Christopher Davids and Cornelia De Vos
Christopher Davids, often called Christoffel or Kit, was born in 1615 or 1616 in England. He settled in New Netherland and married first Cornelia de Vos. Cornelia was the daughter of Andries de Vos. Cornelia had died by 27 February 1657, when her father, Andries, and Catalyntje's husband, Arent Andriessen, where made curators of her estate, due to Kit's mismanagement of his children's inheritance. Kit married second Maria Martens.
Kit served as an Indian interpreter. Kit signed documents with a mark of his initials C D. He participated in an expedition to retrieve captives in 1663. He had been requested as an interpreter and had arrived at the Esopus by canoe. He also warned the settlers of Kingston of trouble in 1665.
Kit settled in Rensselaerswyck, probably at Fort Orange, and at the Esopus (now Kingston, Ulster, New York). In 1650, he lived "on a farm at Dominie's Hoeck, now called Van Wie's Point" at Rensselaerswyck. Petrus Stuyvesant granted to Kit a "certain plot of land named the 'Weylandt'" near Wildwyck (Esopus) in 1656, which Kit later sold to Jacob Jansen Stol. In 1665, he had half ownership of "the Broncken land lying through Hellgate". In 1667, Kit sold to Evert Pels "his land situated on the bank of the Esopus Kil, near the rondout, to the east of the wagon road, running till a running little kil and extending till the second mountain in the interior of the country up to the Ponckhachking path".
Kit was a colorful character. In 1653, he was accused of selling brandy to Indians against the wishes of the leaders of both the Dutch and the Indians. In 1657, he sued for the rent of house but refused to pay on the grounds that he has was drunk at the time he signed the contract. In 1658, he was twice accused in court-once for striking a man and challenging him to fight (there was insufficient proof) and once for telling Esopus Indians that the Dutch planned to kill them, causing the Indians to take prisoners (Kit denied involvement and produced two witnesses). In 1665, Jacob Joosten, the court messenger of Kingston, was removed from his position because he had refused to summon Kit without an armed guard! In 1668/9, Kit started an argument with Eduward Whittakaer over a piece of land. Whittikaer drew his sword and Kit fought back with a cane that had a sword blade in it.Kit and Cornelia's children [1]:
Kit and Maria's children:
Kit may also have had other children either by Cornelia or Maria, including:
- Ariaentje Davids, married Juriaen Teunisz. [7]
Sources:
- Hoes, Roswell Randall (comp.), Baptismal and Marriage Registers of the Old Dutch Church of Kingston, Ulster County, New York, Baltimore, MD: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1997 (originally published by De Vinne Press (New York), 1891).
- "Names of the Members of the Church of Jesus Christ at New Albany, at the End of the Year 1683, and Afterward", excerpted from the Year Books of the Holland Society of New York.
- O'Callaghan, E.B., The History of New Netherland, or New York under the Dutch, Vol. I, NY: D. Appleton & Co., 1855.
- O'Callaghan, E.B., History of New Netherland, or New York Under the Dutch, NY: D. Appleton & Co., 1855, p. 589, from List of Patents issued by the Dutch Government from 1630 to 1664, rendered as complete as the Books of Patents and Town Records now admit.
- Journal of the Second Esopus War, by Capt. Martin Kregier, 1663, cited in O'Callaghan, E.B., The Documentary History of the State of New York, Vol. IV, Albany, 1851.
- Court Minutes of New Amsterdam, from Fernow, Berthold (ed.), Records of New Amsterdam from 1653 to 1674 Anno Domini, Vol. V, Baltimore, MD: Genealogical Publishing Company, 1976.
- Van Laer, A.J.F. (trans. & ed.), Minutes of the Court of Fort Orange and Beverwyck, 1652-1656, 2 vols., Albany: University of the State of New York, 1920.
- Versteeg, Dingman (trans.), New York Historical Manuscripts: Dutch, Kingston Papers, 2 vols., translated 1899, revised by Samuel Oppenheim 1912, and reprinted by Baltimore, MD: Clearfield Co., 1999.
- Vol 1 - Liber AA, p. 66 of Dee's of Ulster Co., in the Clerk's Office at Kingston.
Records of Baptisms of the Reformed Church at Kingston, Ulster, NY.
Page Number Baptism Number Baptism Date Parents Child Witnesses 2 24 1663 Christoffel Davids Abraham Evert Pels. 3 May Martens Geertruy Andries. 4 49 1665 Christoffel Davids Debora Geertruy Andriesen. 25 Jan. Kingston Marriage Register.
Page 504, Marriage # 39
1679 6 July
HEINDRICK CLAASEN, j. m., Nieu Jorck (New York), and DEBORA CHRISTOFFELS, j. d., of Kingston, both resid. in Kingston. First publication of Banns, 21 May.Source: Hoes, Roswell Randall (comp.), Baptismal and Marriage Registers of the Old Dutch Church of Kingston, Ulster County, New York, Baltimore, MD: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1997 (originally published by De Vinne Press (New York), 1891).
Names of Settlers in Rensselaerswyck from 1630 to 1646
(Compiled from the books of Monthly Wages and other MSS.)
...1638...
...Christoffel Davits; lived in 1650 on a farm at Dominie's Hoeck, now called Van Wie's Point.
(p. 438)Composition for Tenths and Thirds for those who hold under that contract...
Names of Settlers Year
Christoffel Davits. 1646 fl. 30 for tobacco and oats.
(p. 472, from the Rensselaerswyck MSS.)Source: O'Callaghan, E.B., The History of New Netherland, or New York under the Dutch, Vol. I, NY: D. Appleton & Co., 1855.
From List of Patents issued by the Dutch Government from 1630 to 1664
Names of Patentees Description of Grant Location of Grant Date of Patent Davits, Christoffel 36 morgens Esopus 25 (September 1656) Source: O'Callaghan, E.B., History of New Netherland, or New York Under the Dutch, NY: D. Appleton & Co., 1855, p. 589, from List of Patents issued by the Dutch Government from 1630 to 1664, rendered as complete as the Books of Patents and Town Records now admit.
Quoting the Journal of the Second Esopus War,
by Capt. Martin Kregier, 1663:4 August 1663:
...Same date a letter is also sent by the Mohegan Indians to Christoffel Davids at fort Orange requesting him to be pleased to come down to the Esopus on important business which we should then explain and communicate to him. (p. 40-41)19 Aug 1663
19th ditto. Was this morning with fifty men and sixteen wagons to the burnt Village to fetch grain; came back to Wildwyck about eight o'clock. Did not see anything. About noon Ensign Niessen returned with his troop from the Indian maize land. Neither saw nor noticed any Indians. About three o'clock in the afternoon Christoffel Davids came from the Manhatans in a canoe.
Brought with him a letter from the Heer General, dated 14th August, brought also a letter from Pieter Couwenhoven who lay with the Sloop in the Danskamer. [8] The letter was dated 17th August, and addressed to me. Its contents were, That I should be on my guard for he was advised that the Esopus Indians together with the Manissings and Wappingers were prepared to attack and surprize our fort in about two days with four hundred men, and that they also daily threatened him in an insufferable manner; he daily expected the arrival of the Sachem who had already been four days gone about the captured Christians to learn what he should then do and what should be the issue of it. But he had not received any intelligence in all that time. He also writes-That the Indians who lay thereabout on the river side made a great uproar every night, firing guns and kintekaying, [9] so that the woods rang again; and he hoped to be with me in two days.-His letter contains divers other circumstances. Christoffel Davids informs us, that he slept one night with the Indians in their wigwams -that some Esopus Indians and Sachems were there who had four Christian captives with them, one of whom, a female captive, had secretly told him, Davids, that forty Esopus Indians had already been near our fort to observe the reapers and the other people. Whereupon the Council of war resolved to send for the Sheriff, who being come, an order was handed him directing him to warn all the Inhabitants not to go from the fort into the fields without a suitable escort, as directed in the preceding Ordinance of the 4th August. Said Christoffel Davids also informed us,-that the Indians had on shore several bowls and gourds with brandy, which they obtained daily from the Sloops, as the Indians had informed him they could get as much as they required and whatever powder and lead they wanted. Now, we cannot determine what this may amount to, but this I understand that the woman who is on board the sloop with Lieutenant Couwenhoven brought four ankers of brandy with her from the Manhatans, but none of it came ashore here. (p. 42-43)30 Aug 1663
...Convened the Council of War and they resolved and concluded to attack with one hundred and twenty men the Esopus Indians who reside in their new fort about four hours farther than their first fort which we had burnt. We take with us as a guide one of our captured Wappinger Indians. Meanwhile issued rations to the people, and orders to start on the expedition this evening or to-morrow morning; but as it began to rain in the afternoon we did not set out to day... (p. 46)1 Sep 1663
1st September...intended to set forth to day but the arrival of the yachts and the escort to the river side prevented this, and the weather was so lowering and threatened rain so much that we concluded to start next night towards the break of day; but as it rained the whole night we could not set out...
2d ditto. Sunday. The weather continued lowering, and heavy rain fell. In the afternoon very heavy rain fell again so that we could not stir out. Nothing occurred during the entire day.
3d ditto. About one o'clock in the afternoon we started from fort Wildwyck, having of my company two and twenty men; of Lieutenant Stilwil's company, four and twenty men, and seven freemen, with two of the Honble Company's Negroes. We took as guide the young Wappinger Indian, and Christoffel Davids as Indian interpreter, and promised the Indian his freedom with a cloth coat, on condition that he brought us truly to the Esopus Indians. We got eight horses with very great difficulty from the farmers, as they were so very unwilling and could not be brought to give us any horses, except Thomas Chambers, who, without any solicitation, presented me with two for the expedition. Several of the others, who would not give any, used much offensive language to the Sheriff and to the company's officers, saying-" They will have horses; they may see if they can get them." Marched that afternoon about three miles from our fort to the creek which runs past the Redoubt; lay there that night, during which we had great rain.
4th ditto. Found such high water and swift current in the Kill that it was impossible to ford it; sent six men immediately on horseback to our fort Wildwyck to fetch rope and axes to make a raft or some other convenience to cross the creek; they returned to us about ten o'clock; brought three axes and rope. Passed the rope over the stream in order to hold fast to it so that the people may not be swept far down the creek. Crossed over with all the men about two o'clock in the afternoon and marched about four miles further on, where we bivouacked during the night. Considerable rain fell this afternoon.
5th ditto. Set out again at day break, and about noon came to their first maize field where we discovered two Squaws and a Dutch woman; who had come that morning from their new fort to get corn. But as the creek lay between us and the corn-field, though we would fain have the women it was impossible to ford the stream without being seen and then discovered. We therefore, adopted the resolution to avoid the cornfield and the road, and turned in through the woods so as not to be seen. Arrived about two o'clock in the afternoon within sight of their fort, which we discovered situate on a lofty plain. Divided our force in two-Lieutenant Couwenhoven and I led the right wing, and Lieutenant Stilwil and Ensign Niessen the left wing. Proceeded in this disposition along the hill so as not to be seen and in order to come right under the fort; but as it was somewhat level on the left side of the fort and the soldiers were seen by a Squaw, who was piling wood there and who sent forth a terrible scream which was heard by the Indians who were standing and working near the fort, we instantly fell upon them. The Indians rushed forthwith through the fort towards their houses, which stood about a stone's throw from the fort, in order to secure their arms, and thus hastily picked up a few guns and bows and arrows, but we were so hot at their heels that they were forced to leave many of them behind. We kept up a sharp fire on them and pursued them so closely that they leaped into the creek which run in front of the lower part of their maize land. On reaching the opposite side of the Kill, they courageously returned our fire, which we sent back, so that we were obliged to send a party across to dislodge them. In this attack, the Indians lost their Chief, named Papequanaehen, fourteen other warriors, four women and three children, whom we saw lying both on this and on the other side of the creek but probably many more were wounded, when rushing from the fort to the houses, when we did give them a brave charge. On our side three were killed and six wounded and we have recovered three and twenty Christian prisoners out of their hands. We have also taken thirteen of them prisoners, both men and women, besides an old man who accompanied us about half an hour but would not go farther. We took him aside and gave him his last meal. A Captive Indian Child died on the way, so that there remained eleven of them still our prisoners. The enemy being conquered, we reviewed our men; found we had one wounded more than we had horses. Convened the Council of War; submitted to them what was now best for us to do relative to cutting down the maize. The Council of war decided that we could indeed cut it down, but were any more of our men wounded, how could they be removed having already one more than we had horses, and this one must be borne, with great trouble; on a litter by two. Resolved to let the maize stand for the present; plundered the houses wherein was considerable booty, such as bear skins, deer skins, notassen, blankets, elk hides, besides several other smaller articles many of which we were obliged to leave behind that we could not bring along with us, for we could well fill a sloop. We destroyed as much as we could; broke the kettles into pieces; got also twenty four or five guns, more than the half of which we smashed and threw the barrels here and there in the stream, hacking and breaking in pieces as many as we could. Found, also, several horns and bags of powder, in all about twenty pounds; got also thirty one belts and some strings of wampum; took the best of the booty along and resolved to set off. Placed the wounded on the horses and had one carried in a blanket on poles by two soldiers in turns. Set out thus in good order on our return and marched that day full two miles from the fort. The fort was a perfect square with one row of palisades set all round being about fifteen feet above, and three feet under ground. They had already completed two angles of stout palisades, all of them almost as thick as a man's body, having two rows of portholes, one above the other; and they were busy at the third angle. These angles were constructed so solid and strong as not to be excelled by Christians. The fort was not so large as the one we had already burnt. The Christian prisoners informed us that they were removed every night into the woods, each night to a different place, through fear of the Dutch, and brought back in the morning; but on the day before we attacked them, a Mohawk visited them, who slept with them during the night. When they would convey the Christian Captives again into the woods, the Mohawk said to the Esopus Indians-What! do you carry the Christian prisoners every night into the woods? To which they answered-yes. Whereupon the Mohawk said, Let them remain at liberty here for you live so far in the woods that the Dutch will not come hither, for they cannot come so far without being discovered before they reach you. Wherefore they kept the prisoners by them that night. The Mohawk departed in the morning for the Manessings and left a new blanket and two pieces of cloth which fell to us also as booty; and we came just that day and fell on them so that a portion of them is entirely annihilated. Wherefore praise and thanks be given to God Almighty. The course lies about South South West to the Indians new fort which is distant about 12 miles. The way is somewhat stoney and hilly, but the road for the greater part is good, After leaving their fort we marched that day two miles where we passed the night. Perceived the Indians on the road.
6th ditto. Early in the morning we started anew; were obliged to cross a rapid, stoney creek, and came this day just beyond the Esopus Kill, which runs by the Redoubt, where we remained this night, and there died the Indian child, which we threw into the creek. Saw scarcely any Indians that day on the road.
7th ditto. Started again and arrived about noon at Wildwyck; did not remark any thing by the way.
8th. An escort attended the reapers in the field; returned in the evening without having seen any thing. Christoffels Davids departed. (pgs. 47-49)Source: O'Callaghan, E.B., The Documentary History of the State of New York, Vol. IV, Albany, 1851.
Court Minutes of New Amsterdam
Volume 5, page 43
25 Mar 1664
Janneke Heermans, arrestant and plaintiff, v/s Kit Davidts, arrested and defendant. Both in default.Volume 5, page 288
22 Aug 1665
Mattheus de Vos, substitute of Thomas Hal, attorney for Christoffel Davits, pltf. v/s Geertie Hoppens, deft. Pltf. requests by petition, that whereas the deft. has remained to the present time in default of making (according to the order of the W. Court of - June last) any effort to bring the witness here, who, as she then stated, were at Fort Orange, demands that the suit may proceed according to order. Deft.'s attorney, Mr. Rider, requests, that the pltfs. demand as aforesaid may be furnished him, as to this time no copy thereof has been handed him: offering then to answer by the next Court day. The Mayor and Aldermen order parties to deliver in their papers in due season to the Secretary and the deft. was in like manner ordered to deliver in his answer 3 or 4 days before the Court, so that the pltf. may then make use of it. Ady as above.Source: Court Minutes of New Amsterdam, from Fernow, Berthold (ed.), Records of New Amsterdam from 1653 to 1674 Anno Domini, Vol. V, Baltimore, MD: Genealogical Publishing Company, 1976.
Fort Orange Court Minutes, 1659, Volume
Page 70-71, 19 Jun 1653
Jan Dirrixsz van Bremen declares under solemn oath that Jacob Symonsz Clomp, skipper, lately sold brandy in a kettle to the savages at Catskill. Furthermore, in the form of an ordinary declaration, that some beavers' worth of brandy was sold by Jacob Clomp to the savages at the Esopus, according to the complaint made to him by some inhabitants of the Esopus who declared they suffered great annoyance from them in consequence thereof and as to Katskill, that the trouble and difficulties which have arisen are the result thereof and are also due to Kit Davidsz...Page 88, 23 Dec 1653
Interrogation on which this court is to examine Lourens Jansz,
burgher and inhabitant of Beverwyck
1 How old is he and where born? Answers, 48 years and born at Hoesem. 2 Whether about four months ago he was not in the Esopus with Commisary Dyckman? Answers, Yes. 3 Whether, when there, he did not understand and hear Christoffel Davits say, in presence of the commissary, that he, Christoffel, had sold to the savages at one time 22 mutsgens of brandy and afterwards also a half anker of brandy? Answers, Yes. 4 Whether he did not understand and hear Marcelis, the servant of Mr de Hulter say that he, Christoffel Davits, now and then had sold not one, but several ankers of brandy to the savages, which he, Marcelis, had noticed and seen while he lived there at the house of Christoffel Davits? Answers, Yes, and that Christoffel Davits himself said that the sackemaas of the savages themselves had been to see him, Kit Davits, and begged him not to sell any more brandy to the savages, as through it they got into serious fights with each other and made trouble. Which interrogation, the questions as well as the answers were sworn by the defendant before the officer.Page 93, 6 Jan 1654
Jacob Jansz Schermerhoren, plaintiff, against Merten Herpertsz, defendant, for fl. 247:- which the defendant owes plaintiff and further for 30 schepels of maize and a mudde of beans which were lost through the defendant's carelessness, as shown by the affadavit of Christoffel Davits...Page 106, 3 Feb 1654
Interrogation on which this court is to examine Marcelis Jansz,
former servant of Mr Johan de Hulter
First, how old he is and where born? Answers, at Bommel, 25 years of age. Whether, about four months ago, he, besides Commisary Dyckman and Lourens Jansz, did not hear Christoffel Davits say that one time alone he sold 22 mutsgens of brandy to the savages? Answers, Yes, and that he, Davits, said so in the presence of still others. Whether from this selling of brandy and drinking of the savages whether no trouble resulted and arose and whether the sachems of the savages there did not come to said Davits and in their way forbade him to sell any more brandy to savages and begged him not to do so, as they got into great trouble and dispute with one another while being drunk? Answers, Yes, that he himself understood and heard Christoffel Davits say so. Whether he did not see Christoffel Davits now and then sell some brandy to the savages? Answers, Yes, but that he does not know the quantity. Whether he knows or has been informed that some trouble among the Christians and the savages had resulted therefrom, especially with the Christians? Answers, Yes, especially because the horses of Thomas Clabbort has been in the corn. He, Marcelis Jansz, has with uplifted fingers confirmed these answers by oath.Page 190, 1 Dec 1654
Mr Johan de Hulter having come into court has exhibited a certain letter written to Cristoffel Davitsz by the Hon. General. It is decided to have the same copied and in addition to notify him, Christoffel Davits, that he must give the aforesaid gentleman peaceful possession (of the land) in response to his complaints and if he sees fit have the case argued by his competent (attorney).Page 281-282, 4 Jul 1656
Pr. Bronk, by virtue of a transfer (of claim) from Christoffel Davidts, plaintiff, against Jacob Gerritsz, defendant, for payment of the sum of fl. 264:4:-, according to his note, payable in beavers or grain.
The defendant admits the debt.
The court gives judgment for the plaintiff.Page 292, 17 Oct 1656
Gossen Gerritsen, attorney for the widow of Reyer Stofelsen, plaintiff, against Christoffel Davids,defendant.
The plaintiff demands payment of 60 guilders in corn.
The defendant admits the debt and promises to pay, on condition that the note which he executed in favor of Reyer Stoffelsen be returned to him; also a silver beaker which he gave to Reyer Stoffelsen, deceased, to have it remodeled in Holland.
The parties having been heard, the defendant is ordered by the court to pay the said sum of 60 guilders in corn within the space of six weeks, provided that the note, if there is one, be at the same time returned to him. As to the beaker, he is to corroborate his claim by testimony.Page 296, 24 Oct 1656
Johannes van Twillert, plaintiff, against Christoffel Davidts, defendant.
The plaintiff demands payment of the sum of 564 guilders, 8 stivers, according to the voluntary confession (of the defendant), whereupon judgment was given by the court of Rencelaerswyck and by virtue thereof an attachment secured aginst certain moneys in the custody of Jacob Janssen Stollen and Tomas Chambert.
The defendant admits the debt and agrees that the plaintiff shall receive from the hands of the aforesaid Jacob Janssen Stollen and Tomas Chambert the moneys attached, up to the amount of his debt due to the aforesaid van Twillert.
The magistrates, having heard the confession and the consent of the defendant, (give judgment for)the aforesaid sum of 564 guilders and 8 stivers and order that the property in the hands of Jacob Janssen Stollen and Tomas Chambert may be levied upon by the plaintiff to the amount of 564 guilders and 8 stivers.Page 304, 5 Dec 1656
Jacob Schermerhoorn, plaintiff, against Christoffel Davids, defendant.
The plaintiff demands payment of 14 schepels of maize, being the balance of a note executed more than 10 years ago.
The defendant denies that he owes the amount, but declares that he is satisfied to pay it if the plaintiff swears to it.
The plaintiff having taken the oath, the court orders the defendant to pay the plaintiff two beavers in specie and 10 stivers in seawan.From Volume II
Page 19-20, 27 Feb 1657
Appeared before the court Jan Verbeeck and Evert Wendel, orphan masters of the court, who declared that seeing the bad management of Christoffel Davids in administering the estate left undivided between himself and his children, the heirs of Cornelia de Vos, his deceased wife, they had thought fit for the preservation of the said property and the protection of the children to nominate and propose the persons of Anderies de Vos, the father of the said Cornelia de Vos, and Arent Anderiessen, uncle on his wife's part of the said children, as curators thereof, for so far as the rights of the minor children are concerned; who, appearing before the court, have voluntarily agreed and promised upon oath to acquit themselves therein to the best of their knowledge and to the best advantage of the estate and the children. Wherefore the court have granted them authority as lawful curators of the said estate and guardians of the aforesaid children, with power to do therein and in all that is connected therewith as they shall jointly see fit for the benefit of the aforesaid estate and children, binding themselves to render an accounting whenever time or necessity shall demand it. Done in court at Fort Orange, the 27th of February Anno 1657.Page 22, 13 Mar 1657
Christoffel Davids, plaintiff, against Jacob Adriaensen Neus, defendant.
The plaintiff demands payment of fl. 423:10:-.
The defendant admits the debt but claims that he does not have to pay it until the next month of August, when he promises to pay, binding his house here as security for the payment.
Having heard the parties, the court orders the defendant to pay the plaintiff the aforesaid sum promptly in August, according to his offer.Page 50, 4 Jul 1657
Default. Jan van Eeckelen, plaintiff, against
Default. Christoffel Davids, defendant.Page 54, 10 Jul 1657
Jan van Eeckelen, plaintiff, against Kit Davidtsen, defendant.
The plaintiff demands payment of fl. 172:16:- in beavers.
The defendant admits that he owed plaintiff the aforesaid sum, but maintains that in payment he assigned to him a note for fl. 152:- due to him by Cornelis Slecht, which the plaintiff accepted, and offers to pay the balance of fl. 20:16.
The court, having heard the parties, order the plaintiff to be satisfied with the note given to him for the sum of fl. 152:, which he accepted, provided that the defendant pay the balance of fl. 20:16.Page 62, 28 Jul 1657
Harmen Jacobsen, plaintiff, against
Abraham Vosburch,
Willem Hofmeyer,
Marten, the mason,
Tjerk Claessen,
Default. Henderick Gerritsen, defendants
Stoffel Davids,
Claes Ripsen,
Claes Janssen,
Poulus Jurcksz,
Pieter Meesen.Page 63, 28 Jul 1657
Idem, Harmen Jacobsen, plaintiff, against Pieter Bronk, defendant.
The plaintiff says that he has had the money in the hands of Jan Tomassen, which was attached by the defendant, reattached in the said hands, as the defendant had agreed to take it or accepted it in payment of a certain debt and then by means of a new account, had tried to have the said account, which was to be paid in beavers, serve in payment of his last claim against Kit Davids, leaving the payment of this last claim, which was to be in seawan, to the plaintiff. He produces a deposition of Henderick Bierman and Evert Noldinck, in which they attest that the defendant, Pieter Bronk, after the liquidation of accounts, agreed to demand payment from Kit Davids.
The defendant denies that he made any such agreement.
The court orders Henderick Bierman and Evert Noldinck to confirm their affidavits by oath in the presence of the court or in the presence of two magistrates.Page 64, 28 Jul 1657
Jan Eerhaer, plaintiff, against Kit Davidsen, defendant.
The plaintiff demands payment of the sum of fl. 248:-.
The defendant admits that he did owe the sum demanded, but says that he paid fl. 32:- on account and offers to pay the balance within the space of fifteen days.
The court orders the defendant to pay the balance within the space promised by him, under penalty of execution.Page 82, 11 Dec 1657
Tomas Janssen Mingael, plaintiff, against
Default. Christoffel Davids, defendant.Page 83, 11 Dec 1657
Tomas Janssen Mingael, plaintiff, against Christoffel Daavids, defendant.
The plaintiff says that he settled with the defendant about the rent of the house of Jacob Anderiessen for fl. 50:-.
The defendant admits that he did so, but says that he was drunk.
The court refers the case to referees to be chosen by the parties, respectively.Page 89, 8 Jan 1658
Adriaen Appel, plaintiff against Christoffel Davids, defendant.
The plaintiff demands payment of fl. 93:12 per balance due for board and other items.
The defendant admits the debt and promises to pay it within the space of six weeks.
The court condemns the defendant to pay the aforesaid sum of fl. 93:12 within six weeks.Same page, same date
Tomas Janssen Mingael, plaintiff, against Christoffel Davidts, defendant.
The parties having been heard, the court, in accordance with the previous decision, orders each party to choose a referee, which the plaintiff did in our presence, whereupon Tomas Janssen chose Cornelis Teunissen Bosch and the defendant, Christoffel Davids, Willem Brouwer.Page 94, 15 Jan 1658
Master van Hamel, plaintiff, against Christoffel Davids, defendant.
The plaintiff complains that the defendant has affronted him, having three times struck him and called him a forger and challenged him to fight, as evidence of which he produces a knife which the defendant surrendered to the plaintiff.
The defendant denies that he did so, but admits that the knife which the plaintiff produces is his.
The court orders the plaintiff to prove his statements on the next court day.Page 116, 4 Jun 1658
Jacob Adriaensen, plaintiff, against Cristoffel Davits, defendant.
The parties having been heard, it is ordered that the defendant shall submit his answer in writing on the next court day.Page 129-130, 9 Jul 1658
Willem Brouwer, plaintiff, against Christoffel Davids, defendant.
The plaintiff demands payment of fl. 48 and a pair of shoes, together with ten guilders advanced to the defendant for a savage.
The defendant admits the debt of fl. 48 and a pair of shoes, but denies that he owes the ten guilders given to a savage.
The court orders the defendant to pay the fl. 48 and a pair of shoes, amounting together to fl. 54, but orders the plaintiff to prove in six weeks that he advanced fl. 10 for a savage.Page 130, 9 Jul 1658
Jan Martensen, plaintiff, against Christoffel Davids, defendant.
The plaintiff demands payment of a certain sum for tavern debt.
The defendant denies a part of it.
The court condemns the defendant to pay the plaintiff fl. 25, according to the ordinance that a tavernkeeper may not give credit for more than fl. 25.Page 139, 23 Jul 1658
Christoffel Davids, plaintiff, against Jacob Meus, defendant.
The plaintiff says that the defendant overcharges him and asks more than is coming to him.
The parties having been heard, the court orders that each party shall choose an arbitrator to dispose of the matter.Same page, same date
Dirck Janssen Croon, plaintiff, against Christoffel Davids, defendant.
The plaintiff demands payment of four beavers, for which the plaintiff has attached 14 napkins and 12 pewter plates.
The defendant admits the debt.
The court declares the attachment valid and orders the defendant to pay the sum demanded,, or in default thereof to give security for the final liquidation.Page 155-156, 3 Sep 1658 [10]
The honorable officer, plaintiff, against Christoffel Davids, defendant.
The plaintiff says that an affidavit from the Esopus has been handed to him, according to which the defendant, coming from the Manhatans in the yacht of Evert Pels and while being in the Highlands, said to two savages who came on board that the Sachem, to wit, the honorable general, had killed the savages at the Manhatans and that the following night he would come to the Esopus and there also break the necks of the savages, whereupon the savages of the Esopus took some Christian prisoners and created great outrages.
The honorable plaintiff therefore requests that the defendant be examined upon interrogation.Interrogation of Christoffel Davids,
held at the request of the honorable officer
before the honorable magistrates of the said court.
1 How old he is and where born? Answer: 42 years and born in the Bishopric in England. [11] 2 Whether, in coming from the Manhtans and being in the Highlands, he did not call out or say that the Dutch in the night of the 23d of August had killed many savages at the Manhatans and that the following night they would come to the Esopus and break the necks of the savages there? Answer: No, but that he said to the savages who were on board: "I know nothing about that." The defendant pleads not guilty and produces two affidavits, one from Henderick v: Dyck and the other from Dirck Janssen, skipper, who attest that while they were in the Highlands two savages came on board, who asked Christoffel Davids whether the Sachem would come and kill all the savages in the Esopus and the Highlands? Whereupon Christoffel Davids answered: "I know nothing about it."Page 206, 15 Jul 1659
Symon Janssen, plaintiff, against Jan van Eeckelen, defendant.
The plaintiff says that the defendant has in his custody some silverware belonging to Christoffel Davids. The plaintiff, therefore, requests that he may have part of this as security, as he has a note from the aforesaid Christoffel Davids.
The defendant says that the aforesaid silverware was given to him by Christoffel Davids as security for a debt, so that he has a prior claim to it.
The honorable court orders that the defendant shall prove that the aforesaid silverware was given to him as security for a debt.Page 241, 27 Jan 1660
The honorable officer, plaintiff, against Hendrick Anderiesen, defendant.
The plaintiff demands payment of seventy-one guilders, by balance of account resulting from some excess committed by the defendant.
The defendant admits the debt and the excess committed by him, but claims that what he did to Christoffel Daevidts was compounded for with the officer by his brother-in-law (Swaeger), Jacob Jansen Stol, deceased, who promised to pay the sum because the excess was committed on his account.
The plaintiff admits that such an agreement was made, but inasmuch as he received no satisfaction, he demands the same from the defendant as the offender in the case.
The honorable court having heard the parties, order the defendant to pay the plaintiff the sum of twenty-one guilders. (Decision) in the action of the plaintiff against the defendant for the fl. 50 is reserved, the court remaining sureties for the money.Page 243, 17 Feb 1660
Cristoffel Davidts, plaintiff, against Willem Jansen, defendant.
The plaintiff demands fifty guilders by balance of accounts.
The defendant denies that he owes so much.
The honorable court orders that this matter be disposed of by referees.Page 244, 2 Mar 1660
Cristoffel Davidts, plaintiff, against
Default. Willem Jansen, defendant.Source: Van Laer, A.J.F. (trans. & ed.), Minutes of the Court of Fort Orange and Beverwyck, 1652-1656, 2 vols., Albany: University of the State of New York, 1920.
From the Kingston, Ulster, New York Court Minutes
Page 186, 9 Dec 1664
Hendrick Cornelissen, Plaintiff vs. Christoffel Davids, Defendant. Absent. Default.Page 189, 16 Dec 1664
Henderick Cornelissen, Plaintiff vs. Christoffel Davids, Defendant
Plaintiff demands from defendant an amount of 21 gldrs. 15 st. to be paid in Indian corn at 30 st. in sewan and two bottles of brandy, besides the bottles.
Defendant admits the debt, and answers that he has paid something on the same to Jan Van Bremen and plaintiff more than the debt amounts to.
The hon. court orders defendant to produce his counter claims, and that parties then shall settle with each other.Page 207, 4 Feb 1665
Eeshie, the wife of Ariaen Gerretsen Van Vliet, having been asked about what she has seen and heard at Christoffel Davids', when he saw his wife home on Feb. 2, answers that she called on said day at the house of Christoffel Davids, and was by him invited to share their meal and that Christoffel Davids said that he had bought a loaf of bread for tobacco from the soldier Mr. Paul.Page 210, 10 Feb 1665
Hendrick Cornelissen, Lyndraejer, Plaintiff vs. Christoffel Davids, Defendant. Absent. Default.Page 213, 12 Feb 1665
Whereas complaint has been made to the hon. court that Jacob Joosten, court messenger, has refused to summon to appear before the hon. court Christoffel Davids, living across the Kill at the redoubt, and then was notified for the third time to appear before the court, where he was asked if he would summon said Christoffel Davids to appear before the hon. court, because the hon. schout and others wanted said Davids summoned before the court, answers, "No," unless he is provided with a guard of two soldiers, but he personally and alone, did not intend to imperil his life. Upon refusing abovenamed service, Jacob Joosten, court messenger, is therefore by the hon. court discharged from his office...Page 213, 17 Feb 1665 (Ordinary Session)
Willem Beeckman, Schout, Plaintiff vs. Christoffel Davids, Defendant. Absent. Default.Page 214, 17 Feb 1665
Hendrick Jochemsen, Plaintiff vs. Christoffel Davids, Defendant. Absent. Default.
Hendrick Cornelissen Lyndraeyer, Plaintiff vs. Christoffel Davids, Defendant. Absent. 2nd Default.
Thomas Chambers, Plaintiff vs. Christoffel Davids, Defendant. Absent. Default.Page 225, 3 Mar 1665
Henderick Cornelissen, ropemaker, requests that the judgment pronounced on March 10 against Christoffel Davids may be executed. The hon. court orders the officer to proceed with the execution.Page 229, 28 Apr 1665
Christoffel Davids, Plaintiff vs. Juriaen Westphael, Defendant
Plaintiff says that about nine years ago he bought a demolished house of defendant, and that in the mean time the war against the savages at the Manhattans broke out, on account whereof (the people) here were also obliged to flee, in consequence of which defendant has never delivered the house, of which plaintiff still demands delivery or restitution of the money to the amount of 180 gldrs. Defendant says that he bought the aforesaid demolished house of Thomas chambers, under condition that Thomas Chambers was to rebuild the aforesaid house, and to surrender it under roof and that he, defendant, was to cut, shorten, and split the woodwork which should be further necessary to the same, and that he, defendant, should assist him, Chambers, in loading, unloading, and carting the said house. And defendant further says that he sold and transferred the aforesaid demolished house in the aforementioned state which plaintiff, replying, acknowledges having thus bought the same of defendant.
Defendant having again been questioned if he has ever been pressed by Christoffel Davids after the troubles with the savages, to have the house erected, answers, "No," and that Christoffel Davids, in the mean time, has sold the land to Jacob Jansen Stol, where the house should have stood, and the house, in the meanwhile, has been left neglected, so that it is entirely decayed.
The hon. court decides whereas it appears from plaintiff's answers that plaintiff has been negligent in preparing the required woodwork for said house, in transporting, and even in pressing defendant after the troubles with the savages, and furthermore it is shown that he sold the land on which the house was to be erected, and the woodwork of the demolished house, consequently, has been left laying until it has decayed, therefore, plaintiff's demand against the defendant is denied.Page 241, 7 Jul 1665
Having been warned yesterday by Christoffel Davids, through Joris Bolus, a soldier, that the savages are planning mischief against our village, and intend to fight and make war against us, which said Mr. Bolus, besides four other residents here have also experienced yesterday on their way to the bank...it is therefore resolved by the Magistrates, Burgher Council of War and Mr. Berrisfort, commander of the troops, until further orders and approbation by the hon. Lt. Gov. Gen. at New York, that from now on no more savages shall be permitted to enter the village...Page 242, 7 Jul 1665
Christoffel Davids, Plaintiff vs. Jan Jansen Van Amersfoort, Defendant. Absent. Default.Page 259, 3 Nov 1665
Christoffel Davids, Plaintiff vs. Juriaen Westphael, Defendant
Plaintiff demands of defendant an amount of 37 gldrs. four st. as per bill produced. Defendant admits the debt and claims a can of plaintiff, which plaintiff broke last year. The hon. court orders defendant, in accordance with his admission, to satisfy plaintiff, provided he may deduct the value of the can claimed.
Christoffel Davids, Plaintiff vs. Juriaen Westphael, Defendant
Plaintiff demands of defendant restitution of 180 gldrs. for a demolished, not delivered house. Defendant answers that defendant had been summoned by plaintiff on this account before the hon. court, and that, at the time, the hon. court refused plaintiff's demand, because it was not defendant's fault. The hon. court refers to the previous judgement, pronounced on Apr. 28, 1665.Page 264, 8 Dec 1665
Henderick Palingh, Plaintiff vs. Christoffel Davids, Defendant. Absent. Default.Page 284, 16 Mar 1666
Henderick Palingh, Plaintiff vs. Antoni Delba, Defendant
Plaintiff demands of defendant six sch. of Indian corn on account of Christoffel Davids. Defendant answers, saying not to owe plaintiff, but Christoffel Davids 18 gldrs. in sewan, in place of Indian corn. The hon. court orders plaintiff to show power of attorney of Christoffel Davids, in regard to the above claim.Page 290, 6 Apr 1666
Hendrick Palingh, Plaintiff vs. Christoffel Davids, Defendant. Absent. Default.Page 291, 28 Apr 1666
Christoffel Davids, appearing before the hon. court, shows an account he kept in the transactions between him and Andries Hop, deceased, in regard to the payment of his half for the "Brockenland" situated through the Hellgate: "Account of what I, Christoffel Davids, have paid on the one-half of 'Bronckenlant through the Hellgate,' amounting to one thousand gldrs. as per bill of sale or deed. 1) Assigned Andries Hop, deceased, upon Jacob Jansen Stol, and also received through him, 800 gldrs.; 2) Have once paid into the hands of Andries Hop, at For Orange 5 1/2 beavers, in the presence of Jacob Coppen, 44 gldrs.; 3) Have further paid into Andries Hop's own hands, 26 pieces of cloth at four for one beaver, makes 6 1/2 beavers, 52 gldrs.; 4) Have still paid to Andries Hop two pairs of woolen stockings, at 1 1/2 beavers, 12 gldrs; 5) Further two roughly cured deer skins, into the hands of the same, at 1/2 beaver, four gldrs.; 6) Further a foxcoat of nine foxes into the hands of his wife, for two beavers, 16 gldrs. Amounts to a total of 928 gldrs."
Which abovenamed amount of 928 gldrs. appearer declares to have thus paid on the aforesaid "Bronckenlant," and consequently has judicially affirmed the same under oath.Page 320, 15/25 Jan 1667
Henderick Palingh, Plaintiff vs. Christoffel Davids, Defendant. Absent. Default.Page 333, 12/22 Feb 1667
Henderick Palingh, Plaintiff vs. Christoffel Davids, Defendant. Absent. Default.Page 336, 19 Feb/1 Mar 1667
Henderick Palingh, Plaintiff vs. Christoffel Davids, Defendant
Plaintiff demands of defendant the amount of 330 gldrs. for received goods. Defendant demands an account of plaintiff, debit as well as credit, and is willing to pay what he owes by a proper account. The hon. court orders plaintiff to render a proper account to defendant at the next session of the court.Page 340, 26 Feb/8 Mar 1667
Henderick Palingh, Plaintiff vs. Christoffel Davids, Defendant
The accounts between Henderick Palingh, plaintiff, and Christoffel Davids, defendant, having been received by the hon. court, it was found, after both had been examined, that Christoffel Davids still owes Henderick Palingh an amount of 109 gldrs. six st. in sewan (the difference of 60 gldrs. which Christoffel Davids mentioned in regard to Evert Prys, was declared by Henderick Palingh with a formal oath, to have been before settled and paid) and therefore defendant Christoffel Davids is ordered to pay plaintiff Henderick Palingh the above amount of 109 gldrs. six st. in sewan.Page 343, 12/22 Mar 1667
The curators of the estate of Henderick Cornelissen, deceased, request that the money of Christoffel Davids in the custody of Evert Pels, from the suit of H. Cornelissen and Christoffel Davids. Amounting to 100 gldrs., shall be attached by the officer, and said attachment having taken place, that the attachment shall be declared valid.
Whereas Christoffel Davids has been beaten [12] by the plaintiff, Henderick Cornelissen, as per judgment, therefore said attachment, after having been executed by the officer, is declared valid by the hon. court...
Henderick Palingh requests that the judgement against Christoffel Davids, dated Feb. 26/Mar. 8, 1667, shall be judicially enforced. The officer is ordered to proceed with the execution.Page 378, 12 Nov 1667
Jan Martens, Plaintiff vs. Christoffer Davids, Defendant. Absent. Default.Page 387, 7 Feb 1667/8
George Hall, Plaintiff vs. Christopher Davis, Defendant. Default.Page 410, 7/17 Oct 1668
Samuel Olivier, Plaintiff vs. Christoffel Davits, Defendant
Plaintiff demands of defendant an amount of 84 gldrs. 3st. Defendant denies the debt and say that he has a counter claim, and says not to owe plaintiff more than 9 gldrs. The hon. court orders parties first to liquidate and to return at the next session.
Christoffel Davits complains and says that Samuel Olivier sells strong drink to the savages and is ready to prove it.
Joris Hal, Plaintiff vs. Christophel Davids, Defendant
Plaintiff demands from defendant 135 gldrs. 19 st. Defendant admits the debt. The hon. court orders defendant to pay plaintiff.Page 413, 26 Oct 1668
Christoffel Davids, Plaintiff vs. Reyner Van der Coelen, Defendant
The wife of plaintiff appeared and says that defendant owes her 25 gldrs. and 45 more, and has agreed to pay the same to Joris Hall. Defendant admits the debt, and has agreed to pay the same to Joris Hall. In regard to the 75 gldrs. the same were coming to him, owing to a contract concerning excise farm. The hon. court orders defendant to pay the 45 gldrs. to Joris Hall, as per agreement.Page 414, 26 Oct 1668
Samuel Olivier, in accordance with the order order of the hon. court, has given in his bill against Christoffel Davidts, and Christoffel Davids, having defaulted, it is resolved by the hon. court that said bill shall be handed to Christoffel Davids, for the purpose of his replying to it at the next session, under penalty of being sentenced to pay the full demand.Page 419, 15 Dec 1668
The hon. court orders in the case between Samuel Olivier and Cristoffel Davits, that both parties shall take the oath. Samuel Olivier and Christoffel Davits have both confirmed their accounts under oath. The hon. court orders Samuel Olivier to pay Cristoffel Davits the amount of 1 gldr. 17 st., or in case Samuel Olivier returns to him a glass bottle, Davits shall pay 8 gldrs. 3 st.
Page 423-424, 13 Feb 1668/9
Eduward Wittikaer appeared before the hon. court, and says that he had left his house for the purpose of calling on Mr. Paelings, and to be informed about when they would go to the new village, and seeing Jan the Braebander busy chopping same wood, asked him when they would go to the field to make some preparation for crossing the Kil and whether he had seen any place where it would be easiest, because yesterday he had been there, and asked him if he was willing to go today, and answered, no, but if he was willing to go tomorrow that he would go along, whereupon I answered that tomorrow is Sunday, and he further asked me to go with him, and take a drink with him which I did, and found Jan Jansen and Cit Davits at his house, and in the course of a conversation Cit Davits said that I had his land, whereupon I answered, What should I do with your land? The general has given it to me. Thereupon Davits answered, "The general is a fool for having given it to you, and all of you are nothing but beggars who have come over, and as soon as you put your foot upon the land to plow it, it will cost you your life," and more other words passed. Thereupon I drew my sword and struck him on the shoulder, and Davits took hold of a cane in which there was the blade of a sword and threatened to pierce me with it, and after that Jan the Brabander took hold of it, and said, "Get out of my house," and followed me into the street, and refers to Jan Jansen and the wife of Dirck Cornelesen Keyser. Jan Jansen, having been summoned, says that there was much talk about land, and did not very well understand what was said, but could understand enough (to hear) Cit Davits say that he had the land which belonged to his daughter, and if he put the plow in the same it would cost his life. And then Wittekar drew his sword and hit Cit Davits in the shoulder, whereupon Davits took a sword blade and said, "If I would I could thrust you through the body, but I will not," and threw the same down, and Jan the Brabander said, "Get out of my house," and nothing further. Angenieta Jacobs declares that she saw that Jan deBrabander had a sword blade and Wittekar a drawn sword in the hand, and he ran after Wittekar in the street, and Wittekar threw stones, and knows nothing further.Page 445, 31 May 1670
The hon. court authorizes the officer to judicially enforce the judgment obtained by Anna Brodheds against Christoffel Davdts.Page 529, 9 Mar 1674/5
Christophel Davits says that Jan Pondt and Robbert Goldsberry have borrowed a canoe of him which belonged to Mattue Blansjan which canoe the aforesaid persons have not returned. The savages delivered to said Davits two guns and one sword which are in the custody of Grevenraedt. Requests that the canoe shall be paid for with the same. Grevenraedt says that said persons are indebted to him, except Jan Pondt. The hon. court orders Grevenraedt to return the gun and sword of Jan Pond.From the Kingston, Ulster, New York Secretary's Papers
Page 574, 9 Sep 1665 (NS)
(From list of items sold at auction from "the effects of the deceased Mr. Gysbert Van Imbroch, surgeon")
...Christoffel Davids-two chairs, 4 gldrs. 5 st...Page 585, 5 Dec 1665
On this December 5 N.S., 1665, appeared before me, Mattheus Capito, Secretary of the village of Wildwyck, the worthy Christoffel Davids, who in the presence of the afternamed witnesses declares, in my secretary's hand, that he has never ordered, either the widow of the deceased Andries Hop or anybody else, to be at liberty to sell his half and ownership in the Broncken land lying through Hellgate, but only gave order to Simon Harmensen Cort when, at the time, the appearer was in arreston the Manhatans which order to the aforesaid Simon Harmensen Cort was not executed at the time. And therefore the appearer, besides Roelof Swartwout and Albert Jansen Van Steenwyck, both residing at Wildwyck, as witnesses invited and requested for the purpose, has signed the present with his own hand atWildwyck on the day and in the year named above. (signed) The mark C D of Christoffel Davids. (Signed) Roelof Swartwout, Albert Jansen Van Steenwyck. In my presence (signed) Mattheus Capito, Secretary.Page 594-595, 10/20 Mar 1666
We the undersigned Jan Willemsen Hoochteylingh and Jan Joosten, commissaries of the village of Wildwyck, make known that before us has appeared Aert Martensen Doorn, husband and guardian of Geertruyd Andrassen who declares having ceded and conveyed as, by the present, he is ceding and conveying, certain plot of land named the "Weylandt" (meadow) situated under (the jurisdiction of) the village of Wildwyck about 16 morgens in extent, Henderick Jochemsen, granted by virtue of a deed of the same first to Christoffel Davids by the late Dir. Gen. Petrus Stuyvesant dated Sept. 25, 1656, and by said Christoffel Davids conveyed to his predecessor Jacob Jansen Stol, deceased, which aforesaid plot of land of about 16 morgens as mentioned before, he, the appearer, having once conveyed, he, the appearer, having once conveyed to Evert Pels, and said Evert Pels granted the same to the aforesaid Henderick Jochemsen whereof, respectively to Evert Pels, and said Evert Pels granted the same to the aforesaid Henderick Jochemsen whereof, respectively bills of sale and convey bills of sale and conveyances have been drawn up...Page 636-637, 12/22 Feb 1667
On this February 12/22, 1667, appeared before me, Mattheus Capito, secretary of the village of Wildwyck, and the below-named witnesses Christoffel Davids, of the first part, and Evert Pels, of the second part, who declare having contracted with each other in the following manner: Christoffel Davids declares having sold and Evert Pels having bought of the aforesaid seller, his land situated on the bank of the Esopus Kil, near the rondout, to the east of the wagon road, running till a running little kil and extending till the second mountain in the interior of the country up to the Ponckhachking path, and with it his dwelling standing on the bank near the rondout. For which land and dwelling the purchaser promises to pay the seller an amount of 300 gldrs. heavy money in wheat, in three installments, the first in November next of this year, being a just one-third portion. The second installment in November of the year 1668, also being a just one-third portion, and the third installment in November in the year 1669, being also a just one-third part. The grantor promises to deliver the aforesaid land and little dwelling on May 1 next, free and unencumbered excepting the Lord's right, and with them the deed for the same. With which beforenamed contract the appearers are satisfied, under promise of both sincerely complying with the same, pledging their persons and estates as per law. And on this account the appearers, besides the hon. Heer Willem Beeckman and Louwies Dubois as witnesses invited and reuested for the purpose, have subscribed to the present with their own hand at Wildwyck on the day and in the year named above. (Signed) The mark C D of Christoffel Davids, Evert Pels. (Signed) Wilh. Beeckman, Louys Dubois, witnesses. In my presence, (signed) Mattheus Capito, Secretary.Page 642, 15/25 Mar 1667
We, the undersigned, Evert Pels and Thomas Chambers, schepenen of the village of Wildwyck, make known that before us has appeared the worthy Aert Martensen Doorn, resident of this village of Wildwyck, who declares to actually owe...a further amount of 564 gldrs. on account of an assignment to Christoffel Davids, executed by his aforesaid deceased predecessor [13] on July 13, 1657...Page 651, 27 Mar/6 Apr 1667
On this March 27/ April 6, 1667, appeared before me, Mattheus Capito, Secretary of the village of Wildwyck, and the belownamed witnesses, Christoffel Davids, who declares having conveyed and ceded as by the present he is ceding and conveying for himself and his heirs to Evert Pels his small dwelling and the land situated near the Rondout on the bank of the Esopus Kil, belonging under the jurisdiction of the village of Wildwyck, with all the obligations and privileges appertaining to the aforesaid land, by virtue of the grant made by the former vice-director Johannes Dyckman at the time residing at Fort Orange in the service of the Lord's Directors of the privileged West India Company, dated Aug. 16, 1653, with the request that the said Evert Pels in the name of him, Christoffel Davids, shall obtain for said lands a deed from the hon. Lord Gov. Genl. Ridsert Nicolls. Wherefore he also grants him absolute power and authority to obtain the aforesaid deed. Promising to consider valid whatever he, Evert Pels, may have done regarding said affair in his name, and also nevermore to revoke the aforesaid conveyance and grant, neither by himself nor his heirs, nor to proceed nor to have proceeded against the same under obligations as per law, under condition that the conditions of sale of said lands and little house shall be complied with by Evert Pels, in accordance with the contract of sale of the same, dated Feb. 12/22, 1667. And therefore the appearer besides Roelof Swartwout and Gerret Fooken as witnesses invited and requested for the purpose, has subscribed to the present with his own hand at Wildwyck in the day and in the year named before. (Signed) the mark C D of Christoffel Davids, (signed) Roelof Swartwout, Gerret Foocken. In my presence, (signed) Mattheus Capito, Secretary.Page 654, 20/30 Apr 1667
On this April 20/30, 1667, appeared before me, Mattheus Capito, Secretary of the village of Wildwyck, and the below-named witnesses the worthy persons, Evert Pels and Samuel Olivier having hired of the aforesaid lessor his dwelling with the land belonging to the same, as per the purchase of Christoffel Davids, situated on the Esopus Kil near the Rondout, for the period of one year...Source: Versteeg, Dingman (trans.), New York Historical Manuscripts: Dutch, Kingston Papers, 2 vols., translated 1899, revised by Samuel Oppenheim 1912, and reprinted by Baltimore, MD: Clearfield Co., 1999.
More about Kit's daughter,
Deborah Christoffels DavidsA complaint of Hendrick Claes against his wife, Debora, maid before Capt. Henry Beeckman, Justice of the Peace ye 17 oct. in Kingston 1687.
-Is yt [that]; ye sd [said] Hendrick Claes comes in his own proper person and saith yt his wife hath declared yt shee is a— and therefore ye sd Hendrick Claes b yye reason yt shee is a —.
Jurian Tunis, brother-in-law of Debora Davis, being sworn testyfteth he was by and heard ye wife of Hendrick Claes say it; she wold bee from hir husband and then hir husband said to her-yt if shee wold carray hir selfa as an onest wooman he wold take hir and live with hir as a man and wife oought to doe and furdraith nott.
William Demyr being sworne testefyeth yt hee heard Debora say yt; shee wold nott live with her husband noo longr ye reason was asked hir and she declared yt shee was nott worthey to live with him and yet ye foalt was not in him butt in hir and yet Dirrick Wooden Legg mislead her.
Ye wife of Matthis Blanshan reported these following words of which Debora had declared to hir; Dirrick Wooden Legg is the father of hir child and when she was with child Dirrick Wooden Legg was gong to be married she went to him and said yt as he had taken away hir repation hee should give it to hir again whereupon he gave hir bad words-Hendrick Clason did seaverall times promis to forgive hir all her fformer ffoalts in caes shee wold promise yet shee wold live with him hereafter as an onest woman shold doe with hir husband where upon she said; yet shee noever did loue him and connot loue him and ffurder sayth nott.Source: Vol 1 - Liber AA, p. 66 of Dee's of Ulster Co., in the Clerk's Office at Kingston.
Footnotes
[1] Kit and Cornelia had more than one child as indicated by the court case where the care of her estate was handed over to her father and brother-in-law.
[2] Joris is probably a son of Kit based on the fact that Maertie (Marritje) Davidts had a son named Christoffel (bap. 1678, #156) who had among his witnesses Joris Davidts and Jannetie Loperts. Also, a Joris Davids appears as the witness for Jacobus, the son of Jacobus Kwik and Francisca Consalis duk (Marritje's daughter) in 1725 (#3344). Joris and Jannetje appear having a son baptized in 1675 (Jacobus, #137). Joris is placed as a child of Cornelia de Vos based on the assumption that he was at least 20 when his Jacobus was baptized. Thus, Joris would have been born around 1655.
[3] Andries Pietersse and Maertie (Marretie) Davidts had eldest son, Christoffel (1678, #156), and eldest daughter, Cornelia (1685, #433) baptized in Kingston, indicating that Andries or Marritje probably had parents named Christoffel and Cornelia (there were no children baptized with the name Maria). Also, two of the witnesses for their son, Johannes, were Henric Claasz and Debora Claasz (1684, #349).
Andries used Van Leuven in his name in the 1688 baptism of his son, Johannes (#583).
[4] Manuel van Salis Duck and Marritje Christophers Davids baptized a child, Franciscus, in 1697 (#989). This indicates that Marritje's father was Christopher Davids.
Manuel appears as Manuel Gonsalis when he and Marritje Davids baptized a son, Manuel, in 1694 (##823).
[5] Hendrick made a complaint against Debora 17 Oct 1687 in Kingston, Ulster, New York because she had an affair with "Dirrick Wooden Leg", who was the true father of her child, Niclaas Van Schoonhoven (see baptism #408 in the Kingston baptismal record, 1 Feb 1685). Apparently, they divorced. By 1693, she was married to her second husband, Peter Van Bommel. Hendrick was married to Cornelia Swartwout by 1691 (see baptism #682).
The fact that Hendrick used the name Schoonhoven can be established by the fact that 1) Hendrick Schoonhoven and Cornelia Swartwout had a child, Cornelia, baptized in 1691 (see baptism #682), Hendrick Claasen and Cornelia Swartwout had Nicolaes baptized in 1694 (see baptism #797), and Hendrick Claesse Schoonhove and Cornelia Swartwoud had Fransyntje baptized 1696 (see baptism 931) and 2) Nicolaas van Schoonhoven (still going by his birth name) and Neeltje van dr Schuive had children, Debora and Margrita (1710, #1814), baptized with Debora Davids as a witness (indicating a close relationship between Debora and the parents).
[6] Isaac Davidsen appeared as a witness for Johannes, the son of Andries Pieterse Van Leuven and Maritje Davids in 1688 (#583). Manuel Gonsales and Marritje Davids were the witnesses for Marietje, the daughter of Isac Davids and Jannetje Maurits in 1692 (#733). These baptisms suggest a close relationship between Marritje and Isaac. Secondly, Isaac and Jannetje's children according to the Kingston baptismal record were: Marietje (#733), Engel (#826), Christoffer (#968), Jannetje (#1122), Frederick (#1265), Joris (#1439), Samuel (#1538), Christoffel (#1764), and Isaak (#1998). Note that the first or second son (depending on if Engel was male or female) was named Christoffer. The first or second son was usually named after his paternal grandfather. The eldest daughter is named Marietje, possibly after her grandmother. However, she could also have been named after Marritje Davids, her baptismal witness. On the other hand, no other daughter is named Cornelia, increasing the likelihood that Maria Martens was Isaac's mother.
[7] Ariaentje is believed to be Kit's daughter because in the complaint made against Debora Davis by her husband, Hendrick Claes, a Jurian Tunis is listed as her brother-in-law. This makes it likely that the wife of Jurian is then the sister of Debora. The first name of Ariaentje comes from a list of member of the Dutch Reformed Church at Albany, New York in 1683, which has Juriaen Teunisz. and Ariaentje Teunisz. as the first two people on the list. More research is required.
[8] Note from E.B. O'Callaghan: "Six miles north of Newburgh, Orange co. ED."
[9] Note from E.B. O'Callaghan: "The Delaware word, Gent'keh'n, to dance, seems to be engrafted here into the Dutch language..."
[10] Note from Van Laer: "Revised from Doc. Rel. to Col. Hist. N.Y., 13:90-91."
[11] Note from Van Laer: "Mr Fernow omits the word 'Bisphoric,' which probably refers to Canterbury."
[12] Note from Versteeg: "Beaten in the sense of having lost the case."
[13] Jacob Jansen Stol