USA > New York > Ulster County > Kingston > The Dutch records of Kingston, Ulser County, New York (Esopus, Wildwyck, Swanenburgh, Kingston) 1658-1684 > Part 10
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
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Albert Heymans, de. fendant. A complaint is made to the Schout that on August 30, last Albert Heymans, when lawfully called upon by Gysbert van Im- broch, at a meeting held at the Schout's house, to furnish a horse for the expedition against the savages, would not say"yes"or"no" to the Court, but said he would first see what the gentlemen were going to do, and that, when the Commissary again demanded an answer, the defendant called him a little tattle tale. By reason
93
THE DUTCH RECORDS OF KINGSTON.
1663]
whereof, the said Commissary, nomine officio, pursuant to the said complaint, requests the Court to sustain his action.
The foregoing having been read to defendant, he admits hav- ing used the aforesaid words, "little tattle tale," towards the Com- missary, at the said place, and requests a copy of the record here, and promises to reply at the next session of the Court.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Geertruyd Andriesen, defendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of fifty gldrs. for violating, for the first time, the ordinance enacted August 4, and a fine of two hundred gldrs. for a second violation, in having harvested with four wagons, and a fine also, for a third offense, in having, on October 26, [sic] arbitrarily harvested with two wagons, and having a gun in the field. Also a further fine for carrying fodder for her horses on a Sunday, on which occasion the horses were seized, but nevertheless the matter was settled with the Schout for five schepels of wheat, and a can of brandy for the guard.
Defendant answers that she was several times refused a con- voy, and therefore she was obliged to gather in her grain herself without a guard, for fear that the rain would spoil it.
The Honorable Court, having heard both parties, orders de- fendant to pay the full amount of the fines demanded for violating the ordinance, and to pay plaintiff the agreed fine of five schepels of wheat and a can of brandy.
The Schout, Roelof Swartwout, enters a complaint that the Messenger, Jacob Joosten, is of little or no service to him, and re- quests the Honorable Court to please give orders relative thereto. Whereupon defendant, Jacob Joosten, answers that he has not been able to collect his money, either as Church or Village Messenger, not having, to the best of his knowledge, received as Village Mes- senger more than one hundred and fourteen gldrs.
The Honorable Court orders and directs the Village Messenger to be more faithful in his duty, and that he be paid as soon as pos- sible for his services as such.
Meeting of the Council of War and Commissaries, held Tues- day, October 30, 1663.
94
THE DUTCH RECORDS OF KINGSTON.
[1663
Present : Marten Cregier, Captain Lieutenant; Christiaen Niessen, Ensign; Evert Willem Munnick, Jan Peersen, Sergeants; Roelof Swartwout, Schout; Tjerck Claesen de Wit, Gysbert van Im. borch, Tomas Chambers, Commissaries.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Henderick Cornelis- sen Slecht, defendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of seventy-five gldrs., pursuant to the judgment rendered by the Court under date of October 9, for violating the ordinance enacted August 4, in that he worked in the field without permission and a . proper convoy.
Defendant admits having worked in the field without permis- sion and convoy, and says that the Schout came without a convoy to the field and fined him for a second offense. He adds that he was fully able to defend himself, and therefore did not need a guard.
Defendant having been given his choice between paying the full fine to the plaintiff pursuant to said judgment, or arranging with him amicably, answers he would rather pay the full fine than settle with the plaintiff.
The Council of War and Commissaries understand that, ac- cording to the aforementioned judgment, defendant is liable for the full fine, as he behaves very obstinately in the matter.
The Same, plaintiff, vs. Pieter Bruynsen, defendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of twenty-five gldrs. for violating the ordinance dated August 4, in that he worked in the field without permission and a proper convoy, for which he was sentenced by the Honorable Court on October 9.
Defendant admits having worked one day in the field without permission and convoy, and the proposition is made to him whether he would prefer to settle with the plaintiff. He answers he is not willing to settle with the plaintiff, nor does he intend to pay one stiver therefor.
The Council of War and Commissaries order defendant to pay the full fine, in accordance with the judgment dated October 9, and, as he shows himself obstinate and unwilling so to do, that he be confined until he shall have paid the full fine.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Henderick Aertsen, de- fendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of seventy-five
95
THE DUTCH RECORDS OF KINGSTON.
1663]
gldr., pursuant to the judgment rendered by the Honorable Court under date of October 9, for violating the ordinance enacted August 4, in that he worked in the field without permission and a proper convoy.
Defendant admits having worked in the field without consent and a proper convoy, and also says that he had sufficient means of defence there.
The proposition having been made to him to settle with plain- tiff, he answers he is not willing to settle with him nor does he in- tend to pay one stiver.
The Council of War and Commissaries condemn defendant to pay the full fine, in accordance with the judgment of the Court on October 9, and, as defendant shows himself obstinate and is un- willing so to do, that he be confined until he shall have paid the full fine.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Ariaen Roose and Jan Roose, defendants. Plaintiff demands from defendants a fine of one hundred gldrs., for violating the ordinance dated August 4, in that they worked in the field without permission and a convoy. De- fendants admit having worked in the field without permission and a convoy, and also say they had sufficient means of defence there.
The Council of War and Commissaries decide that, as defend. ants are still young and minors, they shall be excused in this case.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Willem Andriese Rees. defendant. Absent. Default.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Cornelis Brantsen Vos, defendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of seventy- five gldrs., pursuant to judgment rendered by the Court on October 9, for violation of the ordinance of August 4, in that he worked in the field without permission and a convoy. Defendant admits hav- ing worked in the field without permission and a convoy, and also says that he had sufficient means of defense there.
After a proposition had been made to defendant to settle the fine with plaintiff, he answers he is not willing so to settle nor does he intend to pay anything, but purposes to bring the case before a higher court.
96
THE DUTCH RECORDS OF KINGSTON.
[1663
The Council of War and Commissaries condemn defendant tc pay the full fine, pursuant to the judgment rendered by the Court and, as defendant shows himself obstinate and unwilling, that he be placed in confinement until he shall have paid the full fine.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Jacob Joosten, de- fendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of seventy-five gldrs., pursuant to the judgment rendered by the Honorable Court on October 9, for violating the ordinance dated August 4, in that he worked in the field without permission and a proper convoy. Defendant admits his guilt, but says he must earn his living here or elsewhere.
The Council of War and Commissaries decide, for cause, to ex- cuse defendant this time.
- Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Ariaen Huybertsen, defendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of seventy. five gldrs., pursuant to the judgment rendered by the Court on October 9, for violating the ordinance dated August 4, in that he worked in the field without permission and a convoy. Defendant admits having worked in the field without permission and a convoy, and also says that he had sufficient means of defense there. A pro- position was made to defendant, to either pay the full fine or to settle with the Schout, but he answers he does not intend to pay the fine herein.
The Council of War and Commissaries condemn defendant tc pay the full fine, pursuant to the foregoing judgment rendered by the Court on October 9.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Harmen Henderick- sen, defendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of seventy-five gldrs., pursuant to the judgment rendered by the Honorable Court October 9, for violating the ordinance dated Au- gust 4, in that he worked in the field without permission and a convoy.
Defendant admits he worked in the field without permission and a convoy, but adds that he had sufficient means of defense there, and requests the Captain Lieutenant to settle this case for him with plaintiff.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Jan Gerretsen, de- fondant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of seventy-five
.
97
THE DUTCH RECORDS OF KINGSTON.
1663]
gldrs., pursuant to the judgment rendered by the Honorable Court on October 9, for violating the ordinance dated August 4, in that he worked in the field without permission and a convoy. Defend- ant admits he worked in the field without permission and a convoy, but says he was working close by the guard house, and does not owe anything but intends to go higher up.
The Council of War and Commissaries order defendant to pay the full fine, pursuant to the judgment rendered by the Court on October 9.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Antoni Crupel, defend- ant. Absent. Default.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Henderick Henderick- sen, defendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of seven- ty-five gldrs., pursuant to the judgment dated October 9, for vio- lating the ordinance enacted August 4, in that he worked in the field without permission and a convoy. Defendant admits he worked without permission in the field, and says that Juriaen West- phael, who also appeared before the Honorable Court on October 9, and was sentenced by it to pay the full fine, made himself responsible for it, and has filed an appeal therein.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Jan Willemsen, dc- fendant. Absent. Default.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Teunis Jacobsen, de- fendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of seventy-five gldrs., pursuant to the judgment rendered by the Honorable Court, on October 9, for violating the ordinance dated August 4, in that he harvested without permission and a convoy. Defendant denies having been notified by plaintiff that he was to be fined, and says he knows nothing about it.
The Council of War and Commissaries order plaintiff to prove his demand.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Aert Jacobsen, defendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of two hun- dred gldrs., pursuant to the judgment rendered by the Honorable Court on October 9, for a violation of the ordinance dated Au- gust 4, by himself, his son, his daughter and his farm hand, in that he harvested without permission and a convoy. The defendant in- sists upon an appeal.
98
THE DUTCH RECORDS OF KINGSTON.
[1663
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Jacob Jansen de lange, defendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of seventy-five gldrs., pursuant to the judgment rendered by the Court on October 9, for violating the ordinance dated August 4, in that he harvested without permission and a convoy. Defend- ant admits that he harvested without permission and a convoy, and says he does not intend to pay for doing so.
The Council of War and Commissaries condemn defendant to pay the above fine to plaintiff, pursuant to the judgment rendered October 9, and, as he shows himself obstinate and unwilling, that he be placed in confinement until he shall have paid the full fine.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Aert Otterspoor, de- fendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of twenty-five gldrs., pursuant to the judgment rendered by the Honorable Court under date of October 9, for violating the ordinance dated August 4, in that he worked in the field without permission and a convoy. Defendant admits he worked in the field without permission and a convoy and says he is willing to settle with plaintiff.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Henderick Jochem- sen, defendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of twen- ty-five gldrs., for violating the ordinance dated August 4, in that he was in the field near the bridge, without permission and a convoy. Defendant admits he was at the bridge, as a sentry, as he with oth- ers present had to repair the bridge, but being unable to work be- cause of a lame hand he therefore stood sentry for the laborers.
Whereas, the repairers of the bridge received permission from the Captain Lieutenant, the Schout's demand is refused.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Ariaen Gerritsen, de- fendant. Absent. Default.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Warnaer Hoorenbeeck, defendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of twenty-five gldrs., for violating the ordinance of August 4, in that he har- vested without permission and a convoy. Defendant refers himself to his mistress, because she represented him at the said session of October 23 [sic]. Plaintiff is ordered to summon her in this mat- ter before the Court.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs Geertruyd Andriessen, defendant. Absent. Default.
99
THE DUTCH RECORDS OF KINGSTON.
1663]
The Schout, Roelof Swartwout, requests the Honorable Court to allow him execution in the matter of the judgment rendered by the Commissaries and Council of War on June 27, 1663.
The foregoing request of the Schout is granted by the Court here. Done at Wildwyck, this October 30, 1663.
Order to the Schout and Secretary.
Whereas, on October 23, 1663, Aeltje Claes appeared before the Honorable Court here in Wildwyck, and requested that the es- tate of Claesje Teunissen, deceased, be administered by the Honor- able Court, which the Honorable Court agreed to do, it is therefore ordered that the individual, Roelof Swartwout, Schout, together with the Secretary, Mattheus Capito, repair to the house of the de- ceased Claesje Teunnissen, there to make a proper inventory of the estate left by her, and, having done so, that they exhibit the same to the Honorable Court here.
Given at Wildwyck, this October 30, 1663.
Report on the foregoing.
On this 30th of October, in the afternoon we, Roelof Swart- wout, Schout, and Mattheus Capito, Secretary, pursuant to the order of the Honorable Court here, repaired to the house of Aeltje Claes, for the purpose of taking an inventory of the estate left by Claesje Teunissen, deceased, and questioned Aeltje Claes and also the oldest daughter of the deceased, concerning the estate left. They an- swered us whether we were joking with them and whether we did not know that the Domine had arranged everything relating to this matter, and that if we wanted to know about it we ought to go to the Domine, who would undoubtedly give us information about the matter. Done at Wildwyck, on the above date in the year 1663.
(Signed) Roelof Swartwout, Mattheus Capito.
Whereas, Cornelis Barentsen Slecht has settled with the Schout Swartwout, for and on behalf of his servants, for violating the ordi- nance passed on August 4, last, by the Council of War and the Honorable Court, and he has made a request of the aforesaid Court that his servants be set at liberty, it is ordered that the same be granted to said Cornelis Barentsen Slecht, and his servants be
100
THE DUTCH RECORDS OF KINGSTON.
[1663
released from arrest and be permitted to return home. Done at Wildwyck, November 1, 1663.
(Signed) Marten Kregier.
Whereas Mr. Gysbert van Imbroeck has settled with the Schout Swartwout, for the offence committed by Jacob Jansen in violating the ordinance of the Council of War and the Honorable Court made August 4, last, for which said Jacob Jansen has been placed by the Court in confinement, the said Mr. Gysbert van Imborch re- quests of said Court that the individual, Jacob Jansen, be dis- charged, to which the Court consents and discharges the said Jacob Jansen from his arrest for the present.
Done at Wildwyck, November 1, 1663. (Signed) Marten Kregier.
Ordinary Session, held Tuesday, November 6, 1663.
Present: Roelof Swartwout, Schout; Albert Gysbertsen, Tjerck Claesen de Wit, Gysbert van Imborch, Thomas Chambers, Commissaries.
Eechtje Gerrets, plaintiff, vs. Christiaen Nissen romp, defend- ant. Plaintiff demands that defendant return to her a cushion of which she shows a duplicate to the Court, having taken from the clothes line at defendant's home a pillow case which she says is hers and which she shows to the Honorable Court.
Defendant says that plaintiff took said pillow case from the clothes line at his house, and requests that she return the same to him. Defendant further denies having a pillow and a pillow case belonging to plaintiff, and says that plenty of goods resemble each other without being owned by the same party.
Plaintiff, having been asked whether she would declare under oath that the pillow is in possession of defendant, answers "Yes." Defendant refuses plaintiff's oath, as he does not consent to her taking one, but requests that she prove that he has a pillow and pillow case belonging to her.
The Honorable Court orders plaintiff to prove that defendant has a cushion belonging to her.
Tjerck Claesen de Wit, curator of the estate left by Willem Jansen Seba, plaintiff, vs. Cornelis Barentsen Slecht, defendant.
.
101
THE DUTCH RECORDS OF KINGSTON.
1663]
Plaintiff requests that defendant make an explanation to the Court and render an account, in the matter between him and Wil- lem Jansen Seba, for which he received an extension of fourteen days on October 23, last.
Defendant answers that the Consistory has enjoined him against rendering an account to the Honorable Court here, in the matter of Willem Jansen Seba.
Jacob Joosten, Village Messenger, being summoned before the Honorable Court and being asked whether, under directions from the Consistory, he has enjoined Cornelis Barentsen Slecht from rendering an account to the Honorable Court here, answers "Yes," and says he notified Cornelis Barentsen Slecht, on said directions, not to pay any bills for Willem Jansen Seba, and that, if he should do so, said payment would not be audited.
The Village Messenger having been sent by the Honorable Court to Domine Hermanus Blom and the Consistory to request them to please appear at the session of the Court, the said Domine answered that he could not attend to-day.
The Consistory, Albert Heymans, appeared, and was asked by the Honorable Court whether the Domine and the Consistory for- bade Cornelis Barentsen Slecht and Juriaen Westphael to pay any- thing to any one for Willem Jansen Seba, deceased, and Hendrick Looman. He answered "Yes."
The Honorable Court resolves to refer this record to the Direc- tor General and Council of New Netherland.
Tjerck Claesen de Wit, plaintiff, vs. Evert Pels, defendant. Plaintiff requests an extension until the next session of the Court, as he has not yet ready the proofs he is to adduce against defend- ant.
The Honorable Court orders plaintiff to submit his proofs at its next session, or the Court will decide between the parties on their papers.
Paulus Paulusen, plaintiff, vs. Eva Swartwout, defendant. Plaintiff desires that defendant substantiate her charge that plain- tiff stole twelve chickens.
Roelof Swartwout, representing his wife, Eva, the defendant, demands that plaintiff submit proofs.
102
THE DUTCH RECORDS OF KINGSTON.
[1663
The Honorable Court orders plaintiff to produce proof at ite next session.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Allert Heymans Roose, defendant. Plaintiff asks defendant for the documents demanded of him at the last session of the Court. Defendant submits his an- swer in writing, which literally reads as follows: Anno 1663, Oc- tober 23. I was standing in the street near the guard house looking at the people going out, and then asked Tjerck Claesen how many horses would go along with the expedition against the savages, to which Tjerck answered, "sixteen;" whereupon I replied, "There are not as many farmers, unless double farms like those of Tomas Aert, Aert Jacobsen and your own furnish two." Whereupon he said, "Well, farmer, you pay rather much attention to me; well, you did not do so much in the expeditions pursuant to the ordin- ance, for you rather stood on one wagon with two in it, and I alone on one. Ho, farmer, you lie, I have done as much as you." Thereupon, I answered, "Thus you give the lie to your own ordi- nance. It is not right." For these words, Mr. Gysbert comes and makes complaint.
(Subscribed) Alaerdt Heymansz Roose.
This matter, on the votes of three Commissaries, is, for cause, referred, for decision, to the Director General and Council of New Netherland.
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Allert Heymans Roose, defendant. Plaintiff alleges that defendant challenged a member of the Court when sitting in the Council of War at the house of Thomas Chambers, July 7, concerning two Wappinger sav- ages, saying, "If there is anyone at this meeting who is a friend of these savages, I dare him to come outside."
Defendant denies this, and requests a copy of the record.
The Honorable Court orders plaintiff, at next session, to prove his charge.
Tjerck Claesen de Wit requests the Honorable Court at Wild- wyck to allow him to use, as a garden, the place outside of the re. tracted curtain wall, up to the place of the old removed curtain wall, lying east of petitioner's lot and west of the lot of Aert Otterspoor.
.
1663]
THE DUTCH RECORDS OF KINGSTON.
103
The Honorable Court grants petitioner's request, subject to the approval of the Honorable Director General and Council of New Netherland.
On this November 13, 1663, this note was handed to the minister, Hermanus Blom :
Rev. Mr. Hermanus Blom.
Whereas, Aeltje Sybrants, wife of Mattys Roelofsen, was or- dered by the Council of War and the Court of this village, on Octo- ber 10, last, to pay a fine of one hundred gldrs., and one-third of said amount was set apart for the Church, the one-third part in wheat, being five and one-half schepels of wheat computed at six gldrs. per schepel, due you, is herewith sent to your Reverence.
Done at Wildwyck, this November 13, 1663.
(Signed) Marten Cregier.
(Beneath) By authority of the above named Court. (Signed) Mattheus Capito, Secretary.
Ordinary Session, held Tuesday, November 20, 1663.
Present : Roelof Swartwout, Schout; Albert Gysbertsen, Thomas Chambers, Gysbert van Imborch, Commissaries.
The Schout, Roelof Swartwout, presents this complaint against Tjerck Claesen de Wit, reading, according to his understanding, as follows :
Whereas, Aeltje Wygerts and Albert Gysbertsen have com- plained to me that on November 13, Tjerck Claesen, armed with a drawn knife, openly quarreled in his house, acting as if he wished to kill every man, woman and child, I therefore, on this complaint, inform the Court of the matter, and also decide to exclude him for the present from the Bench, until he shall have cleared himself of the charge, and shall have been declared cleared by the Honorable Court. The advice of the Commissaries is requested herein.
The Honorable Court orders that, whereas, Tjerck Claesen de- Wit has already amicably settled the above matter with his accuser. Albert Gysbertsen, and they have come to an agreement regarding it, he shall remain away from the Bench until he shall have set- tled and adjusted this matter with the Schout.
Tjerck Claesen de Wit, plaintiff, vs. Evert Pels, defendant. Plaintiff produces a written certificate against defendant, signed
4
104
THE DUTCH RECORDS OF KINGSTON.
[1663
by Harmen Jansen and Aert Teunissen, dated November 19, 1663. Defendant wants the witnesses to appear, and desires them to affirm their deposition under oath. He also offers, if the attestors affirni the aforesaid declaration under oath, to pay for the killed pig, and will also sue for damage caused by the pigs to his corn.
The Honorable Court orders plaintiff to produce the aforenam- ed attestors in Court, at the next session, to affirm their declaration there under oath.
Tjerck Claesen deWit, plaintiff, vs. Albert Gysbertsen, de- fendant. Plaintiff demands that defendant, on his default of pay- ment for land sold him, return the land, the time for payment hav- ing expired in the month of April, 1663.
Defendant replies that plaintiff has not delivered a deed of the land to him, and that he will pay plaintiff after the deed has been executed to him, as he has made part payment thereon to the plaintiff.
The Honorable Court orders defendant to pay plaintiff the re- mainder of the money due for the land, plaintiff to deliver to de- fendant a perfect deed and conveyance of the land.
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.