266 



TJie Correct Arms of the State of New York. 



and on the reverse the queen or the king of the successive reigns 

 standing and receiving the homage of two crouching Indians, a chief 

 and a woman, offering gifts. * The Arms of the colony, from the 

 year 168G had retained over the shield and supporters the sole symbol 

 of the royal British crown as a crest. The laws of the colony in vol- 

 umes printed in England or New York down to 1752 bore on the 

 title page a vignette of the complete arms of Great Britain. 

 But in 1752 and in 1762 the folio volume editions of these laws had 

 as their sole vignette the Arms of the colony. The same seal only 

 was on the colonial money of 1771. In thus superseding the com- 

 plete British arms by the arms of the province, they were following 

 on in harmony with those same popular impulses which had led the 

 people to rush out from the King's Arms tavern, to overthrow the 

 King's Statue on Bowling Green, and to cause its lead to be melted 

 into bullets. No New York Arms had as yet replaced them in the 

 Province. The sole change made in the old arms was to place the 

 eagle over the shield instead of the British crown for a crest. They 

 were required to provide a complete appropriate substitute, to make 

 all things new. So these three men, rejecting with calmness all token 

 of subjection, and standing upon the manhood of common citizenship, 

 with no spirit of vengeance that with spear in hand exclaims, sic sem- 

 per tyraiinis, devise an emblematic State Arms, which announce with 

 simplicity and directness a state to be maintained under popular sov- 

 ereignty, and supported by Liberty and Justice without the aid of 

 kingly power. The people of to-day, with a knowledge of the facts, 

 will certainly not be indifferent when they reflect that a device of 

 arms, originated and cherished by these leaders through such a crisis 

 of our history, is liable to be either abandoned or disfigured, and no 

 one can give a reason why." 



If it should be said in reference to one feature of the Arms, the 

 overturned crown under the foot of Liberty, that according to heraldic 

 rales it can be disregarded as not an essential feature, yet, remember- 

 ing that it was placed there by men so honorable and honored in our 

 history, should we not be jealous to retain it? We recall also that 

 George Clinton, of whom Hammond says "he was in grain and prin- 

 ciple a republican," in the same church where a preceding colonial 

 governor had sat in his pew under a painting of the British Arms, 

 had for many years, as Governor of the new independent State, sat 

 under these new republican Arms, with the approval of all the 

 people ; and can we with easy and careless indifference allow our- 



^ The Arms previous to 1664 are described in the MS. folio volume Annaliura 

 Thesaurus, Secretary of State's office. They had no supporters. An impression 

 of the seal having them may be found in LettPrs MS., 1647-1663. 



