Leisler's Rebellion

English forces took control of New Netherland in 1664 and King Charles II gave the territory as proprietor to his brother James, then Duke of York, to rule as he pleased.

[1] James partitioned East and West Jersey to other proprietors and established an essentially autocratic government with a strong governor and council but no elected legislature.

[5] The rule of Andros was highly unpopular, especially in New England,[6] and his opponents in Massachusetts used the change of royal power for their political benefit by organizing an uprising.

[8] Politicians and militia leaders became more assertive on Long Island when they learned of Boston, and dominion officials were ousted from a number of communities by mid-May.

[9] At the same time, Nicholson learned that France had declared war on England, bringing the threat of Franco-Indian attacks on New York's northern frontier.

[10] He attempted to mollify panicked citizenry over rumored Indian raids by inviting the militia to join the army garrison at Fort James on Manhattan island.

Leisler was a vocal opponent of the dominion regime, which he saw as an attempt to impose popery on the province, and he may have played a role in subverting Nicholson's regulars.

[13] On May 22, Nicholson's council was petitioned by the militia, who sought more rapid improvement to the city's defenses and also wanted access to the powder magazine in the fort.

[13][16] An officer was sent to the council to demand the keys to the powder magazine, which Nicholson eventually surrendered to "hinder and prevent bloodshed and further mischiefe".

[26] On June 26, a convention composed of delegates from a number of communities from lower New York and East Jersey established a committee of safety to oversee affairs.

"[26] Through July and August, his hand-picked militia exercised de facto control over the city, financed by provincial funds which Nicholson had deposited in the fort.

They carried documents intended to support accusations that Nicholson had been conspiring against the people of New York and to justify the propriety of Leisler's actions against his "oppressive" rule.

The agents were instructed to request a new charter for the province and to claim that the united colonies could defeat New France without assistance from the home country.

[31] Councilors Bayard and Philipse issued a proclamation on October 20 calling Leisler's rule illegal, and ordered other militia commanders to stop supporting him.

The convention included local militia leaders and the city fathers of Albany, wealthy landowners from the Hudson River valley,[34] and it became the nucleus of anti-Leisler activities in the province.

He responded by sending Jacob Milborne, a close advisor and future son-in-law, with a militia troop to take military control of Albany in November.

[39] In early February, during King William's War, Schenectady was attacked by French and Indian raiders, exposing the weakness of the Albany Convention's position.

[41] A letter arrived in December 1689 from William and Mary addressed to Nicholson or "in his absence to such as for the time being take care for preserving the peace and administering the laws in our said Province of New York".

[43] However, resistance continued to his policies, and he was attacked by a small mob on June 6 who demanded the release of political prisoners and refused to pay taxes which he had imposed.

However, Winthrop did avenge the Schenectady massacre of February 1690, to some extent, by sending a small party north to raid La Prairie, Quebec.

[49] Leisler blamed Winthrop for the failure (for which there were numerous causes) and briefly arrested him, eliciting protests from Connecticut Governor Robert Treat.

It passed a bill on April 17 condemning Leisler's government and activities, despite attempts by pro-Leislerians to control the body, and even blamed him for the 1690 Schenectady massacre.

[57] Leisler and Milborne were convicted on April 17, after repeated attempts by the court to get them to enter pleas, and they were sentenced to be "hanged, drawn and quartered, and their estates confiscated."

By early May, the court had heard 32 cases, convicted and sentenced eight men to death (including Leisler and Milborne), and either acquitted or pardoned the rest.

Anti-Leisler forces agitated for his execution,[58] and there were riots on Staten Island in late April, supposedly instigated by Leisler supporters.

[60] On May 14, the court refused to transport Leisler and Milborne to England for appeal, and Sloughter's council was dominated by anti-Leislerians who urged him to execute the two men.

[61] Leisler is reported to have made a long speech, claiming that he acted "for the glory of the Protestant interest, the establishment of the present government", and to protect the province from outside forces.

It was finally passed on May 2, 1695, after extensive hearings in which Joseph Dudley defended his actions by accusing Leisler of improperly seizing power because he was a foreigner.

He oversaw the restoration of the family estate, and had the bodies of Leisler and Milborne properly reburied in the yard of the Dutch Reform Church.

Leisler, the son of a German Reformed minister, exploited popular anti-Catholic sentiment and was primarily supported by artisans and small traders who opposed the dominion of wealthy merchants such as the patroons.

Nineteenth-century engraving depicting Nicholson's councilors tryting to quiet the rebellion
Howard Pyle 's depiction of Governor Sloughter signing Leisler's death warrant.