"Wholly Addicted to His Pleasure": Lord Cornbury's Dress

Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon and Viscount Cornbury is perhaps the most maligned royal governor that the colony of New York ever had. His reign from 1702 to 1708 was marked with greed, bribery and rampant misuse of public funds. Yet the thing he is most remembered for is this:

Lord Cornbury as remembered by history. If I was more tech savvy Aerosmith's "Dude (Looks Like a Lady)" would be playing right now.

That’s right. If one was to believe the rumors then Lord Cornbury really liked to dress in women’s clothes. Some historians believe that

Edward Hyde as he probably wanted to be remembered

Cornbury truly did parade around New York in full gowns. Other historians believe this was a started to discredit the governor by his political rivals in New York, chief among them Robert Livingston, 1^st Lord of Livingston Manor.

Livingston had been a fan of Cornbury’s when he first arrived in the colony, writing “My Lord is Extrem hearty to redresse all grievances, we must reckon it a duble mercy that God has been pleased to send him at this juncture.”[i]

Robert Livingston certainly had a way with words

Cornbury soon lost Livingston’s support though. After a harrowing trip to England that involved being briefly seized by French privateers and set adrift, Livingston spent about three years getting his accounts settled and getting his offices confirmed by the Queen. When he returned home in 1706 he found that the colonists were united against Cornbury who had been badly mismanaging the colony. When Livingston presented his commission as Secretary for Indian Affairs to Cornbury, Cornbury refused to recognize it despite Queen Anne’s signature. Cornbury apparently preferred to keep the money due to Livingston for his own use.[ii]

William Lowndes: this has nothing to do with Cornbury but this guy had at least 25 kids. So yeah...

 

 In June of 1707 Robert Livingston wrote to William Lowndes of the Treasury;

“Tis said he is wholly addicted to his pleasure…his dressing himself in womens cloths commonly [every] morning is so unaccountable that if hundreds of spectators did not daily see him it would be incredible.”[iii]

Livingston's letter was the first in a series of letters to officials in England describing Cornbury’s odd habit. Later that year Lewis Morris, ancestor of Chancellor Robert R. Livingston’s good friend Gouverneur Morris and owner of the Morrisania estate in the Bronx wrote his own letter. It said:

Lewis Morris; helped ruined Cornbury over New Jersey. We might need to question his judgement.

“The scandal of his life is…he rarely fails at being dresst in Women’s cloaths every day, and almost half his time is spent that way, and seldome misses it on Sacrament day, was in that garb when his dead Lady was carried out of the Fort, and this not privately but in face of the sun and in sight of the Town. But I’ll not enter into his Privacies, his Publick Vices are scandalous enough.”

 In 1709 Morris wrote about Cornbury again:

“...that is his dressing publiqly in womans cloaths Every day and putting a stop to all publique business while he is pleasing himself with that peculiar but detestable magot.”[iv]

It should be noted that Morris was also an opponent of Cornbury’s. Cornbury had suspended Morris from the New Jersey provincial council. Morris was not reinstated until Cornbury was done as governor.

The last about the governor’s dressing habits came from the pen of Elias Neau, a Huguenot refugee turned merchant and catechist. Neau wrote:

“My Lord Cornbury has and dos still make use of an unfortunate Custom of dressing himself in womens cloaths and of exposing himself in that Garb on the Ramparts to the view of the public; in that dress he draws a world of Spectators about him and consequently as many Censures, especially for the exposing himself in such a manner all the great Holy days and even in an hour or two after going to the communion.”

Neau went one step further than the other writers and commented on Cornbury’s style as well:

“I am assured that he continues to dress himself in women’s cloths, but now tis after the Dutch Manner.”[v]

Not only was Cornbury dressing like a woman but he was dressing like a Dutch woman, not even a good English woman!

            Historian Patricia Bonomi assures us that the rumor of Cornbury’s cross dressing did not gain much traction in England or elsewhere in the colonies, yet some people did hear of it. A merchant from Boston wrote to an associate in New York;

 Baron von Bothmer: Liked to imagine Cornury in drag.

“Muliebri Veste uti (women’s clothing), is instanced in as against the Law of Nature. It has been reported that a certain Gentleman at N. York used to practice that abomination. I should be glad to know the certainty of it.”[vi]

Several years later Hanoverian diplomat Baron von Bothmer wrote that he had heard that Cornbury “thought it was necessary for him, in order to represent her Majesty, to dress himself as a woman.”[vii]

            So it is at least possible that a royal governor of New York dressed like a woman. Perhaps he enjoyed it or, as Bothmer suggested, perhaps he took his job representing Queen Anne in the colonies a little too seriously. It is also possible that he was just an unpleasant man brought down in part by the combined efforts of Robert Livingston and a few other colonists whom he had offended. Either way Cornbury was replaced by John Lovelace, 4^th Baron Lovelace in 1708. Cornbury returned to England, spent some time in debtors’ prison and was briefly an envoy to the court of Hanover. He died in 1723.

---

[i] Bonomi, Patricia U. The Lord Cornbury Scandal p59

[ii] Leder, Lawrence H. Robert Livingston p 200-202

[iii] Bonomi The Lord Cornbury Scandal p 158

[iv] Bonomi The Lord Cornbury Scandal p160

[v] Bonomi The Lord Cornbury Scandal p 161.

[vi] Bonomi The Lord Cornbury Scandal p 162

[vii] Bonomi The Lord Cornbury Scandal p 17

The Smartest Man in the Room: How Robert Livingston Earned His Manor

Robert Livingston came to the young colony of New York in 1675, shortly after the colony had become English for the final time.  He was Scottish, but thanks to a father who had a falling out with the King of England had spent a significant amount of time in exile in the Netherlands.  He had plans to become a fur trader, but soon found himself secretary to Nicholas Van Rensselaer, director of the 700,000 acre Rensselaerswyck.

Robert Livingston

When Nicholas died in 1678 he owed a good deal of money to both new world and European creditors.  He also left behind an attractive and intelligent widow, Alida Schuyler Van Rensselaer (yes, those Schuylers).  Livingston married Alida, in July of 1679, a few months after Van Rensselaer died. 

Alida Schuyler Van Rensselaer Livingston

Livingston’s next move was incredibly shrewd.  He paid off Nicholas’ estate’s debts to the tune of 5,831 florins in New York out of his own pocket.  Later auditors were a bit suspicious of these debts.  Livingston was seeking compensation for 2,411 florins of Nicholas’ debt, 1,908 florins of which was paid to his father in law, Philip Pieterse Schuyler for various goods.   Schuyler’s reputation and offer to swear on the debt was enough to soothe their suspicions though.  Livingston took his compensation from the Van Rensselaers by claiming a section of their land as his own, including the Crailo Farm.  The ensuing legal battle went on for years and was particularly hard on Maria Van Rensselaer, widow of Jeremias Van Rensselaer, on whom the directorship of the manor had once again fallen, as her brother Stephanus Van Cortlandt, who was the actual director, resided in New York City.  She also hoped that her son Kiliaen would become the new director.   As early as November of 1679 she wrote “Secretary Livingston troubles me so much…”[i]

After paying the local debts Livingston basically ignored the European debts.  He hoped that the Atlantic Ocean would prove to be too daunting a barrier to cross to collect the debts.  He said “the debts abroad may take care of themselves.”[ii]  He also requested a review of the will of Jan Van Wely, an uncle of Nicholas Van Rensselaer’s.  Livingston claimed that the uncle died before Nicholas and that therefore Alida should inherit anything left to Nicholas.  The Van Rensselaers however, claimed that Nicholas had died first and she was entitled to nothing.  The courts eventually ruled in the Van Rensselaers’ favor on this point.

Next Richard Van Rensselaer, Nicholas’s brother and head of the Van Rensselaer family in the Netherlands, convinced one of Nicholas’s European creditors to sue Livingston for a 38 florin debt.  The case, which was heard in Albany, was not worth it financially but would have set a precedent  for collecting debts across the ocean and had it been successful could have ruined Livingston.  The judge that heard the case though was unwilling to set any such precedent and dismissed the case on a technicality.

Livingston was now set on breaking up Rensselaerswyck, by keeping the land he claimed belonged to Nicholas.  He was joined by his Schuyler in-laws who hoped to grab up some of the Van Rensselaer farmlands for themselves.  Portioning off any part of the manor was not an option for the Van Rensselaers.  In fact the very idea that Livingston controlled any portion of their land was embarrassing and offensive to Maria Van Rensselaer who wrote to Richard in January of 1682; “for all those who hear from Livingston himself that he still has the farm, criticize us.”  She went on to say; “I can not bear to see him any longer in possession of the patroon’s garden…”[iii]

In May of 1682 Richard Van Rensselaer wrote to Livingston directly.  The tone of the letter was threatening at best.  First he declared that Livingston owed him more than 3,000 florins for the land he was using and some existing debts, then called him a “solicitor of fraudulent affairs.”  He goes on to say that even if Livingston abandons the estate “it will plague you thereafter.”  As for Crailo, which Livingston still maintained as his due, Richard wrote: “as I understand that contrary to all justice and fairness you keep in your possession the patroon’s place and also the farm in the Greyne Bos, without being willing to pay any rent or compensation to the patron and co-directors…”[iv]

Livingston responded with his biggest gun.  He attacked the Van Rensselaers’ dirty little secret.  They only owned 60% of Rensselaerswyck.  Kiliaen Van Rensselaer, the first Patroon, had been the largest investor in a group of investors.  In 1683 Livingston sent an agent to the Netherlands to find the heirs of the other investors. The Blommaert and Bessels families who were among the heirs were very shocked to realize they had never seen any profit from the investment or even a proper accounting, which had been ordered in 1650 by the Staats General.

Governor Thomas Dongan had no choice but to step in at this point.  Rensselaerswyck was the largest land holding in his colony and to find out that the Van Rensselaers had been holding it fraudulently for the last fifty years risked destabilizing the entire colony. 

Suddenly Livingston’s long game came into light.  In 1683 he purchased a small land tract of 2,000 acres near the Roeliff Jansen Kill from the Mohicans for some trade goods.  This land was confirmed by Dongan in 1684. 

On July 31, 1685 Dongan officially put an end to the Van Rensselaer – Livingston dispute.  Officially, Livingston was free from Nicholas Van Rensselaer’s debts; he also did not have to pay for the land he had taken from the Van Rensselaers.  The Van Rensselaers also gave him 800 schepels of wheat.  In return Livingston would give back the land he had taken and would not protest against a new patent for Maria Van Rensselaer’s son to become the patroon.

New York was saved except Livingston still did not have what he wanted, his own manor.  Or did he?  A few months later Livingston purchased another small parcel of land, about 600 acres, in Taconic, about ten miles east of his original piece of land.  On July 22, 1686, almost exactly a year from the agreement with the Van Rensselaers, Livingston received a third patent for his land making him lord of his own manor and confirming his ownership of his land, the 2,000 acres on the Roeliff Jansen Kill, the 600 acres in Taconic and the land in between them.  With the governor’s signature Livingston had converted 2,600 acres into 160,000 acres.

It’s tough to say now if Livingston Manor was payment for dropping his disputes against the Van Rensselaers but the time line strongly suggests more than mere coincidence.  It’s also unlikely that the Van Rensselaers or Governor Dongan would have considered some undeveloped wilderness as a high price to pay for maintaining Rensselaerswyck and bringing Crailo back into the family.

 

 

 

 

---

[i] Maria Van Rensselaer to Richard Van Rensselaer, November 1679 in Van Laer, A.J.F., ed., Correspondence of Maria Van Rensselaer 1669-1689 Albany, The University of the State of New York, 1935 p 30.

[ii] Quoted in Leder, Lawrence H. Robert Livingston, 1654-1728 and The Politics of Colonial New York Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina Press, 1961. P 25.

[iii] Maria Van Rensselaer to Richard Van Rensselaer, January 1682 in Van Laer Correspondence, p 57

[iv] Richard Van Rensselaer to Robert Livingston, May4/14, 1682 in Van Laer Correspondence. P 65-69.