USA > New York > Civil List and Constitutional History of the Colony and State of New York > Part 8
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101
Gravesend.
ficorge Baxter. James Hubbard.
Flushing. John Hicks, Tobias Frak's. Newtown. Robert Coe, Thomas Hazard. DECEMBER, 1653.
Flatbush. Thomas Swartwont, Jan Strycker.
JULY, 1663. Var Amsterdam, Pant L. van der Grist, Jacob Strycker.
Thomas Spveer. Elb'rt Elb'rtsen(Stooth'f) Brooklyn. Frederick Lubbertsen, Panhuis van der Beecg. Platlands. Adrian Hegeman. Elb'rt Mbert sim( tooth'); Pieter Chacon, Roclol MartensenSchenck Brooklyn. William Bredenbent, Albert Cornelissen Wan- tenaar.
Flatlands. Sinon Jansen, Roelof Martensen.
Gruessen. William Wilkins, Charles Morgan. Brooklyn. Frederick Lubbertsen, Peter Pietersen van Nes. Flatbush John Sirveker. Hendrick Jorisen. Nam Bricht. Rutger Joostell, Jacob Pietersen. APRIL, 1664.
Bushwick. Peter Jansen de Witt, Barent Joosten.
FEBRUARY, 1664. Rensselaersigek. Jeremias van Rensselaer (president. ) Direk van Schelluyne. Vino Amsterdam. Cornelis Steenwyck, Jacob Bancker.
Fort Orange. Jan Verbeeck, Gerrit Slechtenhorst.
1
1 See pages 37-41.
2 See page 11.
3 See page 15.
4 See pages 45-16.
Tennis Gysbertsen Bo- Haert, Thomas Verdonek. Flatbush. Heintrick Jorissen, William Jacobsen Boerum, van Jan Suedicker. Nom Utrecht. Jacob Pietersell, Balthazar Voschi, Francis de Bruyn.
New Amsterdam. Arent van Hattem, Martin Cregier, Pant L. van der Girist, Wilham Beeckman. Peter Wolphertsen V.IL Couwenhoven.
Gravesend. George Baxter, James Hubbard. Flushing. John Hicks, Tobias Peaks. Varotown. Robert Cor, Thomas Hazard. Hempstead. William Wasborn, John Seaman.
64
PROPRIETARY GOVERNMENTS.
Wiltwyck. Thomas Chambers, Gysbert van Imbroch.
Frederick Lubbertzen.
New Utrecht. Jacqnes Cortelleau, Younker Fosse.
Huntington.
Bushwick. John Stealman, Gisbert Tunis.
Haerlem.
Daniel Terneur,
Johannis Verveelen.
Easthampton.
Oyster Bay. Mathias Harvey, John Underhill.
MARCH, 1674.
Staten Island.
David de Murest.
Pierre Billou.
Flatbush.
Daniel Lane.
Long Island.
Brooklyn.
William Bredenbent, Albert Cornelissen Wan- tenaar.
Flatbush.
Jan Strycker,
William Guilliamsen
Flatlands.
Elbert Elbertsen Stoothof Wert Stevensen van
Voorhees.
James Hubbard.
Now Utrecht.
Hempstead.
David Jochemsen,
John Hicks, Robert Jackson.
Easthampton.
Cornelis Breckman.
Bushwick.
Huntington.
Southampton.
Gysbert Teunisen Bogaert.
Bergen.
Jamaica.
John Jessup, Joseph Reyner. Southhold.
New Utrecht.
Engelbert Steenhuysen, Herman Smeeman,
Thomas Benedlet, Daniel Denton.
Thomas Hutchinson, Isaac Arnold.
MARCH, 1665. Brooklyn.
Newtown. Richard Betts, John Coe.
Brookharen. Richard Woodhull, Andrew Miller:
John Evertsen,
DUTCHI AND ENGLISH DIFFICULTIES.
THE Colony of Plymouth was planted in 1620, under a patent, issued by King James I. In 1631, the Earl of Arundel, Presi- dent of the Plymouth Company, granted to Robert, Earl of War- wick, the country from the Narragansetts along the shore, forty leagues, and westward to the Pacific Ocean. Connecticut river, how- ever, after its discovery by Block in 1614, was periodically and exclu- sively visited by Dutch traders, for many years. In 1632, the arms of the States General were erected at the mouth of the river, at a spot called Kievit's Hoeck (now Saybrook), purchased from the natives for the West India Company. In 1633, Director Van Twiller purchased an extensive and beautiful table land, called the Connittekock, lying on the west bank of the river some sixty miles from its mouth. The purchase was concluded June 8. The price paid was " one piece of duffels, 27 ells long, six axes, six kettles, eighteen knives, one sword blade, one shears and some toys." The Commissioners were Jacob Van Curler, Frederick Luffert- sen, Gillis Pietero, Claus Jans Ruyter, Domingo Dios, Barent Jacobz Cool and Pieter Lowrensen. Upon this table land a trading
1
1 Represented the Dutch inhabitants of Flushing, Jamaica, Newtown and Hempstead.
Nee Orange. Burgomasters.
John Stryker, Hendrick Yorissen.
Southampton.
John Howell,
Flatlands.
Elbert Elbertsen, Roeloffe Martens.
Thomas Topping. Southold.
Brooklyn. Teunis Gysbertsen Bo- gaert.
Flushing. Richard Cornhill, Elias Doughty.
Gravesend.
Edward Jessup, John Quinby.
Jeronimus Rapalie. Flatlands. Roelof Martensen Schenck Court Stevensen Van
Voorhees.
John Bowne.
SEPTEMBER, 1673.
Jan Strycker. Anke Jansen.
Thomas James. Bushwick. Joost Kockuyt,
Jan van ('leef,
John Ketchant, Jonas Wood.
Hendrick Barentsen Smx
Hendrick Mattysen Smack. Cryn Jansen.
Bergen. Claes Barentse, Caspar Steynmits.
Thomas Baker, John Stratton.
Natalcot.
Roger Barton,
Jacob Strycker, Francis Bloodgood. 1
William Wells, John Youngs.
Westchester.
Flutbush.
Isaac Plaît, Thomas Skidmore.
65
HARTFORD BOUNDARY TREATY.
post was established, called "The House of Good Hope." The Governor of Massachusetts' Bay speedily protested against this acquisition, as an encroachment upon English rights. Director Van Twiller responded, under date of October 4, 1633, claiming right- fulness of possession by purchase. Meantime, the colony of Ply- month sent out an expedition, which landed about a mile above Good Hope (Hartford) and the English thereafter rapidly settled at varions points in Connectient and upon Long island, which was also claimed under patent from Earl Stirling. These questions devolved upon Director Stuyvesant to adjust. He accordingly appointed two Boundary Commissioners, Thomas Willett, a merchant of Plymouth, and George Baxter, employed by Stuyvesant as his Secretary. The Commission fixed the boundary line on Long island, from the westernmost part of Oyster Bay straight to the sea; on the main- land, the point of departure was on the west side of Greenwich Bay, abont four miles from Stamford, the line to run thence up into the country twenty miles, provided it did not come within ten miles of the North river. This was called the Hartford Boundary Treaty of 1650. The States General delayed its confirmation so long as to lose its benefits; and then it was nullified by Connecticut. The English pressed hard upon the Dutch in Westchester, while Massa- chusetts, under the claim that her patent extended indefinitely westward, proposed to settle a colony on the upper waters of the Hudson, and insisted upon the right to navigate the river in order to reach her alleged possessions. Fort Good Hope was sequestered by the General Court of Hartford, by an act passed April 6, 1654.
After the restoration of Charles II, John Winthrop the younger was sent by the General Court of Hartford as the agent of that colony to England, with instructions to procure a new charter from the king. New letters patent were accordingly issued in April, 1662, confirming the boundaries of the original patent, with enlarged privileges. It gave to the patentees one hundred and twenty miles from the Narragansett river along the coast, " toward the south-west. west and by south," and from that line westward in its full breadth to the South Sea (the Pacific Ocean). The new patent covered not only Long island but all northern New Netherland. For two years Stuyvesant resisted these pretensions to the best of his ability, but was finally glad to accept of a compromise, to the effect that there should be mutual forbearance, the Dutch and English towns to be free respectively from interference from either government. This left the English in undisturbed possession of all they had gained by
9
66
CAPTURE OF NEW AMSTERDAM.
their aggressions. Under the new charter, the colony of Connecti- ent bonght of the Indians all the country lying between Westchester and the North river, including Spuyten Dnyvil creek, which had been purchased by the Dutch fifteen years before.
Charles II, on the 12th of March, 1664, conveyed by patent to his brother James, Duke of York and Albany, all that portion of the present State of Maine included between the rivers St. Croix and Kennebec ; also, Nantucket, Martha's Vineyard and Long island ; together with all the land from the west side of the Con- nectient river to the east side of Delaware bay. The next month a fleet of four ships, with a force of three or four hundred men, under the command of Colonel Richard Nicolls, as the lieutenant-governor of the duke, sailed for New England. With Nicolls were joined as commissioners, Sir Robert Carr, Sir George Cartwright and Samuel Maverick, with extraordinary powers for settling all difficulties in the New England colonies, as well as to take possession of the Dutch province and reduce its inhabitants to obedience. The commission- ers arrived in Boston late in July, and there was a delay of nearly a month before the expedition sailed for New Amsterdam. Director Stuyvesant was absent at Fort Orange when the English flag-ship sailed up the bay. He returned as quickly as possible, and on Friday, the 29th, sent a deputation to Nicolls to demand his purpose. With all his energy and daring, however, he could not disguise the defenseless condition of New Amsterdam. There was no alter- native but surrender,1 which he did on the 8th of September, 1664. Governor Nicolls proceeded to organize civil government,2 and to that end called a convention at Hempstead3 in March, 1665.
On the 7th of August, 1673, a Dutch fleet of twenty-three ships, being in need of wood and water, anchored in the outer bay of New York, just below Staten island. The fleet was under command of Commodores Cornelius Evertsen and Jacob Benckes. The Dutch inhabitants gladly conveyed to them intelligence of the defenseless condition of the island. The port was then in command of John Manning, captain of an independent company. On the 9th, he communicated with the officers of the fleet, proposing to surrender; whereupon the ship sailed up to the harbor, moored under the fort, landed their crew, and entered the garrison, without giving or re- ceiving a shot. For this act of surrendering to commanders only accidentally within the waters of the province, Manning was subse- quently tried and condenmed.
1 See pages 44, 45.
2 See pages 45-48.
3 See pages 63, 64.
PLATE B
OS
MALAY .PENS
0
U
F
DIST
67
DUKE OF YORK'S GOVERNMENT.
The Commodores, on the 12th of August, organized a Council of War consisting of Captains Anthony Colve, Nicholas Boes and Abraham Ferd. Van Zyll. The following month, Captain Colve was appointed temporary Governor, and the fleet proceeded to its destination. The old official titles were restored amid popular re- joicing. The joy of the inhabitants was short, however. Colve was restoring the Dutch system as rapidly as possible, when his government was brought to an abrupt end. New Netherland was conceded to the English by the peace of Westminster, proclaimed March 6, 1674, and a new patent was issued to the Duke of York in June. On the 11th of July, Colve officially announced, at the Stadt Huys, that he must surrender the province on a duly author- ized demand. Articles of capitulation were signed September 7; Fort Orange surrendered October 5, and was named Albany, and the Dutch and Swedes on South river capitulated October 12. On the 10th of November, Colve formally gave " New Netherlands and dependencies " over to "Governor Major Edmund Andros, on behalf of Ilis Brittanie Majesty," and the province was fully restored to English rule.
Governor Andros asserted his authority from the Connecticut to the Delaware, and the territorial bounds of the colony continued to be thereafter a subject of contention with its neighbors. His con- duct of the government created great dissatisfaction.1
GOVERNOR DONGAN'S ASSEMBLY.
Governor Dongan arrived in August, 1683, and on the 13th of September ordered the election of a General Assembly, consisting of fourteen Representatives, apportioned as follows : Long island, two; Staten Island, one ; Esopus, two ; Albany and Rensselaer's colony, two; Schenectady, one ; Pemaquid and dependencies, one ; Martha's Vineyard, Nantucket, Elizabeth and other adjacent islands, one; Westchester, four, and New York, four. The Assembly thus elected met at Fort James, New York, October 17, 1683. The death of the King raised a doubt in the mind of Governor Dongan, as to the legal existence of the Assembly. He therefore issued writs for the election of a new one. The records being lost,? the names of the following members, only, can be given :
FIRST ASSEMBLY - First Session .- Cornwall - Gyles Goddard. Westchester - Thomas Hunt, Sen. John Palmer, Richard Ponton, William Richardson. Speaker- Matthias Nicolls. Clerk - John Spragg. Second Session. - October 21-29, 1684. Speaker - Matthias Nicolls ; Clerk - Robert Hammond.
SECOND ASSEMBLY. Convened October 20, 1635. Speaker - William Phuhorne ; Clerk - Robert Ham- Bond.
1 See page 49.
2 See pages 49-52 ; also, " Judicial Department."
68
ENGLISH JURISDICTION.
This Assembly adjourned November 3, 1685, to meet September 25, 1686. King James II, however, abolished the General As- sembly June 16, 1686. Intelligence of his action was received in New York September 14, eleven days before the time fixed by the Assembly for its Second Session. Governor Dongan had in the meantime, on the 4th of September, prorogued the Assembly until March 25, 1687. In compliance with the edict of the King, this action was superseded on the 20th of January, 1687, by an order dissolving the General Assembly.
LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR LEISLER'S ASSEMBLY.
Writs for the election of a General Assembly were issued by Lieutenant-Governor Leisler, after his accession to power in 1689. Every county, except Suffolk, chose representatives. This Assembly held two sessions, one in April and the other in October, 1690.
LEISLER'S ASSEMBLY.
MEMBERS.
TOWNS.
MEMBERS.
TOWNS.
John Spratt, Speaker
New York.
Cornelius Pluvier. Robert Walters
New York.
New York.
William Beekman
New York.
Jan Janse Bleecker.
Albany.
Thomas Browne
Westchester.
Jan Janse Schermerhorn
Schenectady.
Kings.
Nathaniel Pearsall. None ....
Queens. Suffolk. Ulster.
ENGLISHI JURISDICTION.
The Dutch rested their title to New Netherland on the fact that they were the original purchasers from the Indians, and upon the rights acquired by treaties with the Long Island Indians, the River Indians and the Iroquois nation or confederated republic of Indians, whose rule extended far and wide over the continent, and who were the allies of England. The Duke of York's title was not deemed perfect, until the issue of the new patent in 1674, conveying sub- stantially the lands acquired by the peace of Westminster; and the English Governors claimed jurisdiction co-extensive with the origi- nal claims of New Netherland. In subsequent voluminous corre- spondence concerning the conflicting rights of French and English, the latter distinctly placed their claims upon these grounds, and not upon the shadowy and vague title of discovery, or the still more absurd point that Hendrick Hudson was a native Englishman. The English, therefore, succeeded to the Dutch jurisdiction, and questions of territorial boundaries between other provinces, as well as ques- tions of sovereignty with the French, were treated from this stand- point. The Dutch laws, not inconsistent with the laws of England, continued to be the law of the province.
PLATE C
HIB : REX . FIDEI.D.
IACOBVS.11 .D:
RTA
GRATIOR
1.D .G. MAG . BRIT . FRAN
CONSTITUTION OF THE COLONY.
The ancient rights and liberties of all Aryan freemen, with the clear appreciation and affirmation of the sovereignty of the People, constituted the legacy of liberty bequeathed to the colony of New York by the Dutch and English inhabitants of New Netherland. The institutions by which this legacy was to be preserved and this sovereignty made to exeente its will were yet to be developed on our own soil, from the germs transplanted from the old world. This has been an unconscious growth, and we scarcely realized the beau- ties of our construction, until they flashed upon us, revealing rather the workmanship of a superior intelligence moulding the incidents and accidents of history to its purpose, than any design among men. In practical appreciation of the science of govern- ment, however, we have led the world and learned little from others ; while all peoples have come to us to understand the secrets of its philosophy, and profit by its mechanical application.
The English Constitution is governed by precedent. The Crown and the Parliament, from time to time, had conflicts of authority, and as these became settled they entered into the organic law of the land. Precisely this process went on in this Colony. The General Assemblies were engaged in writing the Constitution in accordance with the will of the People; the Governors ondeavored to settle it in accordance with the will of the Crown. This organic growth we will endeavor to trace.
The Charter of Liberties' as passed by the General Assembly in 1691 (May 13) was entitled " An Act declaring what are the Rights and Privileges of their Majesties' Subjects inhabiting within the Province of New York." It was vetoed May 11, 1697, the Lords of Trade, in their adverse report, assigning as a reason that it gave " great and unreasonable privileges " to Members of Assembly, and "contained also several large and doubtful expressions." It was,
1 See pages 49-52, 53.
70
THE LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY.
therefore, recommended that the meaningless Charter of Virginia be transmitted to the General Assembly for enactment, but it was never accepted by that body. The conflict between the Crown and the People had already commenced. Toward the close of 1694, the Assembly perceiving that the taxes and revenne, in about three years, had been nearly £40,000, and that the same were generally misapplied, desired the Governor (Fletcher) to account, which he refused to do, saying that it was the business of the Assembly to raise money and of the Governor and Council to lay it out. The Assembly was dis- solved and a new and more subservient one elected in 1695, which it was declared was " packed " by the Governor.
The spirit of the Royal government is shown in the veto of the Charter of Liberties, and in the commission and instructions to Earl of Bellomont as Governor, the first issued June 18, 1697, and the second dated August 31 following. He was given an absolute negative on the acts of the Assembly and Council, to the end that nothing may be passed dangerous to the prerogatives of the Crown; he had the power to prorogue the Assembly, to institute Courts, to appoint Judges and to disburse the Revenues. Officers were not to be displaced "without good and sufficient cause" in writing to Ilis Majesty. Schoolinasters must be licensed by the Bishop of London. " For as much as great inconveniences may arise by the liberty of printing within the province of New York, you are to provide all necessary orders, that no person keep any press for printing, nor that any book, pamphlet or other matter whatsoever be printed, without your especial leave and consent first obtained." In other words, the Royal government of Great Britain over the province was a Royal despotismn.
The Earl of Bellomont complained to the Lords of Trade, May 13, 1699, that Chief Judge Smith and Attorney-General Graham had given it as their opinion that the King cannot, by law, establish courts of justice by his own authority ; that it must be done by act of Assembly. The question thus raised continued to be a disturbing one.1 Another question which caused some disturbance was the enacting clause. The original and favorite phraseology was, " Be it enacted by His Excellency the Governor and Council, and Representa- tives convened in General Assembly, and by the authority of the same." This was changed in 1703 to read, " Be it enacted, and it is hereby enacted, by his Excellency the Governor, by and with the
1 See Judicial Department.
PLATE D
MARIA LODEI GRA.MAG. BRIT.FRAN
GVLIELMVSHIFT MARIA
Só
T.FRAN .HIB. REX .. REGINA.FID.DEF
71
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
consent of Her Majesty's Council and Representatives of the Colony of New York." In 1704, it was sought to insert the word "advice, " to which the Assembly objected ( June 9). In the Commission to Governor Hunter (October 19, 1709) the style of enacting laws was directed to be, " By the Governor, Council and Assembly," and no other. The words " And it is hereby enacted by authority of the same" were adhered to, however, and in 1748 (Aug. 13) Governor Shirley, of Mass., who had been consulted by Governor Clinton, objected to the phrase, on the ground that while it could not be a " designed encroachment " on the Royal prerogative, yet as it " may have a tendency to accustom the Assemblies to consider their power of passing laws as complete without His Majesty's allowance of them, it should be omitted." This was undoubtedly precisely the reason why the Assembly, from the beginning, insisted on the perfect possession of legislative power by the People, as they had always contended and had finally written their demands in the Charter of Liberties.
Another of the inalienable rights of all freemen was pressed to an issue, and decided early in the history of the colony. In the Governor's instructions, he was required to see that no one preached in the province, except under a license of the Bishop of London, without his (the Governor's) express permission. In 1707, Rev. Francis Makemie, a Presbyterian clergyman, traveling through New York, violated this requirement and was brought before the Gover- nor, to whom he boldly replied : " Your instructions are no law to me." He was indicted, tried and acquitted, the learned Chief Jus- tice (Mompesson) charging the jury that the question was a doubtful one. In 1728, a royal commission was issued to the Bishop of Lon- don conferring on him spiritual and ecclesiastical jurisdiction in all the plantations of America. The effort to make the Church of Eng- land the established church in New York was steadily pressed, but it was as steadily and very successfully resisted.
The Governor's commission 1 contained this paragraph : " You, the said Robert Hunter, with the consent of our said Council and Assein- bly, or the major part of them, respectively, shall have full power and authority to make, constitute and ordain laws, statutes and ordin- ances for the public peace." The supporters of the Royal preroga- tive claimed that the Assembly had no other right to exercise the
1 Dated October 19, 1709,
72 .
STUBBORN AND DISLOYAL ASSEMBLIES.
power of legislation than that conferred by the King's commission, while the opponents of prerogative insisted that the power to legis- late is a natural and indefeasible right of the People, and not a pre- rogative of royalty.
The spirit and determination of the People were clearly manifest in the first Assembly, but any outward rupture was carefully avoided. A revenue bill was passed, limited to two years, and a bill for the quieting and settling the disorders that have lately hap- pened within this province ; another for the establishing and seeur- ing their Majesty's present government against the like disorders for the future, and another for the establishment of Courts of Judi- cature. These bills, or the principles connected therewith and enunciated in the Charter of Liberties, constituted the dividing line between Crown and People during the entire colonial period.
The first Assembly was dissolved and a second chosen in 1692. To this Assembly, the subject of revenue was presented by Gover- Hor Fletcher, as the existing law would expire in the following April. The Assembly passed a bill continuing the revenue for two years, the Council sought to amend by making it five years, and the Governor asked that the revenue be settled on their Majesties for their lives. The Assembly adhered to the original bill and was dissolved, the Governor first scolding them because they had done nothing for their Majesties. " There are none of you," he said, im- patiently, " but what are big with the privilege of Englishmen, and Magna Charta, which is your right." The next Assembly was little better. It passed a bill continuing the revenue for five years, which the Governor was forced to accept. He, however, lectured them for their " stubbornness" in refusing to make it for the lives of their Majesties, and dissolved them.
The fourth Assembly complained of profligacy in expenditures, framed bills for the fron- tier defenses in such a way that the Governor said they took " the military command away " from him, and was finally dissolved, the Council expressing the opinion that " there is no good to be expected from this Assembly." The fifth Assembly, elected in 1695, held several sessions, with but little conflict with the Governor. Thesixth Assembly was berated by Bellomont with a scolding address in May, 1698, and dissolved in June for being " disloyal." The seventh Assembly acted in harmony with the Governor, and was terminated by his death. The eighth Assembly existed through the admin- istration of Lieutenant-Governor Nanfan, and had no political
.
RIGHTS OF THE ASSEMBLY. 73
significance. The ninth Assembly, which was the first under Lord Cornbury, presented a marked contrast to it, however, and gave vigorous expression to popular rights.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.