DOCSLIB.ORG

The Fall of New Netherland and Seventeenth-Century Anglo

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Fall of New Netherland and Seventeenth-Century Anglo The Fall of New Netherland and Seventeenth-Century Anglo-American Imperial Formation, 1654–1676 Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/tneq/article-pdf/87/4/666/1793661/tneq_a_00417.pdf by guest on 23 September 2021 l. h. roper N 27 August 1664,1 an English force compelled the New O World Dutch town of New Amsterdam to capitulate to eight commissioners led by Sir Richard Nicolls and including Sir Robert Carr, Sir George Cartwright, Connecticut Gover- nor John Winthrop Jr., and New England colonists Thomas Clarke, Samuel Maverick, John Pynchon, and Samuel Wyllys. Having been duly charged by King Charles II, Nicolls, Carr, Cartwright, and Maverick then executed the takeover of the rest of New Netherland, after which they proceeded to investi- gate a series of intercolonial disputes across a region stretching from Maine to Delaware Bay, an expansive territory Charles had granted as a proprietorship to his brother James Stuart, duke of York. I would like to thank Sarah Barber, Evan Haefeli, Lauric Henneton, Jaap Jacobs, Dennis J. Maika, David L. Smith, attendees at sessions of the 2012 meeting of the British Group in Early American History and the Medieval and Early Modern Studies Colloquium at SUNY–New Paltz, and the anonymous readers of the New England Quarterly for their help with this article, the Office of Academic Affairs at the State University of New York–New Paltz for defraying the costs of archival research in England, Martine van Ittersum for graciously supplying documents from the microfilm edition of the Winthrop Family Papers, and the Massachusetts Historical Society for permission to cite those documents. I would also like to thank Linda Smith Rhoads for her scrupulous editorial attention. 1Dates from the sources are rendered “Old Style” in accordance with the calendar in effect in seventeenth-century England and its colonies (the capitulation took place on 8 September 1664 under the Gregorian calendar in effect in the Dutch Republic and its colonies) but with the year beginning on 1 January. The New England Quarterly, vol. LXXXVII, no. 4 (December 2014). C 2014 by The New England Quarterly. All rights reserved. doi:10.1162/TNEQ a 00417. 666 ANGLO-AMERICAN IMPERIAL FORMATION 667 Characterizing the significance of this episode within the con- text of English imperial history seems straightforward enough: for the first time the English state conducted a successful mil- itary operation in North America; and for the first time it des- ignated officials to report to imperial institutions, themselves newly constituted, for possible action by the center. Megan Lindsay Cherry recently restated the long-standing view that Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/tneq/article-pdf/87/4/666/1793661/tneq_a_00417.pdf by guest on 23 September 2021 the capture of New Netherland reflected, in conjunction with an effort “to stop the spread of [New England’s] infectious inde- pendence,” the Restoration government’s “policy of consolidat- ing control over its North American empire.” Christian Koot, in his examination of the seventeenth-century English Em- pire, similarly concludes that the seizure of the Dutch colony and the Nicolls commission’s activities signaled “the process by which a new idea of an exclusive British empire displaced the seventeenth century’s interimperial Atlantic community.” Yet, Koot claims, Restoration “officials could not extend their fiscal-military state across the Atlantic until locals eschewed their cross-national, flexible origins and chose to conform to new imperial standards.”2 Since the “grand atavistic visions” of metropolitan imperi- alists “clashed with those of the English small-planter regimes already established in North America,” Daniel Richter argues in a recent survey of pre-independence North America, late Stu- art attempts at “state building and imperial expansion” faltered due to, on the one hand, the incompetence of policy advocates and, on the other, colonists’ successful adaptation to new im- perial circumstances.3 As David Hall explains, “the arrival of 2Megan Lindsay Cherry, “The Imperial and Political Motivations behind the English Conquest of New Netherland,” Dutch Crossing 34 (March 2010): 77–94 at 78–79,and Christian J. Koot, Empire at the Periphery: British Colonists, Anglo-Dutch Trade, and the Development of the British Atlantic, 1621–1713 (New York: New York University Press, 2011), p. 5. 3Daniel K. Richter, Before the Revolution: America’s Ancient Pasts (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2011), pp. 241–56 at 241, 242. The standard account of the takeover, from which Richter’s survey of pre-independence American history derives, remains Robert C. Ritchie, The Duke’s Province: A Study of New York Politics and Society, 1664–1691 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1977), pp. 9–24. For more measured views of James II, see Scott Sowerby, Making Toleration: The 668 THE NEW ENGLAND QUARTERLY four commissioners dispatched by the government of Charles II to terminate the colonists’ de facto independence from En- gland” threatened the “rights or privileges” of New England’s freemen. As the freemen saw it, the constitution of their an- cient church accorded them the right “first and foremost . to install popular participation, consent, and ‘Fundamental’ law at the heart of civil governance, and second . to create a Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/tneq/article-pdf/87/4/666/1793661/tneq_a_00417.pdf by guest on 23 September 2021 purified church, the Congregational Way.”4 Just beneath the surface of Cherry’s, Koot’s, Richter’s, and Hall’s various characterizations lingers an age-old comprehen- sion of Anglo-American history as a benchmark of modernity, the key elements of which, in this view, include “state building” or “state formation” and the progress of liberty: seventeenth- century colonists—New Englanders specifically—successfully (in general) resisted the encroachments of a centralizing state— especially the governments of Charles II (r. 1660–85)andJames II (r. 1685–88)—on their particular liberties. The prevailing in- terpretation has correspondingly relegated the aforementioned James Stuart, often identified as the chief English proponent of Louis XIV–style “absolutism,” to Clio’s dunghill as the losing party in the “Glorious Revolution” of 1688–89.5 The modern- ization thesis tends, however, to overestimate the interest in and capacity for pursuing “a centralized overseas territorial em- pire,” let alone “a modern absolutist state,” on the part of late Repealers and the Glorious Revolution (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2013), pp. 1–55; John Callow, The Making of King James II: The Formative Years of a Fallen King (Stroud, Gloucester, U.K.: Sutton Publishing, 2000), pp. 7–21, and John Miller, James II (1978; New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2000). 4David D. Hall, A Reforming People: Puritanism and the Transformation of Public Life in New England (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2011), p. 191. 5J. C. D. Clark, “Secularization and Modernization: The Failure of a ‘Grand Narra- tive,’” Historical Journal 55 (March 2012): 161–94,doi:10.1017/S0018246X11000586. The case of New Netherland/New York supports to a degree Robert Bliss’s claim that an understanding of the “politics of empire,” which incorporates the reality of “colonial dependence,” must “supplant” both the “debate over the sources of English ‘imperial policy’” in the seventeenth century and the view that the Restoration “marked a central turning point (or a useful starting point) for imperial history” (Revolution and Empire: English Politics and the American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century [Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press, 1993], pp. 3–4). Remarkably, Bliss’s study offers no discussion of the run-up to the capture of New Netherland. ANGLO-AMERICAN IMPERIAL FORMATION 669 Stuart governments.6 The characterization also misapprehends the degree to which that state could and did assume respon- sibility for “imperial policy” as well as, more significantly, the degree to which colonists resisted sociopolitical developments ostensibly orchestrated from London, and, accordingly, the de- gree to which the nature of Anglo-American imperial politics Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/tneq/article-pdf/87/4/666/1793661/tneq_a_00417.pdf by guest on 23 September 2021 in the third quarter of the seventeenth century can be styled as “colonial versus imperial.” To comprehend the English imperial enterprise properly, then, we must assess its achievements and failures within the context of seventeenth-century England’s political culture, where the interests of the state required, at the least, the cooperation of local leaders. In the case of empire, “success,” even after the Restoration, arose from the activities of “pri- vate” individuals—such as Martin Noell, Thomas Povey, and Maurice Thompson—in conjunction with the metropolitan as- sociations they formed. These men—whose perspectives and interests transcended “colonial” or “imperial,” “merchant” or “planter” and ranged from the East Indies to West Africa to the West Indies to Hudson’s Bay—supported, even provided the impetus for, the state’s greater role in imperial affairs that was palpable after 1649. There is evidence to suggest, for ex- ample, that they had a hand in establishing a council for foreign plantations, which protected and advanced their interests.7 Povey, whose colonial concerns originated with plantations on Barbados, took charge of imperial affairs from September 1658 (after Cromwell’s death) through May 1660 (the Restoration),
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nicolls/Esopus Peace Treaty of 1665
    An Agreement made between Richard Nicolls Esq., Governor and the Sachems and People called the Sopes Indyans. 7th day of October 1665 A Publication of the Ulster County Clerk’s Office Records Management Program—Archives Division 2015 Nicolls/Esopus Indian Treaty 1665 — A Special 350th Anniversary Commemorative Edition Publication of The Treaty between Governor Richard Nicolls and the Sachems and People called the Sopes Indyans made 7th October 1665. 2 — Ulster County Clerk’s Office 2015 INTRODUCTION hree-hundred and fifty years ago the Esopus natives and the TDutch and English settlers entered into a Treaty for peace between their peoples. This Treaty is significant because it brought to a close hostilities between the Esopus and the settlers that had begun back in 1659. Both parties promised to cease hostilities, to establish a course of justice and conduct trade with each other. In addition to the cessation of fighting, the Treaty proclaimed that all past injuries were forgotten and that the peace would be kept in perpetual memory. This Treaty was so important that it would be renewed 13 times, with the latest renewal dated 1745. What was life like? How did people manage? The best answer to these questions is found in the primary documents written in their own hand. Thanks to the due diligence and stewardship of the forty-four Ulster County Clerk’s before me, a number of very important primary documents from that period have survived. The Richard Nicolls/Esopus Indian Treaty of 1665 is one of them. The County of Ulster is required, not only to identify and preserve its primary documents of historical value, but also to make them available to the public.
    [Show full text]
  • English Colonization in the 19 Century
    English Colonization in the 19th Century Examples of Colonial disunity were not surprising – Reasons: English Crown awarded colonial charters to: 1. Merchants 2. Religious idealists – different types of colonists 3. Adventurers Decisions to Emigrate 1. Rapid Population growth (1580-1650) in England created competition for food and jobs 2. New World was the land of opportunity 3. Institute a purer form of worship 4. Escape poverty, debt, jail terms, bad marriages 5. Religious and political persecution in Spain and England Upon arriving the colonist brought ideas and subcultures of which some were changed by the American environment. The New England colonies, the Middle Colonies, and the Southern Colonies all were distinct in various ways A. Economy B. Religion The Chesapeake: Dreams of Wealth Post Roanoke, New World interest lessened English interest reappeared with English rivalry with Spain Jamestown Colonization was very costly Solution – Joint Stock Company, large amounts of cash available with a stock investment plan, with hopes of high cash returns. 1st charter – London Company – John Smith 30 miles up the James River Problem – wealth was the motivation, not permanent settlement. Wealth rather than farming (planting corn) Captain John Smith – Prevented a Roanoke repeat A. Brought order and prevented anarchy B. Traded with Native American tribes for food C. Mapped the Chesapeake Bay D. Instituted military rule John Smith was rescued by Pocahontas Reorganization in government allowed for joint stock investment to be opened to the general public. Difficulties continue, a supply ship headed to Jamestown crashed in Bermuda John Smith suffered a gun powder injury and returned to England.
    [Show full text]
  • The Essential Guide for Residents Old and New
    AMPTHILL WELCOME PACK www.ampthill.info The Essential Guide for Residents Old and New Inside this Welcome Pack Introduction 2 Where to go if you need help 16 - 18 Brief History of Ampthill 3 Town Voluntary Groups 19 - 26 Map of Ampthill 4 Volunteer Opportunities 27 - 29 Town Communications 4 - 5 Local Events 30 Local Government and Local MP 5 - 9 Leisure and Recreation 31 Refuse and Recycling 10 Tourism 32 - 38 Emergency Services 10 - 11 Plans for the Future of the Town 38 Town Facilities and Services 12 - 15 About Ampthill.Info 39 Page 2 AMPTHILL WELCOME PACK Introduction Dear Resident or Future Resident, Welcome to the town of Ampthill to residents old and new. In this welcome pack you will find lots of useful information about our town, including clubs, facilities and useful phone numbers, email addresses and websites. Residents have commented, in the past that they have lived here for years without realising the full extent of facilities, services and opportunities available, so the aim of this pack is to put that right. Please feel free to print off pages from the pack or the whole forty page guide. Alternatively, you may wish to keep a copy on your computer for future reference. The aim is that the pack will be regularly updated. The information contained in the pack is expanded upon via Ampthill‟s two premier websites, Ampthill – Past Present and Future (www.ampthill.info) and the Ampthill and District Business Directory (www.ampthill.org.uk). Both websites are the brainchild of long time Ampthill Resident, Mark Smith, as is this Welcome Pack, with a mission to keep the town informed, engaged and empowered.
    [Show full text]
  • Dutch Trading Networks in Early North America, 1624-1750
    COUNTRIES WITH BORDERS - MARKETS WITH OPPORTUNITIES: DUTCH TRADING NETWORKS IN EARLY NORTH AMERICA, 1624-1750 A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Kimberly Ronda Todt August 2012 © 2012 Kimberly Ronda Todt ii COUNTRIES WITH BORDERS – MARKETS WITH OPPORTUNITIES: DUTCH TRADING NETWORKS IN EARLY NORTH AMERICA, 1624-1750 Kimberly Ronda Todt, Ph. D. Cornell University 2012 Examining the Dutch in early America only through the prism of New Netherland is too limiting. The historiography inevitably follows a trajectory that leads to English takeover. This work explores how Dutch merchants fostered and nurtured trade with early American colonies at all levels and stages – from ship owners to supercargos to financiers – and over the varied geographical and political terrains in which early American commodities were grown, hunted, harvested, and traded. Chapters are organized geographically and chronologically and survey how Dutch trading networks played out in each of early America’s three major regions – New England, the Middle Colonies, and the Chesapeake and later the Lower South from 1624 through 1750. Chronicling Dutch trade also serves to emphasize that participants in early America were rooted in global – as well as in local, regional, and imperial – landscapes. Accordingly, while each of the chapters of this work is regional, they are also integrated into something larger. In the end, this is a study that thinks across the Atlantic world yet explores various commodities or individual merchants to understand markets and networks. This narrative also demonstrates how profoundly Dutch capital, merchants, and iii goods affected early America.
    [Show full text]
  • The Surrender of New Netherland, 1664 Introduction Questions for Discussion
    1 The surrender of New Netherland, 1664 Introduction The Dutch colonization of New Netherland (which included parts of present-day New York, Delaware, New Jersey and Connecticut) began in the 1620s. From the outset, New Netherland was a multiethnic, multireligious society: about half of the population was Dutch and the remainder included French, Germans, Scandinavians, and small numbers of Jews from Brazil. Settlers were attracted to the colony’s promises of freedom of worship, local self-government, and free land that would remain tax-exempt for ten years. Between 1652 and 1674, the Dutch and English fought three naval wars, battling for supremacy in shipping and trade. England’s Charles II promised New Netherland to his brother, James, Duke of York. In May 1664 James dispatched Colonel Richard Nicolls [or Nichols] to seize the colony. Three hundred soldiers from four warships went ashore on Long Island in August and moved west to Brooklyn, enlisting support from the English towns on Long Island and distributing handbills ahead of the advancing troops offering fair treatment for those who surrendered. Nicolls approached Peter Stuyvesant, the Dutch governor of New Netherland, promising that in return for surrender the settlers would “peaceably enjoy whatsoever God’s blessing and their own honest industry have furnished them with and all other privileges with his majesty’s English subjects.” Stuyvesant, who favored resistance, tried to convince New Amsterdam’s merchants and leaders to keep news of Nicolls’s lenient surrender terms secret. They balked, and Stuyvesant was forced to surrender the colony, though under terms that he, the merchants, and leaders agreed upon with Nicolls.
    [Show full text]
  • Governor Thomas Dongan and His Charter to East Hampton
    Transcript of Lecture Delivered by Peter R. Christoph, MA Sunday October 11, 1998 Governor Thomas Dongan and his Charter to East Hampton I was asked to talk about Thomas Dongan and the charter he granted to East Hampton, hence the title of my talk. Actually, what he granted was a patent, not a charter, and please don't ask me to explain the difference. It is sufficient to know that what a town is granted is called a patent, and what a city receives is called a charter. In 1686 there were serious differences between New York governor Thomas Dongan and the town of East Hampton, leading to the type of patent that East Hampton received in December of that year. The first question for us to deal with, is: who was Thomas Dongan? The second is:what was the area of conflict between him and East Hampton? I think the best way to handle this is to begin by describing the career of Thomas Dongan, including his administration of New York,to the end of 1686, and then review what had been going on in East Hampton, especially in relation to land title, up to the same point, so that we can see why East Hampton received the sort of patent that it did. And I will conclude with a view of Thomas Dongan's career after 1686. I'm sure that the further history of East Hampton has already been well covered by the other speakers in this series. Thomas Dongan, like all of New York's colonial governors, came from a military background.
    [Show full text]
  • Sullivan - History of New York State 1523-1927
    Sullivan - History of New York State 1523-1927 "Hisotry of New York State 1523-1927" HISTORY OF NEW YORK STATE 1523-1927 EDITOR-IN-CHIEF DR. JAMES SULLIVAN Former State Historian; Present Assistant Commissioner for Higher and Professional Education of the New York State Department of Education; Author of "An Elementary History of England, 1904," "The Government of New York State, 1906"; Editor of "Washington's and Webster's Addresses, 1908," "American Democracy- Washington to Wilson, 1919," "Sir William Johnson Papers"; Editor of the Quarterly Journal of the New York State Historical Association. ASSOCIATE EDITORS E. MELVIN WILLIAM EDWIN P. CONKLIN BENEDICT FITZPATRICK VOLUME V LEWIS HISTORICAL PUBLISHING COMPANY, INC. NEW YORK CHICAGO Sullivan - History of New York State 1523-1927 "History of New York State 1523-1927" CHAPTER XII. THE BENCH AND BAR. Dutch Period, 1609-1664. Hudson discovered the river known by his name in 1609. During the next ten years many Dutch ships were in New York waters, and Manhattan Island had a small settlement of traders. Magisterial authority, if there was any in this little trading community, probably followed the rules of the sea, with sea captains as arbiters, and with the certainty that capital offenses would be referred to the home government. In 1621 the Dutch West India Company was chartered, with wide powers and charged with the keeping of "good order, police, and justice." The charter contained many guarantees of freedom in social, political and religious life, but reserved final judicial authority for the States General. Next in magisterial authority were the directors of the company, who exercised supervision of, and accepted responsibility for, the judicial acts of their provincial officials, the superintendents of the trading posts and the ship captains.
    [Show full text]
  • RICHARD NICOLLS First Governor of New York 1664-1668
    RICHARD NICOLLS First Governor of New York 1664-1668 BY MONTGOMERY SCHUYLER PRESIDENT of the ORDER OF COLONIAL LORDS OF MANORS IN AMERICA NEW YORK 1933 RICHARD NICOLLS FIRST GOVERNOR OF NEW YORK In August, 1664, an English fleet of four ships of war under the con1n1and of Colonel Richard Nicolls dropped anchor off Staten Island and a few days later the Dutch Governor and garrison of New A111sterdan1 surrendered to the overwheln1ing force, the flag of the States General of Holland was lowered on the fort and the red ensign of England was hoisted in its place. Although acco111plished without bloodshed and without 111uch unpleasantness, this change was to be of enonnous political i111portance in the history of A1nerica. By transferring fro111 Dutch to English hands the strategic center of opposition to the French in Canada aijd the Northwest, it n1ade possible that later unity of politicgi;, developn1ent in the English colonies fron1 New England oh t~e one side, to Pennsylvania, l\tiaryland and the 111ore southern settlen1ents on the other, which was to bring about the co111bination of interests and identity of purpose resulting in the an1algan1ation of those colonies into the United States of An1erica. Such a result certainly was neither thought of nor 11._oped for at the ti111e. Politics entered le~_s than co111111erce into the picture and re"ligion less than either. But in order to have any clear idea of what the English occupation of New Netherland n1eant or why it was i1npor­ tant at the ti111e, we n1ust look for a 1110111ent at the European situation and point out why such hostile action was taken at a n1on1ent of profound peace between England and Holland.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1. Beginnings, 1664–1691
    Chapter 1. Beginnings, 1664–1691 ’Tis not with us as in our Fatherland, or as in Kingdoms and Re- publics which are established and settled by long and well expe- rienced laws and fundamentals, best agreeing with the condition of the people. But in our little body, made up of divers members, namely, folks of different nations, many things occur in the laying of a foundation for which there are no rules nor examples.1 The legal history of the British colony of New York may be said to have begun on August 26 1664, when Colonel Richard Nicolls anchored his little flotilla in Gravesend Bay and demanded from Peter Stuyvesant the surrender of New Amsterdam. Nicolls’ bloodless conquest confirmed the grant made by Charles II; James Stuart, Duke of York, could now attempt to dictate the terms of occu- pation and government in the rich domain to be called New York. In a larger sense, however, the legal history of New York began fifty years before. Many of the external determinants of the legal order, including the geographic, strategic, and economic constraints on occupation of the territory, were already expressed in the organization of the Dutch colony of New Nether- land. In conquering a province with an existing administrative system, more- over, the agents of the new proprietor had not the luxury of unrestrained cre- ation; the ways, means, and expectations of the population needed to be taken into account, if only to prevent the kind of social unrest that would require prohibitively expensive measures to garrison the Duke’s new possession.
    [Show full text]
  • LONG ISLAND Colonid PATENTS
    LONG ISLAND Colonid PATENTS BY FREDERICK VAN WYCK BOSTON A. A. BEAUCHAMP I935 PREFACE LL the publications cited by the author in this A tract have been consulted in the Boston Public Library, the Harvard Law Library, and the library of the New England Historic Genealogical So- ciety, some in one of them and some in the others, and for the unfailing courtesy shown to him by all three of these libraries and for the favors and privi- leges freely extended to him by all of them while he was making these researches he expresses here his appreciation and gratitude. The first patent by the King to the Duke and the Duke's commission to Governor Nicolls have been reproduced from photostatic copies of these instru- ments as published by Brodhead. The comparing of the other quoted matter in Part I with the sources has been done without assistance, and while care has been exercised it is hoped that those interested in the subject will consult these sources direct. As is in effect said in the tract, it is mainly a collection of authorities thought to have a bearing on a certain legal question, but arguments have been avoided and no assertive position on the question is taken. -..+. $ On the subject of Seventeenth Century chirography, reference is here made to Oyster Bay Town Records, Volume I-1653-1690 . Compared, Annotated Cvl and Indexed By John Cox, Jr., New York, Tobias A. Wright, Printer and Publisher, 1916, " Introduction," at pages viii, ix. It is there said: "The most common contraction was the use of y for th, at the beginning of a word, with the re- mainder of the word raised, as ye for the .
    [Show full text]
  • DFNJ 2016 Edition 7-17-16 OGDEN.Pdf
    FOUNDERS OF NEW JERSEY First Settlements, Colonists and Biographies by Descendants Dr. Evelyn Hunt Ogden Registrar General The Descendants of Founders of New Jersey Third Edition 2016 First Settlements, Colonists and Biographies by Descendants, Third Edition 2016 This 250+ page E-book contains sketches of the earliest English settlements, 137 biographies of founders of New Jersey the state, and an extensive index of over 1,800 additional early colonists associated with events and settlement during the Proprietary Period of New Jersey. Founders of New Jersey: First Settlements, Colonists and Biographies by Descendants Member Authors Paul Woolman Adams, Jr. Steven Guy Brandon Rowley Mary Ellen Ezzell Ahlstrom Craig Hamilton Helen L. Schanck Annie Looper Alien William Hampton Deanna May Scherrer Reba Baglio Robert J. Hardie, Sr. Marjorie Barber Schuster Lucy Hazen Barnes James Paul Hess Judy Scovronsky Michael T. Bates Steve Hollands Sara Frasier Sellgren Kathryn Marie Marten Beck Mary Jamia Case Jacobsen James A Shepherd Taylor Marie Beck Edsall Riley Johnston, Jr. Barbara Carver Smith Patricia W. Blakely Elaine E. Johnston Marian L. Smith Matthew Bowdish John Edward Lary Jr Martha Sullivan Smith Margaret A. Brann Guy Franklin Leighton Myron Crenshaw Smith Clifton Rowland Brooks, M.D. Marian L. LoPresti George E. Spaulding, Jr. Richard Charles Budd Constan Trimmer Lucy Heather Elizabeth Welty Speas Daniel Byram Bush Michael Sayre Maiden, Jr. Charlotte Van Horn Squarcy James Reed Campbell Jr Donna Lee Wilkenson Malek Earl Gorden Stannard III Esther Burdge Capestro Douglas W. McFarlane Marshall Jacqueline Frank Strickland Michael Charles Alan Russell Matlack David Strungfellow Warren R. Clayton Amy Adele Matlack Harriet Stryker-Rodda Eva Lomerson Collins Nancy Elise Matlack Kenn Stryker-Rodda Mirabah L.
    [Show full text]
  • William Blathwayt Papers
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/tf9b69p05t No online items William Blathwayt Papers Finding aid prepared by Huntington Library staff and updated by Diann Benti. Manuscripts Department The Huntington Library 1151 Oxford Road San Marino, California 91108 Phone: (626) 405-2191 Email: [email protected] URL: http://www.huntington.org © 2014 The Huntington Library. All rights reserved. William Blathwayt Papers mssBL 1-423 1 Descriptive Summary Title: William Blathwayt Papers Dates: 1657-1770 Bulk dates: 1660-1709 Collection Number: mssBL 1-423 Creator: Blathwayt, William, 1649?-1717 Extent: approximately 500 items in 9 boxes and 1 oversize folder Repository: The Huntington Library, Art Collections, and Botanical Gardens Manuscripts Department The Huntington Library 1151 Oxford Road San Marino, California 91108 Phone: (626) 405-2191 Email: [email protected] URL: http://www.huntington.org Abstract: This collection contains correspondence and documents primarily accumulated by English civil servant William Blathwayt (1649-1717) in his capacity as a British government official in such roles as surveyor and auditor general of plantation revenues and secretary and member of the Lords of Trade. The bulk of the papers date from 1660 to 1709 and chiefly relate to the British colonies in North America and the West Indies. Language of Material: The records are in English and French. Access Collection is open to qualified researchers by prior application through the Reader Services Department. For more information, please go to following web site. Publication Rights The Huntington Library does not require that researchers request permission to quote from or publish images of this material, nor does it charge fees for such activities.
    [Show full text]