[ 134 ] STEVE J. STERN lawless reign ruined their trade, abused their ministers, and forced "sev" of the best and most considerable Inhabitants" to flee.46 If class, status, and personal interests tempered the Dutch character of Leisler's Rebellion in the New York City-Long Island area, sectional particularism divided the Dutch response much more strikingly. Kingston saw no reason to recognize Leisler's authority.47 Albany resisted Leisler until it needed his military aid after the French and Indian massacre at Schenectady in February of 1690. Albany, unlike New York City, was still very much a Dutch town; outsiders had to fit into the Dutch pattern to find acceptance. English soldiers and officials commonly married Dutch women, blurring distinctively English ethnicity. Albany had coped with the economic depression cooperatively, with regulations to distribute what trade existed among the population and with expeditions to capture the western fur trade from the French. Fear of French attacks also tended to merge the interests of Albany's leaders and the general populace. In addition, their common Dutch bond enabled them to avoid the antagonizing incidents that occurred in New York City. Albany's leaders and populace alike responded to the accession of William and Mary with "ye ringing of y* bell, bone fyres, fyre works and all other demonstrations of joy!'48 In Albany, unity of interest thus tended to mute internal tension. Though a minority of elites in Albany provided leadership for a Leislerian movement,49 they never mustered the level of popular support that was attained in New York City. Leisler thus did not evoke a unified Dutch response in the colony of New York. The Dutch responses to Leisler's Rebellion—the third period of extreme political fluidity in as many decades—illustrated 46Statement of Selyns and two church elders, June 11, 1689, N.Y. Col. Docs., Ill, 588; Corwin, A History of the Reformed Church, Dutch, in the United States (New York, 1894), 91-92; Selyns to Classis of Amsterdam, September 14, 1690, Ecc. Rec, II, 1008; ' Van Rensselaer, History of the City of New York, II, 469; Petition of New York Merchants, May 19,1690, N.Y. Col. Docs., Ill, 749. 47 Schoonmaker, History of Kingston, 85. 48Kenney, "Dutch Patricians in Colonial Albany" New York History, XLIX (July 1968), 249; David Arthur Armour, "The Merchants of Albany, New York, 1686-1760" (Ph.D. diss., Northwestern University, 1965), 8,10-18; Munsell, ed., Annals of Albany, II, 101. 49 Johannes Cuyler, Johannes Wendell, Hans Hendrickse, and Jochim Staats sided with Leisler against Pieter Schuyler, Robert Livingston, Levinus Van Schaick, and Dirck W. Ten Troeck. Kenney, Gansevoorts of Albany, 14-16.