Knickerbockers Who Asserted and Insisted [ 125 ] landts remained powerful. In New York City, the capital, Andros sought to balance English and Dutch interests by appointing Dutch mayors and equal numbers of Dutch and English aldermen. Albany retained its fur trade monopoly, and New York City, in addition to remaining the sole port of entry for trade, received a flour bolting monopoly.29 Though Andros formally extended the Duke's Laws to the entire province, Dutch forms, language, and power still dominated the upper Hudson Valley. Andros's early behavior caused some of the Dutch to remain wary of him but did not prevent the eventual success of a policy designed to incorporate rather than alienate the powerful Dutch inhabitants. Indeed, in the last major incident involving a Dutch provincial interest, the Van Rensselaer affair, leading Dutch merchant-politicians found themselves on the side of Andros rather than the Dutch Reformed church. Though Andros did not, as John Luidens claims, launch "a systemic attack on [Dutch] culture" he was tactless at times.80 In 1674 the duke of York had asked Andros to find a place for his friend Nicholas Van Rensselaer in one of the Dutch churches in New York. Ordained by the Anglican bishop of Salisbury, Van Rensselaer arrived in 1675 to assist Rev. Gideon Schaats in the Albany Dutch Church. Schaats, however, complained of Van Rensselaer's "disorderly preaching" and Rev. 29 Van Rensselaer, History of the City of New York, II, 209-10; Lawrence H. Leder, Robert Livingston, 1654-1728, and the Politics of Colonial New York (Chapel Hill, 1961), 18-19; Patricia U. Bonomi, A Factious People: Politics and Society in Colonial New York (New York, 1971), 52. 80 Luidens, "The Americanization of the Dutch Reformed Church" 62. In addition to the Van Rensselaer affair, Luidens cites reference to an "English Party" among the Dutch and the Rev. Caspar Van Zuuren's cry; "Our Church will never be free of English politics" Ibid., 65; Ecc. Rec, II, 793, 776 for quotations. Van Zuuren's complaints, voiced in the 1680s, were related to a long feud with the Flatbush schoolmaster Jan Gerritsz. Van Marken. Van Zuuren accused those who sided with their schoolmaster instead of their preacher of being of the "English Party" particularly since they threatened to bring the matter before English courts. Van Zuuren's reference to the dangers to the Dutch church did not refer to initiatives by Andros or other English officials. After the Van Rensselaer problem was resolved in 1677, Van Zuuren had described Andros as "a well liked and discreet gentleman, well-affected to religion" In 1681, Van Zuuren wrote (in the same letter in which he complained of an "English Party") that, outside of friction on Long Island, "things go on tolerably well" for the Dutch Reformed church. Kilpatrick, Dutch Schools of New Netherland, 170; Ecc. Rec. I, 701, II, 793, see also 819-20, for the personal nature of the feud. Luidens cites as further evidence of Andros's "systemic attack" the Tesschenmaker affair, which he misinterprets as a "collision... between the governor and the Dutch Church [p. 65]" The Tesschenmaker affair demonstrated, if anything, the desire of both Andros and the Dutch Reformed church not to begin another controversy.