Bayard having steadfastly refused to produce the addresses, the provincial 
council was of the opinion that he had incited the people to disown the 
present authority and to cast off the royal government as then established. 
Therefore, it was resolved that he be committed for high treason and a warrant 
to that effect be issued. Bayard, desiring liberty to appeal to the King, was 
told that he might do as he thought fit in that matter, 177 but steps were taken 
to head off complaint to the Board of Trade by representations from the 
lieutenant-governor and the council that Bayard et al. were not typical of 
the English inhabitants and that exemplary treatment of this atypical group 
was necessary. 178 At the same time a proclamation was issued in the province 
to quiet rumors that the utmost severity would be employed against the signers 
of the three addresses. 178 
Preparation for the trial of Bayard and Hutchins for high treason was made 
by a February 4, 1701/2, order of the provincial council to prepare a special 
commission of oyer and terminer for the justices of the Supreme Court. To 
reinforce the reluctant Attorney General, Thomas Weaver was constituted 
Solicitor General to assist the former in the performance of his office. 180 On 
February 9 the accused vainly petitioned the council that the trial might be 
respited to the usual sitting of the Supreme Court. But some further time was 
granted to prepare for trial, and the crown law officers were ordered to prosecute 
for high treason at the end of this period. 181 On February 12 the commission 
of oyer and terminer was approved of and issued, and the proper 
oaths were taken thereunder. 182 
A week later the commissioners sat and published their commission; a grand 
jury, being sworn, was charged by Chief Justice Atwood, delivered the indictments 
by the court, and presented with the proofs by Solicitor General 
defense (4 Doc. Rel. Col. Hist. N.Y., 956). 
177 CSP, Col, 1702, #41; 8 MS Mins. N.Y. 
Council, Part I, 302-3. For the mittimus for 
the commitment of Bayard see 14 Howell, 
State Trials, 473-74; CO 5/i047/#35 iii. The 
three minor petitioners were bound over to 
the next Supreme Court (Case of William 
Atwood, Esq., 271). A solidly Dutch grand 
jury brought in presentments against Wenham 
and French for high misdemeanors, but both 
wisely fled the jurisdiction long before trial 
(4 Doc. Rel. Col. Hist. N.Y., 957). 
178 CSP, Col., 1702, #44, 45. 
179 CSP, Col, 1702, #49; 8 MS Mins. N.Y. 
Council, Part I, 304. For the proclamation 
issued January 24, 1701/2, see the Redmond- 
Livingston MSS. On March 10 a further proclamation 
was issued, French, Wenham, and Van 
Dam being excluded from this executive expression 
of amnesty. But an offer was made 
to the latter, as influenced by his associates, 
that prosecution would be withheld if he 
appeared before the Lieutenant-Governor and 
Council within seven days and acknowledged 
his offense (CSP, Col, 1702, #188; 8 MS 
Mins. N.Y. Council, Part I, 316; 45 N.Y. 
Col. MSS., 76). On March 12 Van Dam appeared 
before the council and acknowledged 
his errors and was assured that no prosecution 
would take place (8 MS Mins. N.Y. 
Council, Part I, 318). 
™CSP, Col., 1702, #91; 8 MS. Mins. N.Y. 
Council, Part I, 308. Cf. Case of William 
Atwood, Esq., 276-77. 
* SI CSP, Col., 1702, #104. 
is2 lbid., #112; 8 MS. Mins. N.Y. Council, 
Part I, 310. The commission is set out at 14 
Howell, State Trials, 476.