USA > New York > New York City > History of New Netherland; or, New York under the Dutch, Vol. I > 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 | 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
Those who have not closely studied the deeds of 1630, will be somewhat con- fused in reconciling dates and distinguishing landmarks. The latter have been the source of various lawsuits in the early settlement of the adjoining tracts. When application was made to the Duke of York, in 1678, for a warrant to erect the colonie into a manor, the parties interested experienced a good deal of trouble in consequence of this confusion, as we learn by a letter from Jan Bap- tist to Nicolaus van Rensselaer, dated London, 16 June, 1678, of which the following is an extract :
" I must further inform you of what was nigh doing us great injury here. The lord-chancellor required of me clearer proof that the land above and below Fort Orange, mentioned in the deed of 13th August, 1630, only as 'south and
125
NEW NETHERLAND.
Pieter Heyser, skipper of the Whale, and Gillien Coster, CHAP commissary, had, in the mean time, secured by purchase from the Indians, for directors Godyn and Bloemmaert, the land, situate at Cape Mey, on the shore opposite their former pur- chase, extending sixteen miles in length along the South bay, and sixteen in breadth, thus forming a square of sixty-four miles.
The lands in the neighborhood of Fort Nassau and Fort Orange having been thus appropriated, and the island of Man- hattans being reserved to the company, Michel Paauw, another of the company's directors, caused the district called Hobokan- Hacking, situate opposite New Amsterdam, on the east side of July the river Mauritius, to be purchased for him by the Director- general and council, to which was added, in the course of the
12. Aug. 10
north of Fort Orange to a little south of Moenimines Castle,' extended itself down to that. So I just found among my papers two certificates, (attestatien,) one of the 11th March, 1633, given by Gerrit Willems Oosterum, and the other of the 15th March, 1633, by the former Director, Peter Minuit, which declare that the purchase of the land, on the west side, stretched down to the Mill Creek, including Castle Island and the small tongue of land at the other side of the Mill Creek, (over de Molekill ;) which twe certificates 1 was obliged to have translated, which I also send you, as I do not want them, having the original Dutch by me. But it serves for illustration that, in the certificates, 'tis stated, 'to the Mill Creek, that is, where Albert the Noorman dwells, which lies on the west side of the river ;' and in the deed, dated 13th Angust, 1630, 'tis stated, ' from Petanoek, the Mill Creek, nnto Megagonse, which is situate on the east bank.' So, sir, you must perceive that there are two mill creeks ; namely, Petanoek, the Mill Creek-the creek where Evert Pels did live in Greenbush, (in 't greene hosch ;) and, in the certificates, reference is made to Albert the Neorman's Kill, commonly called the Mill Creek.
" There is, also, an obscurity in the certificates, which must be remarked. It is stated therein that the land was purchased and paid for in May, 1630 ; and in another deed of conveyance, which mentions some circumstances about Bastiaen Jansen Krol, it is expressly stated that the aferesaid land, from Moeni- mines Castle down, was purchased and paid for by Gillis Heosett, en the 27th July, 1630, which does not seem to agree very well with the certificates. But this is thus explained : In the certificates aforesaid, allusion is made to a later purchase of land on the east side, the date of which is not stated in the certifi- cates, which must he of the 27th July, 1630; for in the deed where Bastiaen Jansen Krel is mentioned, the date of the last purchase is set down, and in the certificates the date of the first, both which purchases are included in the deed of the 13th August, 1630." The dates of all these purchases are given in the map of Rensselaerswyck.
1630. May 5.
126
HISTORY OF
1630. Nov.
BOOK following month, Staten Island, west of Hamel's Hooftden,1 or II. " the Narrows ;" and, some time after, Ahasimus, on which Jersey City now stands, and the peninsula Aressick, having the 22. North River on the east, Hobokan-Hacking on the north, and surrounded by marshes " which served sufficiently for distinct boundaries."2 The compensation to the natives for all these purchases was " certain cargoes, or parcels of goods."
The "colonie" on the South River was called Zwanendal, or the Valley of Swans; that opposite Manhattan island, Pavo- nia ; and that in the neighborhood of Fort Orange, Rensselaers- wyck. In the colony of Zwanendal was " cradled" the pres- ent flourishing state of Delaware. In that of Pavonia were laid the first foundations of the fruitful state of New Jersey.
The possession or proprietorship of these vast tracts of wil- derness would, it was at once seen, prove rather a burden than a source of profit, if means were not adopted to reclaim and im- prove them. To accomplish this the more successfully, it was considered the properest course to form associations with other wealthy persons, and thus, by giving these a direct pecuniary interest in the undertaking, obtain more ample means to reach the object in view, while such an arrangement would, at the same time, allay some portion of that jealousy and dis- satisfaction which other directors might naturally feel who had not been sufficiently alert to seize, at a more early period, the advantages proffered by the charter of 1629.3
Oct. 1. A copartnership was accordingly entered into between Kiliaen van Rensselaer, Samuel Godyn, Johannes de Laet, and Samuel Bloemmaert, with whom were associated Adam Bissels and Toussaint Moussart, who, by the terms of the contract, were constituted co-directors of Rensselaerswyck. The common stock of this association was divided into five shares, of which Van Rensselaer held two; De Laet, one ;
1 These " Hooftden," or headlands, were called after Hamel, one of the direc- tors of the company. Moulton.
2 Book of Patents, GG. 7, 8, 9, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, &c. Hoboken is so called after a village of the same name situate on the Scheld, a few miles south of Antwerp. Modern map-makers have converted Ahasimus into " Horsimus ;" for what reason they, perhaps, would find it difficult to do- termino.
9 Moulton, 404.
127
NEW NETHERLAND.
Godyn, one ; and Bloemmaert and his associates, one; and CHAP. the management of the affairs of the colonie was committed to a' board consisting of four persons or votes, of which Van Rensselaer represented, or held two; Bloemmaert, or Bissels, one ; and De Laet, or Moussart, one. Van Rensselaer was, however, not to have any rank or authority in the colonie su- perior to his associates, except the title of Patroon, which, with all its feudal honors, was vested in him alone, the partners binding themselves to do fealty and homage for the fief on his demise, in the name, and on the behalf of his son and heirs.1
1 This contract, and the articles of agreement, are referred to in the judgment of the Court of Holland, dated 14th June, 1650, in re Bloemmaert et al. vs. Van Twiller et al., which judgment was ratified by the States General on the same day. Hol. Doc. v., 298. Alb. Rec. viii., 72, 73. Rensselaerswyck MSS. It has been maintained, by some, that there was no partnership interest in the colonie of Rensselaerswyck, and that the claim of Bloemmaert, De Laet, and the other partners was not allowed. But the judgment here referred to shows that such an assertion is contrary to the fact. The suit was decided in favor of Bloem- maert and his associates, and the executors of the first Patroon were condemned to account for the rents and profits, and to pay to each of the partners, or their heirs, their just quota. The partnership is, moreover, plainly admitted in the account of the disbursements for the first venture Lo Rensselaerswyck, anno 1630, wherein the sums advanced by the other co-directors are admitted and acknow- ledged. [See Appendix G.] Ample evidence of the fact will be further found by reference to the Rensselaerswyck MSS., and to Hol. Doc. vi., 303, 304, 306. De Vries also mentions the circumstance. Subsequently, however, Johanna de Laet, widow of Johannes de Hulter, and who married, secondly, Jeremias Ebbing, sold to the Van Rensselaers, in the year 1674, all her right and claim, as heiress of Johannes de Laet, to the colonie of Rensselaerswyck, for the sum of fl. 5,762 10st. or $2,301, which debt was discharged by the transfer to ber of certain bouweries and lands which were deemed an equivalent. This lady was proprietor, among other tracts, of the Weyland, or pasture, lying be- tween the third and fourth kills, now called, in the map of the city of Albany, Rutten and Fox creeks. On the 20th of April, 1685, Gerrit Bissels and Nico- laus van Beeck, (nomine uxoris,) both representing the children and heirs of Adam Bissels and Margt. Reust, entitled to one Lenth part ; and as attorneys for Abraham Elsevier (husband of Catharina Bloemmaert) and Isbrand Schenk, Constantina Bloemmaert, (widow of Isaac Sweers, in his lifetime, Vice-Admiral in the service of Holland,) and Juffrouw Anna Bloemmaert, (widow of Francois Romayn,) children and heirs of Samnel Bloemmaert and Catharine Reust, con- jointly entitled to one tenth part of the colonie of Rensselaerswyck, sold, in Am- sterdam, to Richard and Kiliaen van Rensselaer, Patroon of said colonie, their respective shares, being two tenths, or one fifth of the whole, for gl. 3,600, pay- able in three equal yearly parts. Thus all claims on the part of the original part-
1630.
128
HISTORY OF
BOOK II. Another association was formed, a few days afterwards, be- tween Godyn, Van Rensselaer, Bloemmaert, De Laet, Mathias 1630. van Cuelen, Hendrick Hamel, Johan van Harinckhouck, and Oct. 16. Nicolaus van Sitterich, also directors of the West India Com- pany, and Capt. David Pieterssen de Vries, for planting a colonie on the South River. Equalizing all expected advantages, they equipped a ship and yacht for that quarter, where they designed raising tobacco and grain, and prosecuting the whale- fishery, oil bringing then a fair price in Holland.1 Prepara- tions were also made to expedite farmers and cattle to Rens- selaerswyck ; and everywhere, at home and abroad, things wore the aspect of prosperity, and " promised fairlie both to the state and undertakers."2
In the mean time snch had been the activity of the agents employed by the patroons to purchase their colonies, that the titles obtained from the Indians were laid, duly authenticated by the Director-general and council at Fort Amsterdam, before Nov. the Assembly of the XIX, early in the fall, when the new 28. patroons received the congratulations of the other directors of Dec. 2. the company. The formal enregistration of these patents fol- lowed a few days afterwards, when they were sealed " with Dec. the seal of New Netherland." Fourteen days subsequently, 16. complete lists of the several patroonships were delivered to the company's solicitor, and the whole transactions were unani- 1631. mously confirmed by the Assembly of the XIX, at the meeting Jan. 8. of that body in Zealand, in the beginning of the following year.3
ners, to any portion of the colonie, became finally extinguished ; and that estate vested altogether and exclusively in the Van Rensselaer family.
1 De Vries, Korte Historiael.
2 The condition of Dutch settlements on the North River, at this time, is thus alluded to by a contemporary English writer :- " This which they have settled in New England upon Hudson's River, with no extraordinary charge or multi- tude of people, is knowne to subsist in a comfortable manner, and to promise fairlie both to the state and undertakers. The cause is evident :- The men whom they carrie, though they be not many, are well chosen, and known to be useful and serviceable; and they second them with seasonable and fit supplies, cherishing them as carefully as their owne families, and employ them in profit- able labors, that are knowne to be of speciall use to their comfortable subsist- ing." The Planters' Plea; London, 1630.
* Hol. Doc. i., 176, 180, 181, 184. Letter of Patroons Paauw, Bloemmaert et al. to States General, ii., 100, 101.
129
NEW NETHERLAND.
Two vessels were dispatched this year to New Netherland. CHAP. The imports amounted to 57,499 guilders, or about $23,000 .~ III. The exports consisted of 7,126 peltries, valued at 68,012 gl., 1631. being a little more than the value of the imports.
Meanwhile the expedition under De Vries had safely ar- rived at the South River. The settlers, thirty in number, were landed, with their implements of husbandry, on the western shore, about three leagues within Cape Cornelius, near the entrance of a fine navigable stream, called the Hoar- kill. Here the party proceeded, without loss of time, to erect a house surrounded with palisadoes, without parapets or breastwork, which served as their fort, trading-house, and place of residence. In the spring and summer they prepared their fields, put in their crops, and were in a fair way of suc- ceeding, when De Vries left " Zwanendal" on his return to Holland, to report his proceedings to the interested parties there.1
The object of the Patroons seemed at first, however, to be a participation in the Indian trade, rather than the colonization of the country. They assumed to be privileged, by the 15th article of their charter, to traffic with the natives, not only along the coast and adjoining places, from Florida to New- foundland, but throughout the interior, on the rivers and in the bays " where the company had no commissaries at the time the charter of 1629 was granted." The prospects which that trade afforded led them easily to interfere with what the other directors considered to be the vested rights of the com- pany. This interference created such competition, and af- fected so directly the company's interests, that a revision of the Articles of Freedoms soon followed. New articles were Oct.30. proposed, limiting essentially the privileges already granted to Patroons ; " nay, the whole of the Exemptions were ques- tioned and called into doubt."3
1 De Vries ; Moulton, 405, 406, 407. All the authorities which Moulton quotes fix the year 1630 as the date of the erection of the fort at Zwanendal. De Vries says he sailed from the Texel Dec. 12, 1630. It remains to be determined if he could cross the Atlantic at that early period, and build his house, all in eighteen days. Possibly Moulton's authorities reckoned according to Old Style. ' De Articulon van Exemptien anno 1628 gearresteerd ; 1629 gerevideert en
17
130
HISTORY OF
BOOK 11. These quarrels were soon brought before their High Mighti- nesses the States General, who immediately called for a re- 1632. turn of the names of all those to whom colonies had been March granted. The mischievous effects of these disputes did not 19. stop here. De Razier fell into disgrace with his employers, " by reason of their factions ;" Minuit, the Director-general, under whose administration those vast alienations of the public domain had taken place, was recalled, and the immediate colonization and settlement of the country, of which there had been some prospect, was thus, once more, indefinitely postponed.
Director Minuit embarked for Holland in the spring, to- gether with Sheriff Lampo, in the ship Union, (Eendracht,) carrying with him five thousand beaver skins, on account of the company.1
The British companies, who had obtained charters from the crown to settle plantations in Virginia and New England, were, all this time, not unaware of the activity with which the Dutch were pushing their trade along the whole North Amer- ican coast, from the Chesapeake to Cape Cod. Governor Bradford had already transmitted accounts to Sir Ferdinando Gorges and the council of New England, of the commercial intercourse between the inhabitants of Manhattans and the settlers at New Plymouth, with copies of the correspondence which had passed between himself and the Dutch. The more active members of the New England Company considered it, therefore, incumbent on them to adopt stringent meas- ures to secure their privileges, and to preserve the rights with which they were invested by their charters; and the occa- sion soon offered to put their determination, in this regard, into execution.
geampliceert ; door de Patroouen geamplecteert ; anno 1630 daarover gecon- gratuleert ; anno 1631 ex suprabondante gejustifeceert, zyn bedecklelyck gemineert op den 30 Octob. 1631, als wanneer nieuwe articulen gesmeed zyn, daarby de voorige vryheden en exemptien niet langer impetrabile waren, de patroonen belast en preciesheyt te presteren ; saacken, dio de ervarentheyd leerde niet practicabel te wesen ; ja, alle de Exemptien in dispute getrocken. Patroons' letter to States General, June, 1634. Hol. Doc. ii., 102, 103. 1 Ibid. i., 185, 210.
131
NEW NETHERLAND.
1632.
The company's ship in which Director Minuit and Sheriff CHAP. Lampo were returning, "with a number of persons with their 111. wives and children," to Holland, was forced, by stress of weather, to put into the port of Plymouth. She was seized, March immediately on her arrival there, at the suit of the New Eng- land company, on a charge of having traded to, and obtained her cargo in, countries subject to his Britannic Majesty. Captain Mason, who had caused this step to be taken, fol- April 2. lowed it up by addressing a complaint to the secretary of O. S. state against the Dutch, who, he represented, " fell as inter- lopers" into the middle betwixt the plantations of Virginia and New England, " giving the name of the Prince of Aurange to the countrie and river of Manahata," which they planted, besides imposing " other Dutch names on other places, to the eastward of the said Manahata, as farr as Cape Cod, all which had been formerly discovered and traded unto, diverse tymes, by several Englishmen, as may be proved." He fur- ther represented that, notwithstanding the alleged disclaimer of the States General and their ambassador in 1621, they had maintained their position, fortified themselves in two several places, "and built shipps there, whereof one was sent to Hol- land of six hundred tunnes, or thereabouts ;" -- and though they had been warned by the people of New Plymouth to abstain from trading and making settlements in those parts, as " they were the territories of the king of England, yet they, nevertheless, with proude and contumacious answers, (saying they had commission to fight against such as should disturbe their settlement,) did persist to plant and trade, vilefying our (the English) nation to the Indians, and extolling theire owne people and countrie of Holland, and have made sundry good returnes of commodities from thence into Holland ; especially this yeare they have returned, as reported, fifteen thousand beaver skynnes, besides other articles."1
Director Minuit, indignant at what he considered an ag- April 3. gression on the company's rights, as well as on the law of nations, hurried up to London, where he laid before Messrs.
1 Lond. Doc. i., 47, 48, 49. For this letter, as well as for one from Sir F Gorges to Captain Mason on this subject, see Appendix, D.
132
HISTORY OF
BOOK Joachimi and Brasser, the Dutch ambassadors, an account of II. the seizure of his ship. Their excellencies lost no time in 1632. proceeding to Newmarket, where the king then held his April 5. court, and at an audience to which they were admitted, laid before his majesty a long remonstrance against the pro- ceedings of the authorities at Plymouth. In this representa- tion they exposed the fact that the Dutch had traded for a number of years to the river Manhattans, " now called the Maurice ;" that they had, moreover, enjoyed the free use of his majesty's harbors and ports, in coming and going ; and concluded by demanding the release of the Eendracht, so that she and her passengers and crew might be enabled to proceed on their voyage.
His majesty received this remonstrance with the most gracious attention, but gave, at the same time, the ambassa- dors to understand, that he was informed by the governor of Plymouth, that the States General had, on complaint of his royal father, forbidden their subjects to trade to those coun- tries. His majesty should, however, abstain from saying any thing on the matter then, but promised to inquire further into it. In the mean time he declined ordering the release of the Dutch ship, until the whole affair should be further inves- tigated.
Messrs. Joachimi and Brasser, on receipt of this reply, wrote to the Hague, detailing these particulars, and recom- mended that all documentary evidence, in support of the Dutch right to trade to New Netherland, be forthwith forwarded to them, " as that right will undoubtedly be sharply disputed in England."
The directors of the West India Company were, on their side, not idle. Immediately on learning the seizure of their ship, they addressed a memorial to the States General, setting forth the fact, which they attributed to the intrigues of the May 5. Spanish ambassador in London, and in the course of some days afterwards, laid before their High Mightinesses, at con- siderable length, a deduction of their title to the country. This paper, embodying, as it must be presumed, the grounds on which the Dutch rested, at this early date, their right to
April 10.
133
NEW NETHERLAND.
their North American possessions, deserves a more than pass- CHAP. ing attention.
" After the North River," they proceed, " commonly called the Manhattoes, also Rio de Montaigne, and North River, was first discovered, in the year 1609, by subjects of their High Mightinesses, and visited by some of their citizens in 1610, and following years, a grant was made in the year 1615, [11th Oct. 1614,] to some of their subjects of the trade to that coun- try, to the exclusion of all others. A small fort and garrison were also established there, which were maintained, until the charter granted to the West India Company included these, as well as other countries. .
"In the year 1606, His Britannic Majesty granted, by spe- cial charter, to his subjects the country south and north of the aforesaid river, under the name of New England and Virginia, with express condition that the respective companies should remain one hundred miles the one from the other, and leave so much between them both.
" Whereupon the English began, about the year 1607, a plantation by the river Sagadahoc, which the settlers after- wards abandoned ; and no new plantation was undertaken by the English, north of New Netherland, before the year 1620, when one which they named New Plymouth was commenced behind Cape Cod.
"The English, themselves, place New England along the coast between the forty-first and forty-fifth degrees. The English began, in 1606, to frequent Virginia, which lies south of our aforesaid New Netherland, the limits of which they fix, according to their charter, from the thirty-seventh to the thirty- ninth degree.
" So that our limits, according to their own statement, should be from the thirty-ninth degree inclusive to the forty- first, between which degrees it is not known to us that they ever had any designs.
" What limits your High Mightinesses have given your sub- jects can be seen by the Octroy granted in 1615, [1614,] which your H. M. will please to cause to be examined. We have no knowledge of what His Majesty alleges regarding the demand made by his father, nor of what followed."
III. 1632.
134
HISTORY OF
BOOK II. The directors, therefore, urged on the States General the propriety of instructing their ambassadors at the British court 1632. to demand the release of the company's ships and goods ; for, they reasoned, the natives of America were free ; subjects neither of the king of Great Britain nor of their High Mighti- nesses, and at liberty to trade with whomsoever they pleased. His majesty, they admitted, might confer, by charter, this trade on any association composed of his subjects, to the exclusion of all others his subjects ; but it was, they insisted, contrary to all law and reason for any power to prevent the subjects of others to traffic in a country of which it never took actual pos- session, and a title to which it never obtained from the right owners, either by contract or purchase, much less to set up a claim to lands, the property of which the subjects of their High Mightinesses have obtained, partly by treaty with the proprie- tors of the soil, and partly by purchase. The directors con- cluded this able chain of reasoning, by demanding particularly of the States General to maintain their own sovereignty, the freedom of the seas, as well as the validity of those contracts which were entered into with distant nations, who, by nature, were independent of all, and had not been subjected to any power by conquest.
Copies of this vindication of the company's rights, as well as of the octroy of 1614, were immediately ordered by the States General to be sent to England to Messrs. Joachimi and Brasser, who were informed, at the same time, that it was the determi- nation of their High Mightinesses to maintain the right of the West India Company to trade to New Netherland.
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.