USA > New York > New York City > Dutch New York (early history of the Dutch in New York) > Part 12
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
142
DUTCH NEW YORK
Turning now to a weaver named Glaunde Germon- pré van Gitts, 1687, we find that the weaver's loom is worth £2 Ios. od .; and in the modest house there are nine linen sheets (£1 7s. od.) and five pillowbeers (£o 3s. 6d.). Six napkins, eight sheets, and fifteen pillowbeers were owned by Derick Clausen in 1686; Dirck Theunissen had nine sheets, nine pillowbeers, and eight napkins in 1691; and twelve tablecloths (£3 15s. od.) and nine dozen napkins (£5 8s. od.) were owned by Nathaniel Sylvester in 1680. In 1679 Dominie Nicholas Van Rensselaer, of Albany, owned twelve pair of sheets, sixteen pillowbeers, and four large ones, and a cloth to hang before a chimney, all worth together twelve beavers.
C
CHAPTER VII
SERVANTS AND SLAVES
S ERVITUDE in New Netherland was not re- garded as demeaning. The mistress and ser- vant were really on a social equality, since the servant was very frequently the daughter of somebody whose station in the community was equal to that of the mistress. In a new country every extra pair of hands was valuable, and when a householder had more children than were required to do the work afforded by his own occupation and his home, he hired them out to others. When the indentures were signed, the chief parental rights passed to the employer. Sometimes the son or daughter took service for a short time only, but more often for a term of years. If the children were not properly treated, the parents or guardians would apply to the court, which seems to have been quick to remedy any real case of abuse, neglect, or cruelty. If the child absented himself or herself from the master, even if only to visit parents, without permission from the master, it constituted a breach of the engagement. Thus, in 1638, when Jan Damen sued Lenaert Arent- sen for breach of his son's indentures, Arentsen was ordered to send his son back whenever he ran away. Again, in 1660, Hendrickje Swartwout sued Pieter- nelle La Montagne for seven months' wages for her daughter, hired by defendant at fifty florins the year. The court decided that the girl should recover only a
I43
144
DUTCH NEW YORK
quarter's wages, because she was at home two days with her parents without the knowledge of her master or mistress.
That a master could not discharge a servant without good and sufficient cause was shown in a case in which the ill-fated Jacob Leisler was defendant; Agnytie Hendricks sued him for a year's wages, amounting to one hundred guilders in seawant and four beavers, because he had discharged her. Mr. Leisler pleaded that inasmuch as Agnytie had consumed almost a whole bottle of preserved strawberries, also biscuit of his; moreover, as it came to his ears that she had two fellows climb over the wall to her whilst he was at church with his wife, and received no good service from her, he would have nothing to do with her. Agnytie denied having Sunday visitors over the gar- den wall, and declared that the children had eaten the preserves. She was consoled for the loss of her place by a quarter's wages, according to agreement. Having blamed the children for the disappearance of the pre- serves, it is a wonder that Agnytie did not lay the loss of the biscuit at the door of the cat. She was not as fertile in excuse as a contemporary of the male sex named Elias Jansen, who, when discharged by Jan de Witt, miller, sued his employer for breach of contract. The miller declared Elias had stolen a pound of candles, whereupon " he gave him for answer that it was not true, and that perhaps a dog had been in the mill and eaten them."
Teunis Cray's wife, 1662, sues Jan Jacobzen for a balance of wages for her son, forty-five guilders in corn and four guilders in seawant; also by balance, one breeches and two pair of stockings sold to him for twenty-four guilders. Defendant has nothing against it but deduction of wages for three weeks when the
VOORHUIS IN THE DOLL'S HOUSE RIJKS MUSEUM, AMSTERDAM
145
SERVANTS AND SLAVES
plaintiff's son left before the expiration of his time. It was proved, however, that he had discharged the boy, and so judgment was given against him.
Masters were responsible for the good behavior of their servants; employer's liability was fully recog- nized by the court. On Nov. 12, 1643, Teunis Nysson sued Peter Colet for injury done to a young animal by Colet's boy ; and the master was fined fifteen guilders, payable when the lad should have served him two months. If the boy should die before that time, dam- ages were to be proportionable.
The servants here were undoubtedly subject to rough treatment on the part of their employers; and it does not appear that an occasional beating was regarded by the court as a valid excuse for breaking the contract. In 1657, when Jochem Wesselsen, a baker, was sued by Jan van Hoesum because the baker's wife, Gertrude Jeronimus, had violently kicked Miss van Hoesum, Wesselsen pleaded that his wife had a perfect right to chastise any girl who was in his service. The court, however, agreed with the father, and fined the irritable Gertrude thirty guilders and costs.
In 1659, " Andries Clazen says that Jan Everzen Bout cut two holes with the tongs in his little daugh- ter's head, in service with him about three weeks ago. Jan answers that it is a stiffnecked thing and will not listen to what is said to her, and through hastiness he flung the tongs after her, but not with a view to in- jure her, - it occurred unintentionally. Clazen says his daughter lay abed some days." Finally Jan had to pay the surgeon's bill, twenty florins damages and ten florins fine.
Caspar Stynmets, 1657, said that his wife's brother served Jan Hendrick nine months, and as the boy was treated harshly and dismissed, he requested that de-
IO
146
DUTCH NEW YORK
fendant be condemned to fit the boy out decently in clothes as he received him, so that he might engage with other persons; demanding a coat, breeches, two shirts, one pair of stockings, and one pair of shoes, and rep- aration for having treated the boy so harshly. Hen- drick said that the boy earned only whippings, but denied having abused him, treating him only as his own child. He also said that he offered the boy a shirt and leather breeches, and could not give him any more. The defendant was condemned to pay thirty- six florins instead of the clothes demanded. The boy was, further, released from service.
Teunis Tomassen sued Barent Gerrisen for 28.15 fl., according to verbal agreement, because his son had worked with defendant. Being sick himself, his wife pressed the case. Gerrisen admitted having taken the boy at eleven florins per month, and pocket money every week, but said the boy was still bound to him for another half year; also he had not done what he was bound to do, for which he was to receive spending money ; therefore no spending money was due. " Plain- tiff replies and says that her husband will have the money for the boy every week, and that he the defend- ant said he will not see the boy at the table. Defendant rejoins and says, that he stated if the plaintiff will have his money every week for the boy, he does not require the boy. Requests that the boy serve out his time, promising to pay him. The Court order the plaintiff to let her boy serve out his time according to agree- ment, on condition that he be paid according to agreement."
Wolfert Webber, 1657, said he hired his son to Claes Pietersen Kos to dwell with and serve him here in this city; " and whereas the defendant employs his son, not here but mostly over at Pavonia and in jour-
147
SERVANTS AND SLAVES
neying to and from that place, where much danger is to be expected both by water as from Indians, etc., of which he has had a sample," demanded that his son should either be employed in the city or sent home; and in case he refuse he declares before God and the " Judge that he, in the capacity of a father, protests that if any misfortune happen his son, either in passing over, or from the Indians or otherwise, he has done his duty and shall avenge himself on him." In reply, Kos said he hired the boy to reside with and serve him " un- conditionally as to his going over, or remaining."
In 1662, the Directors write to Stuyvesant about a child being retained in New Netherland by a creditor as security for a debt due by the mother. They order it to be released and sent to Holland.
In the wills we frequently find fathers disposing of the future of their children till they come of age. Thus, in 1680, Cornelis van Bursum leaves "the proper portion of a child to my daughter, Anna; and my wife Sarah is to maintain my daughter Anna de- cently and cause her being taught reading and writing and a trade by which she may live." Balthazar de Hart, 1672, bequeaths " unto his natural son Matthias 2000 guilders . . . and he is to have maintenance with reasonable vittles and clothes, and likewise to be teached to read and write and in a trade also that thereby he may help himself." John Leggatt, 1679, desires his son to be bred up to the sea for his livelihood. Daniel Pearsall, 1702, devises "concerning my three little daughters, my wife disposed of two of them to their two sisters before she died, and the third, Margery, I do likewise dispose of to my two eldest daughters, desiring that as soon as it is convenient, she may learn the trade of a tailor."
In at least one case we find that a parent would
148
DUTCH NEW YORK
rather entrust his children to the tender mercies of total strangers than of his own or his wife's relatives. For example, Francis Yates, 1682, wills " to Mr Wm. Richardson my five children, Mary, John, Dinah, Jona- than, and Dorothy, for him to keep so many of them as he sees fit. The rest to be put out to whom he thinks fit, but not to any of my own kindred, or kindred of my wife."
From two or three of the wills both in New Amster- dam and Fort Orange we gather that parents were prejudiced against the officially appointed Orphan Masters. For example, Stoeffel Abeel and his wife Heeltie in their joint will, 1678, exclude the Lords Or- phan Masters from all management and do not desire them to meddle with the government of the children.
Judging from some of the wills, fathers were not always entirely satisfied that their widows would treat the children with the kindness naturally to be ex- pected from a parent, or, on the other hand, that sons would be invariably dutiful and affectionate to their mothers. In some cases, at least, the father provided special inducements for mother and children to dwell together in unity. For example, Nathaniel Sylvester, 1698, desires his wife to take care of the children, and they are to be dutiful to her. Richard Terry, 1696, leaves all his children at his wife's command to be educated and brought up " both for the good of their souls and bodies 'till of age." Abraham Jossling, 1669, desires his son Henry to be kind to his brothers, and take one of them to himself to learn his trade, as he had promised. "And Good Wife I would not have you remain where you are with any of my chil- dren, but my desire is that my children may be put out to trades where they are."
Captain Sylvester Salisbury, 1679, leaves all to his
149
SERVANTS AND SLAVES
wife " with this proviso and restriction, viz. to bring up the children in good education and learning, and further to do what is fitting for good and religious parents to do for their children." Cornelis Van Hoorn's children, 1692, are to be instructed in an art or trade by which they may live. Henry Crevenraedt, 1699, hopes that his wife " will be kind to the children and not rong them, but doe by them as she will an- swer to God Almighty." On the other hand, Jasper Smith, 1695, wills that " my son John be careful and diligent to seeke to please his mother and goe forth in her business and not grieve her." In that case he is to have fio more than the others; but if " he bee care- less and disobedient " he is to have fio less.
As the passenger lists of the ships show, many of the settlers brought servants with them who were un- der contract to work for their masters for a certain number of years for stated wages, and until they had earned their passage money. When their time was up, the Company would allot them a city lot for build- ing a house, and land for farming, on various terms, as we have already seen.
It was a serious offense to lure a servant away from his master; but so many servants did break their agreements and seek other service that stringent legis- lation was required. The Company promised not to take from the service of the Patroons any man or woman, son or daughter, manservant or maidservant, and though they desired the same they would not be received, much less allowed to leave their Patroons and go into the service of another.
In 1640, it was declared that so many servants daily ran away that the corn and tobacco were rotting in the fields, and the harvest was at a standstill. Both farm and house servants therefore were ordered faith-
150
DUTCH NEW YORK
fully to serve out their time on pain of making good all losses sustained by their masters, and serving double the time they might lose. The penalty for har- boring runaways was fifty guilders, to be equally divided between the Fiscal, the New Church, and the Informer. In 1658, also, it was ordered not to de- bauch or incite any person's servants, or to harbor them, or fugitives, or strangers, longer than twenty- four hours.
In 1648, the authorities having daily observed that some of the inhabitants harbor in their homes and dwellings the Company's servants and other domestics, when they run away from their lords and masters, also of those who come hither from abroad, whereby many servants when they are dissatisfied with their employ- ment are afforded a means and opportunity to run away, therefore anybody who lodges or boards such runaways for more than twenty-four hours at the most is to be fined one hundred and fifty florins, to be paid to whomsoever will make the complaint. In 1662, a runaway servant, "a Turk," was hanged and after- wards beheaded, and his head was set on a stake at New Amstel, for resisting arrest. .
In 1654, the West India Company considerately thought of a scheme for "taking a burden from the Almshouse of this city and helping to increase the population of New Netherland." They therefore wrote to Stuyvesant : " We recommend you most seriously to take good care of the boys and girls sent from the Orphan Asylum and place them with good masters."
On examining the ages of the children who arrived in 1655 we must confess that the Amsterdam Alms- house of the day could not be accused of turning the inmates out into the world before they were of an age to shift for themselves, the girls especially.
BEDROOM, DOLL'S HOUSE RIJKS MUSEUM, AMSTERDAM
SERVANTS AND SLAVES
15I
Girls
Age
Boys
Age
Tryntje Peters
23
Guillaume Roelant
17
Tryntje Jans
22
Francis Leigh
I7
Jannitje Dircx
19
Mathys Coenratsen
I6
Lysbet Jans
I8
Hendrik Thomasen
I4
Dieuwer Volcherts
I6
Peter Stoffelsen
13
Annitje Pieters
17
Lysbet Gerrits
I6
Jan Hendricksen
I2
Debora Jans
15
Marritje Hendrik
I6
Catalyntje Jans
I3
Otto Jansen
13
If we follow the career of these waifs who were sent away to relieve the congestion of home charity, we shall find that a fair proportion of them followed the example of the early pastors and schoolmasters in developing into undesirable citizens. The first to be presented at court was Trintje Pieters, the eldest of all, who had scarcely landed before being sued (Aug. 23, 1655) by Heyltie 't Havens for insult. The winter had hardly set in before the sixteen-year-old maiden, Marretie Hendrick, asked legal aid to settle a dispute between herself and her master, Captain Francis Fyn, to whom she had been indentured, " regarding a dif- ference about service rendered and agreement made thereon." The court appointed Sieurs Paulus Leen- dert van Grift and Govert Loockermans to reconcile the parties. Eight years later the young lady was sued for slander by Pietertje Jans. Tryntje Jans seems to have been comparatively quiescent for six years. At the age of twenty-eight, however, she said disagreeable things about Teuntje Jurriaans, who haled her into court, where she was ordered to prove or eat her words. In the same year, 1661, we learn from a lawsuit that Lysbet Jansen, now twenty-four years of age, was the widow of Dancker Cornelissen.
The youngest of the consignment, Catalyntje Jans, had to wait fifteen years before she found a husband.
152
DUTCH NEW YORK
On June 28, 1670, her banns of marriage with Claes Cornelissen, of Schoonhoven, are recorded. Her senior by three years, Marritje Hendrik, had to be content with a widower, in 1671, when her banns were pub- lished. Barent Gerritsen von Swol, widower of Grietie Dirx, was the happy bridegroom.
Of the boys, Hendrick Thomassen and Francis Leigh (1674) make countercharges of theft and vio- lence. On Oct. 30, 1666, Otto Jansen was prosecuted for stealing and selling at Albany a horse. He declared that " Jan Hendricksen had sett him uppon it wch beinge alledged to the said Jan Hendrickx he denyed the same." Otto " confessed in open court that he hath stollen this Summer in New England, twoe horses." Later he became a soldier. In 1664, he petitions to have surgeon Van Imburg's bill paid, for services during illness contracted during the Esopus Campaign.
The lot of the indentured servant was hard enough, but that of the negro slave was harder still. After a certain number of years the white servant became his own master, and, as we have seen, had land allotted for cultivation and animals to stock it, part of the produce and increase of which paid the annual rent. The negro slave, however, had no assurance that he would ever be free, although for good conduct and faithful ser- vice manumission was not an uncommon occurrence, even during the owner's lifetime; and the wills show that the masters frequently followed the ancient cus- tom of freeing slaves at their own demise. The terms in which the slaves are referred to often show that there was real attachment between master or mistress and slave. Among many examples the fol- lowing may be mentioned. Roger Rugg bequeaths to his friend, Mr. Rider, "My negro boy, Mixon. Be kind to him for my sake." William Leath leaves " to
153
SERVANTS AND SLAVES
my servant, Wan, the Spanish Indian boy, now living with me, his freedom, provided he serves my wife seven years." Anna Medford frees her negro man, Frans, on account of his true services and leaves him a small parcel of ground. Daniel Sayre desires that his negro woman may have liberty to choose her master when she is sold. Jan Francisco was freed at the re- quest of Dominie Megapolensis ( 1646) " on account of his long and faithful services." In return for the boon, however, he was to pay the Company ten schepels of wheat a year. Nathaniel Pearsall provides: "If my negro, Francis, shall grow unruly, my son, Thomas, may sell him. . .. If he is sold, the produce of him shall go to my five daughters." John Ramsden wills that his negro man, John, is to be freed after four years and " he is to have one good suit of clothes, one cow, one horse, and whatsoever else my wife shall see fit."
Negroes did not always earn the approbation of their owners. In 1658, the Fiscal is ordered to sell a man and woman, "the one being lazy and the other a thief."
Negro labor was very important in developing New Amsterdam. Many of the rich merchants and settlers owned small colonies of them. Frederick Philipse, for instance, owned forty. In 1700, more than one fourth of the population of New York consisted of negroes. The Thirtieth Article of the " Freedoms and Exemp- tions " (1629) stated that the Company would use their endeavors to supply the colonists with as many blacks as they conveniently could.
The West India Company obtained its own negroes from the Spanish Main; but till the middle of the century there was no direct traffic in the slaves by the individual settlers. The need of cheap labor was,
154
DUTCH NEW YORK
however, greatly felt; and on Jan. 20, 1648, the Council resolved to import negroes from Angola. On April II, the Directors wrote to Stuyvesant approv- ing: " Such as have completed their trade in Angola may carry negroes to your place to be employed in the cultivation of the soil."
It would seem that the Company's negroes had to endure the hardest kind of servitude: many of the more serious crimes committed by the whites were punishable by working in chains with the negroes. For example, on June 6, 1644, Michel Christoffelsen pleaded guilty of stabbing some of the Company's negroes and was sentenced to twelve months' hard labor in chains with the Company's negroes.
The Company's negroes were apparently a savage lot in the early days. On Jan. 17, 1841, Manuel de Gerrit, the Giant, and eight of the Company's other negroes pleaded guilty to having killed Jan Premero, another negro. It would have been too expensive to execute the whole batch, - negroes were too valua- ble in the little settlement, - so the prisoners were sentenced to draw lots to determine who should suffer death; whereupon, " by God's Providence the lot fell on ' the Giant,' " who was condemned to be hanged, as an example to all such malefactors. It would appear that Manuel was too valuable to be sacrificed, for the proceedings at the gallows look decidedly suspicious. The court minute sets forth that the hangman turned off the ladder the above negro, having two strong halters about his neck, both of which broke, whereupon all the bystanders called out "Mercy!" which was accordingly granted. Two years later Manuel the Giant and ten other negroes were set free on condition of paying the Company annually thirty schepels of maize, wheat, peas, or beans, and one fat hog valued
I55
SERVANTS AND SLAVES
at twenty guilders ; but their children, born and unborn, were to be slaves.
In 1649, the authors of the " Remonstrance " com- plain of the authorities here having exploited the ne- groes for their own profit. They say :
Even the [Company's] Negroes, which were obtained with Tamanderé were sold for pork and peas; something wonderful was to be performed with this, but they just dripped through the fingers. There are yet sundry other negroes in this country, some of whom have been manu- mitted on account of their long service; but their chil- dren continued slaves, contrary to all public law that anyone born of a free Christian mother should notwith- standing be a slave and obliged so to remain. To this Tienhoven replies that the Company's negroes were set free in return for their long services on condition that the children remain slaves, and the latter are treated the same as Christians. At present (1650) only three of these children are in service; one at the House of the Hope, one at the Company's Bouwerie, and one with Martin Crigier, who, as everybody knows, brought up the girl.
The negroes who were set free received land and stock, like other servants when out of their inden- tures. Thus, in 1643, Domingo Antony, negro, re- ceived a patent of five morgens, and five hundred and five rods on Bouwery No. 5, near the Fresh Water; and Catelina, widow of Jochim Antony, negro, re- ceived another of four morgens and ninety-one rods, next the above, a double wagon road between both. The above apparently formed the nucleus of the negro quarter, not far from Stuyvesant's farm.
In 1650, it was recommended to the States General that the inhabitants of New Netherland shall be at liberty to purchase negroes wheresoever they may think
156
DUTCH NEW YORK
necessary, except on the coast of Guinea, and bring them to work on their bouweries on payment of a duty. In April, 1652, the necessary consent was written to Stuyvesant for the colonists to import negroes direct from Africa, excluding, however, the Gold Coast, Cape Verde, Sierra Leone, the Pepper Coast, and Qua Qua Coast. They were also forbidden to go farther west than Popo Sonde. The duty of fifteen guilders a head, however, was too heavy to encourage the colonists to charter their own ships for the trade, which was there- fore carried on by Amsterdam merchants chartered by the West India Company. The first direct impor- tation of slaves from Africa into New Amsterdam (1650) was in the ship Wittepaert, which the home Directors authorized to be chartered in Amsterdam, to go to Africa for ivory and for slaves or New Nether- land " to the increase of population and the advance- ment of said place." In 1653, the Directors informed Stuyvesant that they have allowed two or three ships to go to Africa for slaves for the West Indies; if they come to New Netherland, he must " assist them in every proper way to clear away all obstacles." In August, 1664, the Gideon landed at New Amsterdam two hundred and ninety slaves (one hundred and fifty-three men and one hundred and thirty-seven women) on account of the West India Company.
There was no feeling in the community that slavery was anything but an eminently proper institution. Cornelis Steenwyck bought negroes from William Penn; and in 1691 Colonel Lewis Morris leaves " to my honored friend Wm. Penn my negro man Yoff, provided he come to dwell in America. I leave to Wm. Bickly one negro man and to Samuel Palmer a negro girl. ... I leave to John Bowne of Flushing one negro girl that is at old Thomas Hunts."
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.