Transcript:Colonial Society of Massachusetts. Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts/v10p269

Previous Page <--- [Vol 10, p 269 - THE REVEREND FRANCIS DOUGHTY, Feb 1906] ---> Next Page

refuge which his friends the Dutch ministers called the latrina of New England. With the record of his having sold twelve acres of land at Taunton, his connection with the Old Colony ceases. From Rhode Island he betook himself to New Amsterdam, where he was well received by Director Kieft, who was then promoting emigration from New England. Doughty took the oath of allegiance and received on 28 March, 1642, a patent for 13,332 acres¹ at Mespat (Newtown), Long Island. Here he was joined by Richard Smith and others of his friends. They had for neighbors the settlements of Mrs. Hutchinson at Annie's Hoeck and of John Throgmorton at Throg's Neck, and Lady Deborah Moody with her Baptists from Salem at Gravensande,² — all together involved in common disaster when in September, 1643, the Indians unexpectedly attacked them. The Newtown settlement then numbered over eighty persons, some of the men were killed and most of their houses burnt and their cattle killed.³

¹ "In area the continentem sex millia sexcenta sexaginta sex jugera Hollandica, aut circiter ignogvaphice inclusum," etc. (Riker, Annals of Newtown, p. 413). A Dutch acre is said to be a little less than two English acres, and this patent "embraced nearly the whole of the present town of Newtown " (Ibid. p. 17). The Indian name for Newtown, sometimes written Mespachtes by the Dutch, was usually shortened to Mespat, and in modern days has been corrupted to Maspeth (Ibid. p. 13 note).
² Soon corrupted, as now, to Gravesend.
³ Mr. Doughty's affairs became of much consequence in New Netherland and of some importance in Holland. We have three sources of information: (1) Remonstrance of New Netherland, 28 July, 1649; (2) The answer made by Stuyvesant's Secretary to this attack on him; (3) Some court records. The court records are meagre so far as they are found in print. The Remonstrance and reply are, as is to be expected, largely contradictory. The leader of the men who took over the Remonstrance was Adriaen Tan der Donck, a man of education far beyond most of the colonists and of excellent character and understanding. He had married Mary Doughty 22 October, 1645, and was thoroughly informed in all the matters concerned. He is supposed to have written the Remonstrance. While he cannot be considered unbiassed, he was yet under no compulsion to make any statements or bring forward any matter he did not wish, while Stnyvesant's agent had to answer point by point, and that was not easy. Where there is contradiction the presumption then seems in favor of the correctness of the Remonstrance. The Remonstrance was for relief from the tyranny of the Directors General. Kieft had been a "grafter," a fool and a tyrant; Stuyvesant, honest and no fool, was a tyranj and not scrupulous. Doughty's experiences were related as cue instance of a man