USA > New York > Courts and lawyers of New York; a history, 1609-1925, Volume I > Part 20
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
Cornelis Steenwyck was a schepen of New Amsterdam in 1658 and 1660, was a burgomaster in 1662, and also in 1664,
205
DUTCH MAGISTRATES
when the city was surrendered to the English. He was con- tinued as such in 1665 and 1666, and was again mayor in 1668-70, and again in 1682-83. He was orphan master, an office like that of Surrogate, in 1661, 1662 and 1663. That he was loyal to the Dutch to the end is indicated by his attend- ance, as a delegate from New Amsterdam, at the convention of Dutch towns in April, 1664. Not many members of the Council have as worthy a record as that of Cornelis Steen- wyck, the last Councillor elected.
PROVINCIAL SECRETARIES AND ATTORNEYS-GENERAL.
(Opper Koopman and Schout-Fiscal).
Closely connected with the Council were the chief officers of the Province; the Opper Koopman, who was commissary, bookkeeper, and general secretary of the governor; and the Schout-Fiscal, who was public prosecutor, sheriff, legal ad- visor, customs officer and much else less dignified. They had power in the Council, and, as has been shown, several were members of that court. The secretaries of the province were :
Isaac de Rasieres, appointed July 27, 1626; Jan van Remund, in 1628; Andraes Hudde, in 163 -; Cornelis van Tienhoven, on April 1, 1638; Adriaen Keyser, in 1649; Jacob Kip (acting), in 1650; Cornelis van Tienhoven, in April, 1651 ; Carel van Brugge, in 1652; Cornelis van Ruyven, in Nov., 1653; Matthias Nicolls, in 1664; Nicolas Bayard, on August 20, 1673.
They were the clerks of the Council and courts, and were ex officio members of the Council when a governor felt so disposed. Isaac de Rasieres, Andraes Hudde, Adriaen Keyser and Jan van Remund have already been noticed. The capable but disreputable Cornelis van Tienhoven comes into review a page or two further on. Cornelis van Ruyven served the exacting Stuyvesant with evident satisfaction. Once, after the governors of the South River colonies, Alrichs and Beeck- man, had failed in their negotiations with the Maryland en-
206
COURTS AND LAWYERS
voys, Stuyvesant sent Van Ruyven and Marten Cregier to supercede them. Van Ruyven was Receiver-General (or its equivalent) of the Port of New York from June, 1656, to Sep- tember, 1663, and again held that responsibility under the English in 1668. In September, 1673, Governor Colve sent him to Holland, carrying an urgent appeal for military re- inforcements. From 1669 to 1673 Van Ruyven had been a member of the English Council of the Colony of New York, but when the Dutch returned he, of course, dropped his allegiance to the English.
Nicholas Bayard, who was provincial secretary during the brief administration of Governor Colve, was again Secretary of State in 1688. He became quite prominent, indeed notori- ous in one case. Bayard was Receiver-General of the Port of New York in 1663-64, and one of its four commissioners in 1689. In 1665 he was clerk of courts in New York; was mayor of New York in 1685; and was an influential member of the Council of the Colony of New York for many years, 1685, 1687-88, 1691-98.
Following the collapse of the Andros administration, Bayard was one of the leading figures of an exciting period, to which some reference will be made in a later chapter. He was the most influential of those who almost forced the gov- ernor to sign the death warrant of Leisler, though the latter was Bayard's kin, by marriage. Bayard was one of the most active members of the Council of New York at the time of the dethronement of James II. Brodhead describes him as "a wealthy and respectable merchant, but a hot-headed militia captain, quite unfit, as his own letters show, for important command in a time of emergency" like that of the interregnum between the arrest of Andros and the appointment of another governor, by the incoming royalties, William and Mary. Leisler seized the government, in New York, and held the military forces well in hand, more it seems because of the pos- sibility of attack by the French, with which nation England
207
DUTCH MAGISTRATES
was at war, than of rebellious intent. And in so doing he could hardly be considered a usurper, unless Bradstreet, who arrested Andros, be so classed. Leisler, however, did indis- creet things later, defying the authority of the next and lawful government. For this he was arrested, and, with six of his followers, sentenced to death. All were reprieved, however, until the King's pleasure could be made known. Meanwhile, Governor Sloughter arrived, and called a General Assembly. This was composed mainly of the party Leisler had ousted, and they were disposed to be vindictive. Moreover, Bayard was a member of the Governor's Council. While several pe- titions, begging that Leisler be pardoned, reached the gov- ernor, the party in power demanded his execution. The latter won, the deciding moment being when Governor Sloughter was the guest of Bayard. Quoting Smith's "History of New York": "Tradition says that when no other means could pre- vail with him (Sloughter), a sumptuous feast was prepared, to which Colonel Sloughter was invited. When his reason was drowned in his cups, the entreaties of the company pre- vailed on him to sign the death warrant; and before he recov- ered his senses the prisoners were executed," on May 16, 1691. But Nemesis came to Bayard in one of his own pieces of legislation. The opposition did not pass with Leisler's death, the political parties, White People and Black People (by which the anti-Leisler and Leisler factions were respectively known) becoming increasingly bitter. An attempt by the White People, led by Bayard and others, to oust the opposing party by irregular means in 1701, resulted in the arrest of Bayard, who had made himself liable to the penalties of an act passed in the first Assembly, and said to have been mainly of his own contriving, making it treason "to disturb the peace, good or quiet of the province by force of arms, or otherwise." He was found guilty, and may have lost his head had not the new governor, Lord Cornbury, arrived in the nick of time. Du Simitiere, wrote: "A tradition is preserved that Bayard
208
COURTS AND LAWYERS
was respited from time to time, by the payment of money to Lieutenant-Governor Nanfan. But his children, tired at last of these costly appeals to their filial piety, expostulated with their father for not consenting to be hanged, as the cost of saving him would come to be, they feared, their pecuniary ruin." (See N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 1868).
Thus, it is clear that the last of the provincial secretaries of New Netherland did not prove to be as worthy as some others of the Dutch period.
The Schouts-Fiscal of the Province of New Netherland were :
Jan Lampo, appointed in 1626; Coenraad Notelman, in 1632; Lubertus van Dincklage (Dincklagen), in 1633, Jacques Bentyn, in 1636, Ulrich Lupold, on March 28, 1838; Cornelius van der Huyghens, July 13, 1639, Heinrich van Dyck, on May 22, 1647; Cornelis van Tienhoven, on March 27, 1652, Nicasius de Sille, on June 26, 1656; William Knyff, on December 15, 1673.
Some of these public officials of the direct personnel of the governor-members of the Council, the opper koopman or provincial secretaries, and the schouts-fiscal, or attorneys-gen- eral-were at some time prominent in movements begun by and for the commonalty; but in general they were too close to the governor, and too much subordinated, to be much more than his mouthpieces, though it is recorded that "so far as reports have been handed down, they were, with perhaps a single exception, upright men of capability." The one ex- ception is stated to have been Schout-Fiscal Van Tienhoven, although, despite his "thoroughly bad character," even he might be given some credit, for "none of his contemporaries surpassed him in natural ability for public affairs." De Vries did not have a very good opinion of at least two officials of Van Twiller's staff-Secretary van Remund and Fiscal Notel- man, who boarded the patroon's vessel in 1633, to appraise his furs for duty. Notelman, who was "somewhat of a bouser,"
209
DUTCH MAGISTRATES
clamored for wine, protesting that "he was dry, and would go to the cabin." Both officials were finally sent ashore assured that De Vries was "astonished that the West India Company should send such fools to the colonies, who knew nothing but how to drink themselves drunk." Van Tienhoven was notori- ous in this respect; yet he cannot possibly be called a fool. He was described as "cautious, subtle, intelligent and sharp- witted"; "expert in dissimulation"; "gives everyone who has business with him . . . good answers"; but in the same "Representation" are made known many of his faults.4 Van Tienhoven, in 1633, came out to New Amsterdam as a book- keeper, in the West India Company's service. In 1638 he was holding the two offices of opper koopman and schout-fiscal, at a salary of about $250 a year, plus the fees of his legal office. His subtlety of mind, and, it would seem, elasticity of con- science, brought him favor with both Kieft and Stuyvesant; hence he may be deemed to have been a capable official. Indeed, but ultimately "his impure private life and his ques-
4. The Secretary, Cornelis van Tienhoven, comes next. Of this man very much could be said, and more than we are able, but we will select here and there a little for the sake of brevity. He is cautious, subtle, in- telligent and sharpwitted-good gifts when they are well used. He is one of those who have been longest in the country, and every circumstance is well known to him, in regard both to the Christians and the Indians. With the Indians. moreover, he runs about the same as an Indian, with a little covering, and a small patch in front, from lust after the prostitutes, to whom he has always been mightily inclined, and with whom he has had so much to do that no punishment or threats of the Director can drive him from them. He is extremely expert in dissimulation. He appears to all to be asleep, but it is in order to bite, and shows externally the most friendship toward those whom he most hates. He gives everyone who has any business with him-which scarcely no one can avoid-good answers and promises of assist- ance, yet rarely helps anybody; but twists continually and shuffles from one side to the other. Except to his friends-the priests-he is in his words and conduct loose, false, deceitful and given to lying, promising every one, and when it comes to perform, never at home. ... The whole country, save the Director and his party, cries out against him bitterly, as a villain, mur- derer and traitor, who must leave the country .- "Representation of New Netherland," see Collections of the New York Historical Society, second series, Vol. II, 306.
C.&L .- 14
210
COURTS AND LAWYERS
tionable public conduct compelled the West India Company to order Governor Stuyvesant to remove him from office immediately." This happened in 1655. "He disappeared from New Amsterdam overnight, and, as his hat and cane were discovered on the shore of the bay, it was believed by some that he had committed suicide, but there has always been a suspicion that he decamped from the country, carry- ing with him some proceeds of his dishonesty."
A man of far different type was his successor, Nicasius de Sille, scion of a distinguished Belgic-Dutch family. He was well educated, was considered in Holland to be "an expert and able statesman," a man "well versed in the law," and moreover, "acquainted with military affairs, and otherwise qualified for public service." The College of Nineteen dele- gates of the West India Company in Holland commissioned him, in July, 1653, as "First Counsellor" to the Director- General of New Netherland. He brought high credentials5 to New Amsterdam, and was gladly admitted into Stuyve- sant's official family. De Sille was an efficient aide of the governor in the military expedition against New Sweden, and after Van Tienhoven was dismissed as schout-fiscal, De Sille was the official best fitted to bring the office into good standing again. The burgomasters and schepens of New Amsterdam seized the opportunity that presented itself when
5. We have deemed it advisable, for the better administration of New Netherland, to strengthen your Council with another expert and able statesman ; and whereas Nicasius de Sille, the bearer of these open letters, did apply to us for this appointment, we have, trusting in the good reports of his character and confiding in his talents, appointed him First Counsellor to the Director, to reside as such at Fort Amsterdam, and deliberate with you on all affairs relating to war, police and national force; to keep in- violate all alliances of friendship and commerce, and, if feasible, to increase these ; to assist in the administration of justice, criminal as well as civil, and, further, to advise you in all events and occurrences which may be brought forward. We address this to your Honors that you might be informed of this our intention, and to have this Nicasius de Sille acknowledged and respected by all the inhabitants, as, in our opinion, the service of the Com- pany shall hereby be promoted .- Quoted in "History of New Netherland," by O'Callaghan, Vol. II, 236.
2II
DUTCH MAGISTRATES
Van Tienhoven disappeared by petitioning the governor to separate the offices of schout-fiscal and city schout; but their arguments lost force when De Sille was appointed to both. He relinquished the city office in 1657, but continued as schout-fiscal and also as a member of the Council, or highest court, until the English took possession. From 1657 he was interested in establishing the town of New Utrecht, of which he was one of the nineteen first settlers. He acted as schout of that town, and was the secretary of the "five Dutch towns" in 1674. He had literary talent; "was one of the few poets of New Amsterdam who left examples of their work"; and wrote the "History of the First Beginning of the Town of New Utrecht."
Stuyvesant had the assistance of another learned counsellor, Lubertus van Dincklagen, "a man of superior education, a doctor of laws, and an able and accomplished jurist." He had been schout-fiscal under Van Twiller, and was the most capable government official in New Netherland, probably, in the first years of Stuyvesant's administration. Van Dinck- lagen was appointed as Vice-Director-General, the first to hold that office, his commission as such coming direct from Hol- land. By virtue of this office Van Dincklagen was the presi- dent of the Council, taking over authority that had formerly been vested in the governor. The former was a man of high character, and was sympathetic with the movement initiated by the Board of Nine Men, in 1649, to demand representative government. Indeed, he abetted the remonstrants in their appeals to Holland, and would not 'be a party to some of the arbitrary actions of the vindictive Stuyvesant. Especially, he sympathized with Patroon Melyn, who was shamefully persecuted by the governor in 1650. Stuyvesant would not brook opposition, and when the moment was opportune, was wont to wield his rod of office with savage vigor. After he had disposed of Melyn, he dealt with Van Dincklagen. In February, 1651, he appeared in the Council Chamber at the
212
COURTS AND LAWYERS
head of a file of soldiers, who, at his command, expelled Vice- Director Van Dincklagen from the chamber. Van Dinck- lagen was imprisoned for some days, and dismissed from all offices, Stuyvesant taking no heed of the fact that the Vice- Director's commission had come direct from Holland. Upon release, Dr. Van Dincklagen fled to Staten Island, fearing that the Governor might next demand his life. He took refuge with Melyn, who had fortified his manor. There they were both safe for a while. Van Dincklagen appealed to Hol- land, and Stuyvesant was promptly commanded to reinstate him.6 It seems, however, that he failed to do so, or, if he did so, that Van Dincklagen would not accept reinstatement; for the latter does not again come into official records of the Council. Apparently Van Dincklagen was of somewhat timid disposition, and for long had been reluctant to rouse the ire of the choleric Stuyvesant.7
Another of the official family of Stuyvesant was destined to go out of favor with Van Dincklagen, and for the same
6. But the domineering governor met his match this time. Van Dinck- lagen was held in high esteem by the authorities in Holland, alike as a man and as a jurist. Orders promptly came to Stuyvesant before the close of the year to reinstate him in office, but, meantime, he had moved to Staten Island, and he does not appear to have again participated in the deliberations of the Council .- Chester's "Legal and Judicial History of New York," Vol. I, II2.
7. The Vice-Director, Lubbert van Dincklagen, has for a long time on various occasions shown great dissatisfaction about many different matters, an has protested against the Director and his appointed Councillors, but only lately, and after some others of the chief officers had done so. He was, before this, so influenced by fear, that he durst venture to say nothing against the Director, but let many things pass by and submitted to them. He declared afterwards that he had great objections to them, because they were not just, but he kept silence for the sake of peace, as the Director had said in the Council, that he would treat him worse than Wouter van Twiller had ever done, if he were not willing to conform to his wishes. This man then is over-ruled .- "Representation of New Netherland," see Collections of the N. Y. Hist. Soc., 2nd series, Vol. II, 305.
(Van Twiller's administration was marked by drunkenness in him and most of his officials. Bryant writes as follows : "It was not to be wondered at that an administration conducted in so slipshod and absurd a fashion should receive the sharp censure of the few capable men about the gov- ernor; and it was through Van Twiller's treatment of one of these, Van
213
DUTCH MAGISTRATES
reason. Hendrick van Dyck, who had come out with Stuyve- sant in 1647, or in 1646, when he was commissioned as schout- fiscal, was also won to the popular movement. The Board of Nine Men referred somewhat favorably to him in their Remon- strance in 16498 ; and Van Dyck supported Van Dincklagen in 1651. They were both detected in the act of drafting another remonstrance, protesting against Stuyvesant's evasion of the States General's Provisional Order of 1650. Van Dyck was able to retain membership in the Council until 1655, but Van Tienhoven was appointed schout-fiscal in his place in 1652.ยบ
Dincklagen, the schout who now occupied Notelman's place, that the gov- ernment was suddenly checked in the midst of its abuses. For Van Dinck- lagen, having ventured to express his contempt too openly, was sent back to Holland, with large arrears of salary unpaid, and in a condition giving a decided right to complain, which he did not hesitate to do. To such purpose did he represent the governor's conduct before the board of Amsterdam directors, that they determined at once upon Van Twiller's recall.")
8. With Melyn, on Staten Island, Van Dincklage, the Vice-Director, also found a refuge from the violence of Stuyvesant. The Vice-Director busied himself in preparing a new protest to the States-General on behalf of the colony, when Stuyvesant ordered that he be expelled from the Council. Van Dincklage refused to be thus disposed of, on the plea that he held his commission not from the Director but from Holland. Stuyvesant arrested him for some days, and he felt that his life was not safe on Manhattan Island. . . . Van Dyck, the fiscal, or attorney-general, who, with Van Dincklage, was detected in drawing up the protest, was excluded from the Council, and his duty reduced to that of a mere scrivener. . . . Finally, he was charged with drunkenness and removed from office. The Secretary, Van Tienhoven, was appointed in his place; the "perjured secretary," wrote Van Dyck, "who returned here contrary to their High Mightinesses' pro- hibition ; a public, notorious, and convicted whoremonger and oath breaker ; a reproach to this country, and the main scourge of both Christians and heathens, with whose sensualities the Director has been always acquainted." "The fault of drunkenness," he adds, "could easily be noticed in me, but not in Van Tienhoven, who has frequently come out of the tavern so full that he could go no further, and was forced to lie down in the gutter."-Albany Records and Holland Documents, quoted by O'Callaghan, Brodhead, and Bryant.
9. There remains, to complete this court-bench the Secretary and the Fiscal, Hendrick Van Dyck, who had been previously an ensign-bearer. Director Stuyvesant had kept him twenty-nine months out of the meetings of the Council for the reason, among others, which his Honor assigned, that he cannot keep secret but make public what is there resolved. He also frequently declared that he was a villain, a scoundrel, a thief and the like. All this is well known to the Fiscal, who does not against him take the right cause, and in our judgment it is not advisable for him to do so; for
214
COURTS AND LAWYERS
Van Dyck opposed Stuyvesant until the end, and seems to have been of a more resolute type than Van Dincklagen; he had seen service in Indian warfare in 1642 and 1644, during the administration of Kieft.
Cornelis van der Huygens, who was schout-fiscal during the greater part of Kieft's administration, left the province with that governor, and was drowned when their ship was wrecked off the coast of Wales.
the Director is utterly insufferable in word and deed .- Collections of N. Y. Hist. Soc., quoted in Chester's "Legal and Judicial History of N. Y."
9. There was, it seems, a very good reason why Van Dyck should be dismissed from the Council. He had one day in 1655 detected an Indian girl in the act of stealing fruit from his orchard, on his Staten Island farm. He shot her. At that time Stuyvesant was away, and had drawn practically the whole armed strength (600 to 700 men) away, for the reduc- tion of New Sweden. The Indians wished to punish Van Dyck, and the opportune moment was before them. There were other reasons, but the inexcusable action of Van Dyck, angered them, and early one the morning of September 15, 1655, sixty-four canoes brought about 500 warriors to Manhattan Island. They overran New Amsterdam during the day intent" upon finding Van Dyck. For hours the frightened burghers and their wives and children were submitted to insolence and outrage, thinking it more prudent not to resist. At last, at sunset, the Indians agreed to paddle over to Nutten (Governor's) Island, and there await the result of the confer- ence between their chiefs and the magistrates. This evidently was unsat- isfactory, for they soon attacked again. They detected Van Dyck running to the house of a neighbor, Van der Grist. They "brought him down with an arrow in the breast," and tomahawked Captain Van der Grist. Fortu- nately, there was still an organized town guard at Fort Manhattan; and this disciplined force repulsed the Indians, and their canoes were quickly lost to sight in the darkness. However, their war-whoops still carried over the water, and soon there was other evidences that the trouble was not over. The denuded Pavonia settlement was put to the torch, and soon there was nothing standing in Hoboken. The men were killed, and the women and children were taken into captivity. Next the Indians turned upon Staten Island, and the only place of comparative safety was Fort Manhattan until Stuyvesant returned with the troops from New Sweden. By that time most of the settlements had been destroyed, crops, stock and all possessions lost, one hundred settlers had been killed, and eighty men, women and children were in the hands of the Indians. Ransom was de- manded, and was paid, Stuyvesant feeling that moderation was the better procedure. Both sides kept their word, Pennekeck, chief of the Indians of Achkinkeshaky securing from Stuyvesant an ample supply of powder and lead, and duly releasing the Dutch prisoners unhurt. In November, 1655, the Director and Council rendered an opinion as to the trouble, and what should be done to prevent like calamities in the future. The preamble recognizes that the "all too hasty inconsiderateness of some hot-headed in-
215
DUTCH MAGISTRATES
dividuals diverted the Indians," who professed to have been more on the warpath against the Indian tribes of the eastern end of Long Island than against any Dutchman, but the Council seemed to have Van Dyck well in mind. Again, when, in 1660, the Indian chiefs considered terms of peace and amity with the Director-General and Council at the Stadt Huys, the fourth clause agreed upon was as follows :
"That henceforth no war should be commenced for any private action, but if a Dutchman should happen to kill an Indian he shall again be pun- ished with death, and if an Indian happened to kill a Dutchman he should be delivered to the Dutch and also be punished with death."
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.