to all his Majties Subjects In this yor Highs Collony who Desire noe Greater Happinesse then the Continuance of yor Royll Highs grace and favour and to be and Remaine his Majties Loyll and free Subjects.

John West, Cl Assize"

Resolution of the Charges Against William Dyre and Edmund Andros

Upon arrival in London, William Dyre appeared before the Privy Council and posted a bond to secure his appearance at a trial of the charges brought against him.  The bond meant that Dyre did not have to be held in captivity and could move about England freely.

Within a few months, however, it became clear that Samuel Winder (who had brought the original charges against Dyre and was instructed by the General Court of Assizes to prosecute the matter) was refusing or failing to pursue the matter.  Thus, Dyre petitioned the Privy Council, seeking dismissal.  The Privy Council referred the matter to the Lords of Trade for preparation of a report of investigation.  

The Lords of Trade issued such a report favorable to Dyre and forwarded it to the Privy Council.  On September 30, 1682, the Privy Council entered an order that was later read in Council on October 26, 1682, exonerating Dyre.  The order read:

"Captain William Dyre having complied with the Order of Council dated the 3d of August last in reference to Samuel Winder by whom hee has been accused at New York of high Treason for levying of Customes there. And the said Winder having not, since that time, made his appearance in order to a prosecution; the Lords of the Committee of Plantacons are humbly of opion: That the Bond wherein the said Cap' Dyre stands bound for his appearance at the Council Board may bee now delivered up to him, to th' end hee may take his Remedy at Law against the said Winder at New York or elsewhere, as hee shall thinke fitt. Read in Council 26 Octob 1682." 

It is unknown how long William Dyre remained abroad.  One thing is clear, however.  In his absence from New York City, he was replaced as Mayor by Cornelius Steenwyck.  Indeed, although both Edmund Andros and William Dyre were fully exonerated, neither returned to his previous office.  

Source:  Leach, J. Granville, Major William Dyre of New York (visited Jun. 18, 2016).  

In the meantime, the Duke of York continued his investigation of the charges made against New York Governor Edmund Andros.  He referred the matter to Sir John Churchill, Attorney General to the Duke of York.  Churchill concluded that Andros and other officials in his administration "had behaved themselves very well in their several stations." 

What About an Assembly for New York?

With the complete exoneration of New York Governor Edmund Andros and William Dyre, the remonstrance issued on behalf of the General Court of Assizes demanding authority to establish an Assembly elected by freeholders to govern alongside the Provincial Governor seemed far less compelling to the English authorities.  Yet, an ambitious Duke of York -- rising soon to become King of England in 1685 -- seemed to want to avoid a bruising political battle with the colonists within his colonial holdings in the New World.

Within a short time, the Duke of York "condescended" to the desires of the colony of New York for an elected Assembly.  He sent Thomas Dongan to the Province to replace Andros as Governor.  In permitting such an assembly, the Duke of York included many restrictions in the way representatives could be elected to it.  He also limited its powers.  Yet, he permitted an Assembly in response to the petition submitted by John Pell and his colleagues on the General Court of Assizes.

The Assembly, however, was short-lived.  Within three years the Duke of York rose to the throne as King James II.  The new King promptly abolished New York's first Assembly.  Soon, the King replaced Thomas Dongan -- who misused his position as Governor for personal gain -- with a returning Edmond Andros.  Only a few years later, the Glorious Revolution swept away King James II and New York, once again, found itself in turmoil. 

*          *          *          *          *

Below is the text of the Clerk's minutes of the sessions of the General Court of Assizes held between June 29, 1681 and July 2, 1689.  It is followed by  citation and link to its source.

"Att A Speciall Court of Assizes holden In the Citty of New Yorke by his Majtis Authority Beginning the 29th Day of June and Ending the 2d of July in the 33th yeare of the Reign of sd Sovereigne Lord Charles the 2d by the Grace of God of England, Scotland, France & Ireland King Defender of the faith &c Anno Domini 1681

PRESENT:

Capt Anthony Brockholls, Commander in Cheife.

} of the Councell

Mr Frederick Phillips
Mr Wm Darvall
Mr Stephanus Courtland

} Aldermen of the Citty of New Yorke

Mr Johannes V. Brugh
Mr Thomas Lewis
Mr Peter Jacobs
Mr Samuel Willson
Mr James Graham
Capt John Young High Sheriffe of Yorkeshire on Long Island

} Justices of the Peace for the East Rydeing.

Mr Isaack Arnold
Mr John Tapping
Mr John Woodhull
Mr Jonas Wood

} Justices of the Peace for the North Rydeing.

Mr John Pell
Mr Richd Cornwell
Major Tho: Willett
Capt Tho: Hicks

} Justices of the Peace for the West Rydeing

Mr James Hubbert
Mr Richd Betts
Capt Elbert Elbertsen
Capt Richd Stillwell

Capt Thos: De Lavall Justice of the Peace for Esopus

Mr John West Justice of the Peace for Pemaquid and Parts Eastward

The Names of the Grand Jury.

Mr Robert Vicars
Mr Cornelis Stenwycke
Mr John Lawrence, Sen
Mr Nicho Blake
Mr John Smith, Sen
Mr Tho Rushmore
Mr John Smith, Junr
Mr John Jackson
Mr Elias Doughty 
Mr John Hinchman
Mr Thomas Williams
Mr Henry Taylor
Mr Thomas Smith
Mr Thomas Okley
Mr Samuell Smith
Mr Nathaniell Denten
Mr John Coe
Mr Jonathan Hazard
Mr Gersham Moore
Mr Samuell Moore
Mr Jonathan Write
Mr Wm Goulding
Mr Joseph Goulding
Mr John Powland

Wednesday Morning [June 29, 1681]

The Court Being Satt Proclamacon for Attendance made and the Grand Jury Sworne.  They had their Charge Given them.

Then the wittnesses were Sworne to the Number of twenty one and the Grand Jury withdrew and Thursday in the afternoone they Returned and found the Bill or accusacon agt Capt Wm Dyre which was the only occasion of this Court Billa Vera.

Upon which the High Sherriffe was ordered to take Capt Dyre into his Custody and bring him before the Court.  Where he was acquainted that the Grand Jury had found the Bill and that he was the Kings Prisoner.  The Seale of the Citty and his Commission for Mayor was Demanded by the President which he Refused to Deliver saying he Received them from the Governour.

After which the Court Adjourned to fryday the first of July att two in the Afternoone Being the time appointed for his Tryall.

On which Day the Court Being Mett Capt Dyre was sent for and braught to the Barr by the High Sherriffe and Sylence being proclaimed his Charge or accusacon was read a Coppy Whereof is hereunto Annexed.  To which he pleaded not Guilty.

Then the Pannell of the Jury was Called over and Proclamation in usuall forme made for Informacon.  The said Capt Dyre makeing noe Challenge The Jury were Sworne.

And the Charge or accusacon again read by the Clerke and Severall Wittnesses to the Number of twenty Sworne and Examined.  Butt the said Capt Dyer being to make his Defence Desired to know by what Law they proceed against him and the Authority and Commission by which the Court Satt, saying if they Proceeded by his Majtis Letters Pattents to his Royll Highs he had the Same Authority and one Parte Could not trye the other.

On which the Court withdrew.

And after some Debate it was ordered Nemine Contradicente [unanimously; without dissent].

That Capt Dyre haveing Questioned the Power and Authority of this Court Alledging he was Commissionated from his Royll Highs as they were:

Sent home in the Pinke, Hope, George Heathcott Mas. now Bound for London to the Secretary of State to be proceeded against as his Majtis and Councell shall Direct:  And Samuell Winder his Accuser pursuant to his Recognizance of five thousand pounds taken Before the Councell is to Prosecute him in England Accordingly.

On which the Tryall Ceased:

-----

The Bill or Accusacon against Capt William Dyre found by the Grand Jury.

William Dyre standeth Charged and accused by the name of Wm Dyre Late of the Citty of New Yorke Gentlm for that he the said Wm Dyre Severall times since the first of May Anno:  one thousand Six hundred and Eighty att the Citty aforesaid as a false Traytor to sd Soverigne Lord the King hath Tratorously Maliciously and Advisedly used and Exercised Regall Power and Authority over the Kings Subjects; for the Better Support and upholding whereof he the said Wm Dyre hath Traiterously Maliciously and advisedly Plotted, and Contrived Innovacons in Governmt, and the Subversion and Change of the Known antient and fundimentall Laws of the Realme of England by Virtue of which Arbitrary and Unlawful Power he the said Wm Dyre (Together with others some false Traitors Unknowne) hath any times Since the first of November Last Past Establish't and Imposed Unlawfull Customes and Imposicons on the Goods and Merchandizes, of his Majtis Leighe People trading in this Place by force Compelling them to Pay the same, and hath Imployed and made use of Souldiers to maintain and Defend him in these his Unjust and Unlawfull Practises Contrary to the Greate Charter of Liberties, Contrary to the Peticon of Right and Contrary to other Statutes in those Cases made and Provided, and Contrary to the Honor and Peace of ye most Soverigne Lord the King that now is his Crowne and Dignity.

Billa Vera [Latin; means a finding that the bill of indictment is supported by the evidence]

Robert Vicars.
Samuel Winder 

-----

The Court Ordered and Appointed Mr Steph: V: Courtland, Capt Thomas Delavall, Mr James Graham, Mr John Pell and Mr Isaack Arnold as A Committee to Draw up the Proceedings agt Capt Dyre and to putt them In a Method to be sent home with a Letter to the Secretary of State which was Read In Open Court and Approved of and was as followeth;

A Letter to be sent with Capt. William Dyre to the Secretary of State Sir Loyonell Jenkins.

Rt Hon ble

His Maties Court of Assizes for this Province of New Yorke haveing by Speciall Warrant and order from the Commander and Councell Mett together the twenty ninth Day of June Past for the Heareing and tryall of Capt Wm Dyre one of the Councell Coll: of his Royll Highs Revenue and Mayor of this Citty of New Yorke who was Charged & accused by one Samuell Winder In the Mayor's Court of this Citty the thirty first of May Last past for High Treason which was by the Aldermen and Court Intimated to the Commander and Councell who thought fitt to Committ him thereupon to bee Tryed att the General Court of Assizes and on his Peticon for a Speedy Tryall was ordered to bee tryed att this Speciall Court wch was called for that Purpose.  A Grand Jury Being Likewise Impannelled and sworne with twenty one witnesses.  They Received ye Charge and withdrew to Consider on the Bill which the next Day they returned Billa Vera, And the said Capt Wm Dyre being made Acquainted therewith fryday the first Instant about two  In the afternoone was Appointed for his Tryall where the Petty Jury was Likewise Sworne and severall Wittnesses.  Butt the said Capt Wm Dyre Questioning the Power and Authority of this Court to trye him who was Commissionated from his Royll Highs as they were and the Crime Charged against him being aggrivated to be High Treason and the present Confusion and Disorder in the Governmt here made us Presume to send the said Capt Wm Dyre to you with all the proceedings here against him that he may be further proceeded against as his Majties shall thinke fitt.  To which Refer you for further Information and Remaine

Rt Hono ble
Yo r Hono rs most Affectionate and humble Servants,
In Behalfe of the said Court of Assizes

A Bill was Likewise Presented in Court against Francis Rumbouts [sic; Francis Rombouts, 12th Mayor of New York City] by John Tuder Committed to the Grand Jury and by them Returned Billa Vera and was as followeth Vizt:

Francis Rumbouts Standeth Charged and Accused by the name of Francis Rumbouts Late Mayor of this Citty, for that he the said Francis Rumbouts upon the Second Day of December one thousand Six hundred Seaventy and Nine Did with Wm Beakman, Johannes Van Broughen, Gulyne VerPlanke, Peter Jacobs with other his Associates as a false Traytor to ye Soverigne Lord the King, Trayterously, Maliciously and Advisedly Plott Contrive and Practice Innovacons In Governmt the Subversion and Change of the Knowne ancient and fundimentall Laws of the Realme of England, who the said Francis Rumbouts with Wm Beakman, Johannes Vanbrough, Guylyne Verplanke, Peter Jacobs and other his aforesd Associates Did on the aforesaid Second Day of December, as a false Traytor to the Crowne and Dignity of ye Soverigne Lord the King att the Citty Hall of this Citty Traterously, Maliciously and Advisedly Deny John Tuder of this Citty one of his Maties Naturall Borne Subjects a Lawfull Tryall by A Jury in his the said Tuders Cause Depending then In Court Between John Archer and himselfe Contrary to Magna Charta the Peticon of Right and his aforesaid most Sereen Majties Crown Dignity and Honor.  And for that he the said Francis Rumbouts did with Wm Beekeman, Johnannes Van Broughen, Gulyne Verplanke, Peter Jacobs and other his aforesaid Associates at the Same time and place Aforesaid Traiterously, Maliciously and Advisedly give Judgment, and Grant out Execucon after, without his the said Tuders Lawfull Tryall according to the Law of the Land.  Although the said Tuder Did then and there Demand a Jury for his Lawfull Conviccon.  All wch aforesaid Plotts, Contrivances and Practices are absolutely Contrary to the Greate Charter of Priviledges the Peticon of Right and Contrary to the Crowne Dignity and Honor of [our] Soverigne Lord the King that now is.

John Tuder

Bella Vera

Robert Vicars.

Whereupon the said Francis Rumbouts was Committed into the Custody of the Sheriffe.

And on Satterday the Second of July being Brought to the Barr for his Tryall he presented a Peticon therein Desiring that his Tryall might be Reffered to the next General Court of Assizes being now wholly Unprovided to make his defenec [sic] and surprised att the Charge which the Court thought fitt to graunt and ordered his tryall to be suspended till ye next General Court of Assizes.

When the Grand Jury made their Returne on the Bill against Capt Dyre they presented a paper signed by them all which they Desired might be read.

And was Accordingly Read as followeth:

Wee his Maties most Loyall Subjects and Grand Jury for this Collony of New Yorke in America att A Speciall Court of Assizes Appointed to be held and held In New Yorke on the twenty ninth Day of June, one thousand Six hundred Eighty one, Doe under a true Sence, and most serious Consdieracon of the Great Manifold and Insupportable Greevences under the which this Collony hath a Long time and still Doth Groan Praying to bee Delivered; to Perticularize the same, the number there of Being soe many, it would be tedious, Wherefore In most humble manner and In the Behalfe of the said Collony, wee Doe with all Submission [& as wee Conceive In Duty Bound] make these [our] most humble Requests that those Branches and markes of Displeasure that Lyes upon this Collony in poynt of Governmt may be Removed by sitting us upon Equall Ground with [our] fellow Brethren and subjects of the Realme of England Under [our] most Dread Soverigne Lord and King, (whom God Preserve) by haveing the Governmt of this Collony (Settled in the hands of a Governor and Assembly for time to come)  Duly Elected by the Freholders of this Collony by whom through the Blessing of Almighty God, under the Governmt of [our] Dread Soverigne wee may Enjoy the benefitt of the Good and wholsome Laws of the Realme of England that thereby wee may Bud Blossom and bring forth the fruites of a Prosperous and flourishing Governmt for want of which wee have Been (and yett are) in a most wythering and Decaying Condicon, Under the Sence Whereof, wee humbly Crave the Conjunction of this Honoble Court in the makeing A most Submissive Request in order to the Redressing [our] Great (and otherwise) in Supportable Grevences, by Prostrating [our] Selves at the feete of [our] most Dread Soverigne whose most gratious and tender Care over his Subjects hath been wonderfull Greate, in that wee humbly Conceave in his Grant of this Collony, he hath Reserved all appeals (of what nature soever) to his Sacred person and his Successors, Subscribing [our] selves his Majtis Constant Loyall and obedient Subjects.

-----

Upon Mocon made for a Concurrance with the writeing Delivered Into Court by the Grand Jury Relating to an Assembly which was Read.

RESOLVED and ordered that a Peticon be Drawne up and Sent from this Court to his Royll Highs to Desire an Assembly to be Chosen by the freholders and Inhabitants of this Collony Like other his Majties Plantacons.  RESOLVED that Capt John Young High Sheriffe Doe Draw up the said Peticon for an Assembly and Deliver the same to the Clerke of the Assizes.

The Peticon Drawne up and Delivered by the High Sheriffe was Signed by the Clerke of ye Assizes for and in behalf of the Court and sent to his Royll Highs accordingly as followeth.

To his Royll Highs James Duke of Yorke and Albany, Earle of Ulster &c.  The Humble Peticon of the Councell of this yor Royll Highs Collony of New Yorke, the Aldermen of the Citty of New Yorke and Justices of the Peace assembled att A Special Court of Assize holden in the said Citty on the twenty ninth Day of June 1681.

SHEWETH.

That wee yor Royll Highs most humble and obedient Servants Assembled together by Virtue of yor Royll Highs Authority Establisht in this yor Collony had In open Court Presented to [our] Consideracon A Request from the Grand Inquest humbly Craveing the Conjunction and Assistance of this Court to make a submisive addresse to yor Royll Highs therein Representing the Greate Pressures and Lamentable Condicon of his Majties Subjects in this yor Royll Highs Collony and alsoe Prescribeing for the only Remedy and Ease of those Burdens that an assembly of the People may be Establisht by a free Choice of the freholders and Inhabitants of this yor Royll Highs Colony the which Request wee haveing maturely and Deliberately weighed and considered and haveing full Assureance of yor Royll Highs good Gracious and Reall Intentions to Encourage and Advance the Ease Benefitt and Advantage of Trade and the Merchants and Inhabitants of this yor said Collony and the removeall of all things that might obstruct or hinder the same to us particularly signified by yor Gracious Commission Given to John Lewin Gentlm yor Royll Highs Agent & Servant hear Beareing Date the 24th of May, 1680 which with Greate Joy and Generall Sattisfaccon was Received and Published Expecting and Longing for the happy Event of such yor Royll Highs Grace and favour the Enjoymt of which wee have not as yett Attained too finde [our] selves Encouraged and obliged to Concur with the said Grand Inquest and In all submissive Manner to prostrate att yor Royll Highs feette the miserable and Deplorable Condicon of the Inhabitants of this yor Highs Collony who for this many years past have Grond Under unexpressible Burdens by haveing an Arbitrary and Absolute power Used and Exercised over us by which a yearely Revnue is Extracted from us against [our] Wills [our] trade Greviously Burdened with undue and Unusuall Customes Imposed on [our] merchandize wthout [our] Consents [our] Libertyes and freedomes Intharled and the Inhabitants wholly shutt out and Deprived of any share Vote or Interest in the Government to thier Greate Discouragement and Contrary to the Laws, Rights, Liberties and Priviledge of the Subject soe that wee are Esteemed as and Become A Reproach to [our] Neighbors in other his Majties Collonyes who flourish under the fruition and Protection of his Majties Unparalleld forme and method of Governmt in his Realme of England the Undoubted Birth right of all his Subjects which necessitates us In Behalfe of the Inhabitants of this yor Royll Highs Collony to become humble supplicants and suiters to yor Royll Highs Praying and wee Doe hereby humbly and Submissively with all obedience pray and beseech yor Royll Highs that for the Redressing and Removeall of the said Grevences the Governmt of this yor said Collony may for the future be settled and Established Rulled and Governed by a Governor Councell and Assembly which Assembly to be Duly Elected and Chosen by the freeholders of this yor Royll Highs Collony as is Usuall and practicable with the Realme of England and other his Majties Plantations which will give Gen: Ease and sattisfaccon to all his Majties Subjects In this yor Highs Collony who Desire noe Greater Happinesse then the Continuance of yor Royll Highs grace and favour and to be and Remaine his Majties Loyll and free Subjects.

John West, Cl Assize"

Source:  Proceedings of the General Court of Assizes Held in the City of New York October 6, 1680, to October 6, 1682, pp. 8-17 (Collections of The New-York Historical Society For The Year 1912, NY, NY:  The New-York Historical Society, 1913).

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.

Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.

Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."