Jacob Jansen van Etten and Annetje Arians
Jacob Jansen van Etten was baptized 22 October 1634 in Etten, North Brabant, Netherlands [1], the son of Johannes Marinuszen and Wilhelmina Joannesdr. He was engaged to work 15 May 1652 by Adriaen van der Donck and emigrated to New Netherland. Jacob was probably also called "long Jacob" and "Jacob Jansen de lange" [2]. Jacob's wife was Annetje Adrians. She was from Amsterdam, North Holland, Netherlands and was possibly the daughter of Adriaen Gelijns and Grietje Jans. [3]
Before she had married Jacob, Annetje had married Aert Pietersen Tack. However, Aert deserted Annetje, their son, and their unborn child between December 1662 and May 1663 [4]. The family had been heavily in debt and Aert had mortgaged his crops only months before he disappeared. Annetje and her children were left to sell their possessions at auction to pay off the debts. They were further impacted by the Second Esopus War, when Annetje was forced to leave most of the crops in the field. By February of 1664, Annetje reported that she "lacks bread, pork, meat, etc. in her household". After Aert had married another woman back in the Netherlands, Annetje petitioned for and obtained a divorce from Aert on 21 Aug 1664. [5]Jacob had known the Tack family well before the desertion and divorce - Jacob and Aert were both from Etten [6], they had both been hired by Adriaen van der Donck, and Jacob had been hired by Aert as his farm hand. Jacob married Annetje 11 January 1665 in Kingston, Ulster, New York.
Aert and Annetje's children:
1. Cornelis Tack, born in Kingston, Ulster, New York, baptized 14 Aug 1661 in Kingston, Ulster, New York, married Barbar Metselaer 18 Nov 1688 in Kingston, Ulster, New York.
2. Grietje Aartz Tack[7], baptized in Aug 1663 in Kingston, Ulster, New York, married Leur Jacobse van Kuykendaal. [8]
Jacob and Annetje's children:
3. Jan van Etten, baptized 3 Jan 1666 in Kingston, Ulster, New York, married 1) Jannetjen Roosa and 2) Cornelia van Aaken 22 Jun 1731 in Kingston, Ulster, New York.
4. Sytje Jacobz van Etten, baptized 28 Mar 1668 in Kingston, Ulster, New York, married Jan Evertz in 1685 in Kingston, Ulster, New York.
5. Adriaen (Arie) van Etten, baptized 26 Jun 1670 in Kingston, Ulster, New York, married Cathryn Crom.
6. Pieternella van Etten[9], born in Marbletown, Ulster, New York, married Aldert Roosa (the son of Arien Roosa and Maria Everts Pels) 21 Jun 1696 in Kingston, Ulster, New York.
7. Pieter van Etten[10], born in Hurley, Ulster, New York, married Eva de Hooges (the daughter of Johannes de Hooges and Margarita Post) 12 Oct 1697 in Kingston, Ulster, New York.
8. Heyltje van Etten, born in Marbletown, Ulster, New York, baptized 21 Apr 1679 in Marbletown, Ulster, New York, married Willem van Vredenburg 12 Nov 1699 in Kingston, Ulster, New York.
9. Emanuel van Etten, born in Marbletown, Ulster, New York, baptized 29 Dec 1681 in Kingston, Ulster, New York, married Antje de Hooges (the daughter of Johannes de Hooges and Margarita Post) 10 May 1702 in Kingston, Ulster, New York.
10. Tietje van Etten, born in Marbletown, Ulster, New York, baptized 24 Feb 1684 in Kingston, Ulster, New York, married Evert Roosa (the son of Arien Roosa and Maria Everts Pels) 10 May 1702 in Kingston, Ulster, New York.
11. Jacobus Van Etten, baptized 2 May 1686 in Kingston, Ulster, New York, married Rebekka Roosa. [11]
12. Geesje Van Etten, born in Hurley, Ulster, New York, baptized 25 Dec 1688 in Kingston, Ulster, New York, married Jacob Jacobse Decker in 1704 in Kingston, Ulster, New York.
Sources:
1. Baptismal Records, Etten, North Brabant, Netherlands.
2. 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).
3. Notarial Index (re: North America), Amsterdam Archive and Nieuwenhuis, Pim, New Netherland Connections, Vol. 5, No. 2, pg. 50.
4. O'Callahan, E. B. (comp.), Laws and Ordinances of New Netherland, 1638-1674, 1868, pg. 414.
5. Singleton, Esther, Dutch New York, New York City: Benjamin Blom, 1909, p. 216.
6. Gouverneur, Frans, "Aert Pietersen Tack", New Netherland Connections, 7:2, May 2002, citing O'Callaghan, E.B., Calendar of Historical Manuscripts, pg. 268.
7. Versteeg, Dingman, New York Historical Manuscripts: Dutch: Kingston Papers, 2 vols., Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1976.
8. The Divorce of Annetje Arians, Olde Ulster, vol. 10, part 3, 7 Oct 1911, pgs. 207-212.
9. Anjou, Gustave, Ulster County, New York, Probate Records, vol. I, pg. 45 (citing will of Gritie Jans).
22 octobris 1634 baptisatus est Jacobus filius Jois Marini et Wilhelme Jois uxois eius. Susceptores Marinus Jois et Adriana Jacobi. Baptismal Record
(22 Oct 1634 is baptized Jacobus son of Joannes [12] Marinus' son and of Wilhelmina Johannes' daughter his wife. Sponsors are Marinus Joannes' son and Adriana Jacobus' daughter).Source: Baptismal Records, Etten, North Brabant, Netherlands.
15 May 1652 the following persons are engaged by Adriaen van der Donck:
1. Aert Pieterszen Tack, at 100 guilders per year
2. Jacob Jansz from Etten, at 90 guilders per year
3. Jannetje Gerrits from Loon, at 48 guilders per year
4. Maijchien Huijberden from Raemsdonck, at 36 guilders per year.Sources: Notarial Index (re: North America), Amsterdam Archive and Nieuwenhuis, Pim, New Netherland Connections, Vol. 5, No. 2, pg. 50.
Kingston Tax List
(to defray the cost of building the Dominie's house),
12 November 1661"Aert Pietersen Tack, 20 morgens...40 florins..."
Source: O'Callahan, E. B. (comp.), Laws and Ordinances of New Netherland, 1638-1674, 1868, pg. 414.
"There is plenty of evidence that bigamists were not uncommon here (in New Amsterdam)...In 1664, one Anneke Adriaen prays for divorce from A. P. Tack, 'who has married another woman in Holland.'"
Source: Singleton, Esther, Dutch New York, New York City: Benjamin Blom, 1909, p. 216.
21 Aug 1664. Anneke Adriaens is granted letters of divorce and permission to marry another man. Aert fails to appear before the Court.
(Done at Fort Amsterdam. Calendar of Historical Manuscripts, Edited by E.B. O'Callaghan, page 268)Source: Gouverneur, Frans, "Aert Pietersen Tack", New Netherland Connections, 7:2, May 2002.
Aert Pieterszen Tack was brought to New Amsterdam in 1652, as a servant, by Adriaen Van Der Donck, of what is now Yonkers, New York. He was to serve him for six years. By June of 1659 he was at Fort Orange (now Albany, NY) when he sued Jochem Kettelhuyn over a debt. During the course of this suit Aert stated that he was about to depart for the Netherlands; however, if he did make the journey it was of short duration, for by September 1660 he was once more in the Court at Fort Orange in connection with this and other lawsuits. He was a resident of Rensselaerswyck [around Albany, N.Y] in October of 1660. By 1661 Aert Tack had settled at Kingston [then called Wiltwyck], in Ulster Co., N.Y. In October 1661 he possessed Lot No 31 there, on one corner of the settlement, next to the barricade. In 1663 he also owned a farm there, comprised of 20 morgens of land (about 42 acres). Aert was still found in the Kingston area in December of 1662, deeply in debt with several creditors in the Court demanding judgment against him. Sometime between then and June 1663, Aert abandoned his wife and family and apparently returned to the Netherlands. Perhaps he took advantage of the confusion and turmoil caused by the events of June 1663, when the Indians attacked Kingston, with many casualties and much destruction. The Divorce of Annetje Arians
Annetje Adriaens (also called Annetje Arians on occasion, as well as "Annetie Gelvins" in 1679 and "Annetje Adrianse Kam" in 1688) petitioned the Court at Wiltwyck on 13 May 1664 to have an inventory made of Aert Tack's property in order to have the debts paid off at public auction, stating that he had "absented himself." She also petitioned the Court at New Amsterdam sometime during the summer of 1664 for a divorce. She proclaimed that Aert Tack "had not hesitated to marry another woman at Amsterdam in Holland..." The court ordered that Aert be summoned to answer the complaint both at Fort Amsterdam and at New Haerlem on July 31, 1664. Three times he was ordered to appear and also "called forth by ringing of the bell" and "...also three times beating of the drum in the village of New Haerlem." He did not come. It was then ordered that he be apprehended, beaten with a rod, branded, and banished from the colony. There is no record if this sentence as ever carried out; in fact, there is nothing that really proves Aert Tack was even in America at all then. All things considered, it seems most likely that he was probably still in the Netherlands. On 21 Aug 1664 the Court at New Amsterdam granted Annetje Adriaens a divorce from Aert Pieterszen Tack along with the permission to remarry. She married, second, Jacob Janszen Van Etten, who had also been a servant of Adriaen Van Der Donck, and later settled at Kingston, where he was a hired hand for Aert Tack on his farm. He sued several times, apparently unsuccessfully, to collect back wages due him by the Tack estate.Source: The Divorce of Annetje Arians, Olde Ulster, vol. 10, part 3, 7 Oct 1911, pgs.
207-212.
Vol. I, Page 42, 14 Nov 1662 From the Court Records of Wildwyck (now Kingston, New York).
Evert Parys, plaintiff, vs. Aert Pietersen Tack, defendant.
Plaintiff demands payment of the amount of eleven and one-half schepels of wheat, for wages earned. Defendant admits the debt, and offers to pay one-half of it within fourteen days, if it so please the plaintiff.
The Schout and Commissaries order defendant to pay the other half within six weeks.Vol. I, Page 45, 28 Nov 1662
Gerrit Heergrins, plaintiff, vs. Aert Pieterse Tack, defendant.
Plaintiff demands from defendant payment of the amount of four schepels of wheat which his son earned while with defendant. Defendant says he hired plaintiff's son for two years, the first year for ten schepels of wheat and a pair of leather breeches, the second year for fifteen schepels of wheat; that plaintiff took his son away from him, and for fear of arrest sent said son to the Mathans (Manhattan). This having been made known to the Schout and an order of arrest having been asked for, defendant refuses to pay, or wants plaintiff's son to serve out his time; says the mudde of wheat which plaitiff claims for his son is ready. This is affirmed by Poulus Poulussen who is busy winnowing.
The Commissaries, having heard both parties, order plaitiff to send his son back to serve out his time, as he admits he hired him out under a written agreement with defendant, prepared by himself, and according to which defendant is to pay plaintiff a mudde of wheat. For which reason plaintiff is ordered to pay the fine on arrest. He says he himself represents his son.Evert Pels,
The mark (x) of Albert Gysbertsen,
Tierck Claszen de Witt.Vol. I, Pages 46-47, 21 Dec 1662
(The following entry is in the handwriting of Mattheus Capito, Secretary.)
"This note was neglected to be entered by the ex-Schout and Secretary, Roelof Swartwout, and I have entered the same here at the request of Gysbert van Imbrock. This is a literal copy of the original which reads:
"On the underwritten date, the worthy Aert Pietersen Tack, resident of the village of Wildwyck, appeared before Roelof Swartwout, Schout of Wildwyck, and two Commisaries, and acknowledged and said he appeared before us and admitted and declared that he this day settled and closed his account with Mr. Gysbert van Imbrock, and is truly and justly indebted to him for the sum of five hundred and fifty-eight gldrs., in beavers, with interest on two hundred and sixty four gldrs., as per obligation in favor of Mr. Gysbert, which sum the said Aert Pietersen Tack acknowledges he owes. And, owing to his inability now to pay, he absolutely mortgages his present crop of grain which, by God's grace, is to be harvested in the year 1663, and hereby confers upon him full right, power and authority to do with the same as if personally present, until mr. Gysbert shall have received his claim out of the same. Both appearers hereby admit having made this agreement with each other, and, in pursuance thereof, submitting themselves to the jurisdiction of all courts and judges. The appearer (Tack) shall not be at liberty to alienate, seize or cause to be seized any of the said crops or harvests until Mr. Gysbert van Imbrock shall have been satisfied for what has been above mentioned. In testimony whereof, we have affixed our signatures to these presents at Wildwyck this 21st of December, Anno 1662.
(Signed) This is the mark (x) of Aert Pietersen Tack, This is the mark (x) of Albert Gysbertsen, Tjerck Claesen de Wit.
(Below stood) In my presence. Roelof Swartwout.
After comparison with the original the above has been found to be an exact copy, to which I certify.
Mattheus Capito, Secretary, October 25, 1664."Vol. I, Page 49, 12 Dec 1662
Poulus Poulussen, plaintiff, vs. Aert Pietersen Tack, defendant. Plaintiff demands the amount of thirty schepels of wheat, payment of three months' wages earned.
Defendant answers that plaintiff broke the terms of his contract by leaving him. The Court questions Gommert Gerritsen and Dirck Adriaensen, witnesses who have been summoned, and finds that Poulus Poulussen left Aert Pietersen Tack's service, without the latter's consent.
The Court reject the plaintiff's claim, because he hired himself out for a year and left his place within the stipulated period; and decides that defendant owes plaintiff nothing.
Poulus Poulussen, after above sentence was read to him, declared that the witnesses testified falsely, and that if he is not paid he will not be receiving justice.
The Commissaries order the Schout to arrest Poulus Poulussen, and to keep him under arrest until he shall prove he has not received justice, and further proved that the witnesses have testified falsely.Evert Pels,
Alaerdt Heymansz Roose,
Albert (x) Gysbertsen,
Tierck Claszen de Witt.Vol. I, Page 50, 12 Dec 1662
Thomas Chambers, plaintiff, vs. Aert Pietersen Tack, defendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant payment of the amount of two hundred and ninety-four gldrs. beaver's value, as per obligation. Defendant admits the debt.
The Court, having heard the parties, orders the defendant to satisfy plaintiff.Vol. I, Page 53, 23 Jan 1663
Poulus Poulussen, at the request of Emmetje Volckerts, declares and testifies that, after he left Tack's service, Aert Pietersen Tack promised to pay her.Vol. I, Page 73, 18 Sep 1663
Same (Roelof Swartwout, plaintiff) vs. Jacob Janse Stoutenborch, do. (defendant.) Do. (Default.)
Same vs. Jacob Janse de lange, do. Do.Vol. I, Page 78, 9 Oct 1663
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Jacob Jansen de lange (the long), defendant. Second default. Plaintiff demands a fine of seventy-five guilders, and requests judgment. The Court allows defendant a third default.Vol. I, Page 87, 16 Oct 1663
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Jacob Janse de lange (the long), defendant. Plaintiff requests that defendant testify in the case of the prisoner Paulus Tomassen, and state if he did not hear the prisoner say, "Schout, I'll shoot you." Defendant answers that the said words were spoken by the prisoner Paulus Tomassen at the house of Aert Martensen Doorn.Vol. I, Pages 91-92, 23 Oct 1663
Gysbert van Imbroch, plaintiff, vs. Annetje Ariaens, wife of Aert Pietersen Tack, defendant. Plaintiff demands that, pursuant to mortgage, defendant be not permitted to alienate or estrange the gathered grain before he has first been paid. Defendant answers that if plaintiff will undertake to pay her debts she will then get out and leave, and adds thereto that the debts contracted by her for food during harvest time must also be paid, otherwise she could not have taken in the crops.
The Honorable Court, having heard both parties, finds that, according to the obligation, defendant must not appropriate or decrease, much less alienate, any of the grain, without the knowledge and consent of the plaintiff.Vol. I, Page 92, 23 Oct 1663
Jacob Joosten, plaintiff, vs. Annetje Ariaens, defendant.
Plaintiff demands from defendant five schepels of wheat, which defendant admits he owes. The Honorable Court orders defendant to pay plaintiff the said amount.Vol. I, Page 92, 23 Oct 1663
Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Jacob Jansen de lange (the long), defendant. Third default. Plaintiff demands payment of a fine of seventy-five gldrs., legally due after a third default.
The Honorable Court orders defendant, for not appearing before it after a third default, to pay the full fine to plaintiff, and also to pay the costs.Vol. I, Page 98, 30 Oct 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 worked in the field without permission and a convoy. Defendant 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 have paid the full fine.Vol. I, Page 100, 1 Nov 1663
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 requests of said Court that the individual, Jacob Jansen, be discharged, to which the Court consents and discharges the said Jacob Jansen from his arrest for the present.
Done at Wildwyck, November 1, 1663.(Signed) Martin Kregier.Vol. I, Page 109, 18 Dec 1663
Albert Gerretsen, plaintiff, vs. Annetje Tacks, defendant.
Plaintiff demands from defendant, under a contract dated December 16, 1662, payment of the amount of three hundred and thirty-eight guilders, heavy money, payable in grain, according to the contract aforesaid. Defendant admits the debt, and that she has paid on the same the value of eight schepels of wheat and five schepels of peas.
The Honorable Court orders defendant to pay plaintiff, pursuant to her admission and obligation.Vol. I, Page 115, 27 Dec 1663
Albert Gerritsen shows the Court an extract from the minutes of December 18, 1663, against Annetje Tack, in reference to a sum of three hundred and eighteen guilders, heavy money. He has had three summonses served for the payment of said allowed claim, and requests that execution may issue for the same.
The Honorable Court orders the Provisional Schout, Mattheus Capito, to issue such execution.Vol. I, Page 117, 21 Jan 1664
On January 21, the following note was handed to the minister, Hermanus Blom:
Rev. Mr. Hermanus Blom.
Whereas, on the evening of January 2, last, Paulus Cornelissen, Jacob Jansen, alias long Jacob, Cornelis Brantsen Vos, and Ariaen Huybertsen, came to an agreement with the Provisional Schout to pay, for the violations committed by them, the sum of one hundred and seventy guilders, in seewan, of which eight guilders are for costs, leaving one hundred and sixty-two guilders, one-third whereof is due to the Church, your Reverence will also receive thereby two schepels of wheat, besides seven schepels of wheat last week, making in all nine schepels of wheat, reckoned at six guilders per schepel, forwarded on account of the Church at Wildwyck, being the legal one-third of the one hundred and sixty-two guilders. Done at Wildwyck, this 21st day of January, 1664.
(Signed) Mattheus Capito.Vol. I, Page 121, 29 Jan 1664
The Same (Mattheus Capito, Provisional Schout, in the name of the curators of the estate of Jan Albertsen van Steenwyck, plaintiff) vs. Jacob Jansen, alias long Jacob, defendant. Absent. Default.Vol. I, Pages 128-129, 26 Feb 1664
Gysbert van Imborch, plaintiff, vs. Annetje Tacks, defendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant payment of two hundred and thirty-four guilders, eight stivers, in beavers, as per account rendered, allowed by the Schepens under date of December 21, 1662, among which are included twenty-six guilders, eight stivers, in beavers, for interest on two hundred and sixty-four guilders, in beavers, and requests that the horse called "Blackie" (het Swartje) be sold, at her expense, under execution.
Defendant admits the debt, but says she is not able at present to pay plaintiff, as she already lacks bread, pork, meat, etc., in her household, and, further, that most of her crops were left on the field last harvest because of the war.
The Honorable Court, having requested defendant to furnish security, which she knows not where to obtain, and plaintiff not willing to give her an extension, orders defendant to pay plaintiff's aforesaid demand.Vol. I, Page 129, 26 Feb 1664
Paulus Cornelisen, plaintiff, vs. Annetje Tacks, defendant.
Plaintiff presents an account against defendant, amounting to two hundred and forty-one guilders, ten stivers, in seewan, and eight beavers, for money advanced and provisions sold and furnished to her last harvest. Defendant admits the debt.
The Honorable Court orders defendant to pay plaintiff the aforesaid amount.Vol. I, Pages 134-135, 11 Mar 1664
Gysbert van Imborch, plaintiff, vs. Thomas Harmensen, defendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant four schepels of wheat, and to secure payment has laid an attachment therefore with Aert Martensen Doorn. Defendant admits owing him as aforesaid, and asks that the same be deducted from his wages for harvesting, and also presents divers accounts of eleven schepels of wheat and two schepels of peas, being wages for harvesting, six schepels of wheat and five schepels of wheat for guarding the shop of Annetje Tacks, and two schepels of peas for threshing. He also says that plaintiff, through the Schout, forbade him to thresh, whereupon he ceased, and thereupon on the following day plaintiff said, "Why don't you keep on threshing?"; that then he continued threshing and delivered grain to the plaintiff's loft. Further, that plaintiff promised im board, with others, in case Annetje Tacks refused him board. Plaintiff denies he forbade defendant to thresh, but had him forbidden to furnish grain to anyone else than himself; whereupon the defendant answered that Annetje Tacks would not board him; thereupon plaintiff said that if she would not do so, he would.
The Honorable Court, having heard parties, finds, conformably to the judgment for plaintiff rendered October 23, 1663, that Annetje Tacks should neither use, decrease nor alienate any of the grain, without the knowledge and consent of plaintiff aforesaid, and that plaintiff must deliver to defendant six schepels of wheat for wages earned during harvest, and two schepels of peas for wages for threshing, and that he may deduct from defendant the four schepels of wheat, and that defendant may claim the remaining five schepels of wheat from Annetje Tacks.Vol. I, Page 135, 11 Mar 1664
Paulus Cornelissen requests execution against Annetje Tacks under the judgment entered February 24, 1664, served by the Court Messenger after citation, summons and renewal. The Doorkeeper is directed to proceed with the execution.The mark (x) of Albert Gysbertsen.
Thomas Chambers,
Tierck Claszen de Witt,
Gysbert van Imbroch.Vol. I, Page 145, 1 Apr 1664
Albert Gerretsen asks of the Honorable Court that execution may continue against Annetje Tacks, as the barn has been advertised for sale under execution on April 3, next.
The Honorable Court orders the Doorkeeper, after the expiration of the time, to continue the execution, as usual.Vol. I, Page 150, 5 May 1664
On this May 5, 1664, before the honorable Court at Wildwyck, there being then present the Schout, Roelof Swartwout, and the Commissaries, Albert Gysbertsen, Tjerck Claesen deWit, Thomas Chambers and Gysbert van Imborch, appeared the worthy persons, Jan Cornelisen vander Heyde and Paulus Cornelisen, attorneys for Maritje, widow of Jan Barentsen Wemp, and informed the aforesaid Honorable Court of the following Lord's acknowledgment, with the request to enter the same in the minutes. It reads word for word as follows:
Before me, Cornelis van Ruyven, Secretary in the service of the Honorable Chartered West India Company in New Netherland, appeared the worthy Aert Pietersen Tack who, in the presence of the Honorable Lords Councillors deSille and Johan de Decker, acknowledged that he is really and truly indebted to the worthy Jan Barentsen Poest as follows:
For two horses, in beaver's value.......................................................fl. 600
Another horse, 106 schepels of wheat, or in beavers..........................fl. 318
For a cow.........................................................................................fl. 115
Also in beavers..................................................................................fl. 200
Total in beavers or beaver's value.....................................................fl. 1233
Also, for sewant received..................................................................fl. 300
Which sum of twelve hundred and thirty-three guilders, in beavers, or its value, and three hundred guilders in seewant, the said Aert Pietersen receives and promises to pay to the aforesaid Jan Barentsen or his attorney, within three years, paying each year a just third, with ten per cent interest theron from this day. To secure the aforesaid Jan Barentsen Poest in the full payment hereof, he, the appearer, mortgages and binds his farm lying in the Esopus, between Tjerck Claesen's and Jan Willemsen Schoon's, together with the dwelling house, barn and loft, four horses and one cow, and all other appurtenances thereunto belonging, nothing excepted, and also all his estate, real and personal, present and future, submitting the same to the jurisdiction of all judges and courts. In witness whereof, these presents were subscribed by the appearer in the presence of the above mentioned Lord Councillors at Fort Amsterdam in New Netherland, April 1, 1662. (Below stood) To my knowledge, Cornelis van Ruyven.
After comparison, this has been found to agree with the original. To which I certify.Mattheus Capito, Secretary.Vol. I, Page 156, 24 June 1664
Jan Cornelisen vander Heyde asks the Honorable Court to permit him to take along with him the horses for account of Aert Pietersen Tack, pursuant to direction from his mother-in-law, Marietje Meynderts.
The Honorable Court decides that petitioner must proceed according to law against the estate of Aert Pietersen Tack.Vol. I, Pages 156-157, 10 Jul 1664
Sweerus Teunissen, successor of Jan Barentsen Wemp, deceased, requests the Honorable Court to permit him to obtain his money from Aert Pietersen Tack who has absented himself from this place, as he is his principal creditor. And he further requests that the real and personal estate of Aert Pietersen Tack be sold under execution to satisfy his mortgage, especially as the risk of horses, cattle and grain in the field operates to the prejudice of the creditors. Among these horses, also, is a mare, two years old, delivered by his predecessor, Jan Baretsen Wemp, to Aert Pietersen Tack, on the condition, previously stipulated in a contract dated September 7, 1661, that the purchaser should keep said mare, at the seller's risk, for six years and then return it to the seller. Wherefor, he, Sweerus Teunissen, requests possession of the horse and that Aert Pietersen Tack's claim be rated by impartial men. Requests speedy justice with reference to the foregoind, as he is a stranger.
The Honorable Court decides, that, as Aert Pietersen Tack has absented himself, and his wife, not wishing to have anything further to do with the estate, has had an inventory made thereof, he shall be summoned according to law, either by ringing of bell or on holidays. But having learned that the grain in the field, the horses and the cattle are held at great risk to the creditors, the Honorable Court therefore decides to sell these at auction to the highest bidder next Monday, July 14, and to hold the proceeds on deposit as provisional security. The real estate, the Honorable Court decides, shall, after due citation and non appearance of Aert Pietersen Tack, be sold at auction to the highest bidder. Regarding the request for the possession of the mare, the Honorable Court decides that said claim shall be appraised by impartial appraisers, and for that purpose Evert Pels and Aert Jacobsen are chosen to appraise the same as near as possible according to its value; all this being in accordance with the contract relating thereto.Vol. I, Pages 157-158, 14 Jul 1664
Swerus Teunissen, appearing, requests that the sale of the grain lying in the field, and horses and cattle of his debtor, Aert Pietersen Tack, may proceed, according to the decision of the Court, dated July 10.
Thomas Chambers says he was not present on July 10, and is of the opinion that Aert Pietersen Tack must first be condemned according to law, ere his property can be sold under execution.
Mr. Gysbert, Jan Willemsen and Henderick Jochemsen are of the same opinion, but for reasons set forth in the decision of July 10, adhere to their resolution.
The matter having been reviewed, it is decided, for cause, that the sale shall proceed, if reasonable prices are obtainable thereat.
On July 14, the eleven schepels of sown wheat and the additions in the field, together with the horses and cattle, were offered for sale at auction, but were withdrawn by the Honorable Court, as their value could not be reached or realized and this would be very prejudicial to the general creditors. And Swerus Teunissen asks that the horses and cattle be held back until the time appointed for the sale of the farm, the which is consented to.Vol. I, Page 162, 7 Oct 1664
Jan Tyssen, plaintiff, vs. Annetje Ariaens Tack, Defendant.
Plaintiff demands from defendant, for wages for two and one-half months, seventy guilders, heavy money, and thereupon has attached, at Thomas Chambers', as many schepels of wheat as long Jacob, the defendant's servant, has earned with the aforesaid Thomas Chambers.
Defendant refers the matter to the estate, because the wages earned by the plaintiff were earned under her husband, and she maintains that the wages earned by her servant with Thomas Chambers are due to her.
The Honorable Court decides that, as the wages of the defendant's servant, earned with Thomas Chambers, were concealed, the same will be transferred to the estate, and plaintiff shall stand on a par with the other creditors after the sale of Aert Pietersen Tack's property.Vol. I, Page 167, 21 Oct 1664
Jacob Jansen van Etten, farm hand of Aert Pietersen Tack, requests that he also be paid out of the estate of Aert Pietersen Tack, according to account rendered.Vol. I, Page 175, 18 Nov 1664
Thomas Harmensen, Plaintiff, vs. Jacob Jansen Van Etten, Defendant.
Plaintiff demands from defendant, as per balance coming to him, 10 sch. of wheat. Defendant admits the debt, but answers just now not to have it, neither being able to procure it on account of being sick with fever, and requests time. Plaintiff grants defendant time until Aert Pietersen Tack's estate shall have been settled.Vol. I, Page 186, 9 Dec 1664
The hon. court, having examined the accounts given in against Aert Pietersen Tack, finds that these are preferred: 1) Te general expenses of the execution. 2) The village of Wildwyck for the general tax for the preacher's salary and other items. 3) Jeronimus Ebbingh for the third or last installment for the land. 4) Gysbert Van Imbroch for "schepen knowledge," dated Dec. 21, 1662. 5) Jan Barentsen Wemp, for "Lord's knowledge," dated April 1, 1662, and which has been communicated on May 5, 1664, to the hon. local court. 6) Evert Prys, on account of schepen sentence. 7) Albert Gerretsen on account of schepen sentence. 8) Jan Tyseen for wages. 9) Jacob Jansen for wages. 10) Paulus Cornelissen on account of schepen sentence. The remaining creditors shall be paid pro rata, being: Cornelis Barentsen Slecht, Jeronimus Ebbingh, Henderick Cornelissen Sclecht, Jan Aertsen Smith, Gommert Paulussen, Pieter Lookermans, Andries Harpertsen, Wouter Aertsen, Abraham Staets, Barent Reyndersen.Vol. I, Page 194, 6 Jan 1665
Annetje Ariaens requests to be relieved from the debt of hers, because the effects she has possessed with her absconded husband have been sold by execution in behalf of the creditors.
The hon. court decides to have no authority for the same, but petitioner will have to address the higher authority to which she is referred.Vol. I, Page 205, 3 Feb 1665
Jacob Jansen Van Etten requests payment from the estate of Aert Pietersen Tack for wages, amounting to 388 gldrs., heavy money in wheat. The hon. court decides that after the preferred creditors, plaintiff shall be paid pro rata.Vol. I, Page 283, 16 Mar 1666
Willem Beeckman, Schout, Plaintiff vs. Jan Jansen Van Etten, Defendant.
Plaintiff says that last year he rented the house of Gerret Bancken, on account of back village taxes, to defendant at one sch. of wheat per month. Already 13 months have passed, and on this account demands 13 sch. of wheat. Defendant answers and admits having taken the aforesaid house but says that he is not able to pay. The hon. court orders defendant to satisfy plaintiff's demand.Page 328, 29 Jan/8 Feb 1667
Femmetie Alberts, Plaintiff vs. Juriaen Westphael, Defendant
Plaintiff produces, as per a previous sentence, a declaration signed by Jacob Jansen Van Etten and Teunis Jacobsen who declare having heard of Jan Hendericks, deceased, that he served with defendant nine or 10 days less than his legal time. Defendant answers that declarers could not very well take their oath in regard to the above named declaration, and further says that nine or 10 days' serving would matter very little, and complains of his indigence, so that he cannot well satisfy plaintiff's previous demand. The hon. court refers to its previous sentence, provided plaintiff shall permit defendant to deduct 10 days' wages from the nine months' hire.Vol. I, Page 333, 12/22 Feb 1667
Joris Hael, Plaintiff vs. Jacob Jansen Van Etten, Defendant.
Plaintiff demands of defendant three sch. of wheat for received goods. Defendant admits the debt. The hon. court orders defendant to satisfy plaintiff's demand.Vol. I, Page 333, 12/22 Feb 1667
Jacob Jansen Van Etten, Plaintiff vs. Juriaen Westphael, Defendant. Absent. Default.Vol. I, Pages 362, 24 Sep/4 Oct 1667
Thomas Chambers, Plaintiff vs. Jacob Janssen Van Etten and Jan Broersen, Defendants.
Plaintiff says that four pigs of his escaped from his own land through the Great Kill, and that last Friday in or near defendants' plantation two pigs were pierced or wounded, one of which remained behind. Therefore, he maintains that defendants must have wounded the same. Defendants answer not having hurt pigs with either knife or gun because they did not have either. Defendants, having been questioned under oath whether they had not seen that some body had wounded the pigs, answer, "No, only the dogs."Vol. I, Pages 362, 24 Sep/4 Oct 1667
Jacob Jansen and Jan Broersen, Plaintiffs vs. Wessel Wessels, Defendant
Plaintiffs produce defendant as a witness to declare that they did not do anything to Capt. Chambers' pigs as is being said. Defendant said that when he heard the pigs squealing he went with plaintiffs to deliver them, but he did not see that plaintiffs hurt them. Wessel Wessels, having been questioned under oath, whether he did not see anybody in their company hurt the pigs, answers, "No, only the dogs."Vol. I, Pages 362-363, 24 Sep/4 Oct 1667
Jacob Jansen and Jan Broersen, Plaintiffs vs. Paul Paules, Defendant
Plaintiffs demand payment of five sch. of peas for damage to peas which defendant burnt by accident, because his fellow originators of the fire have agreed to pay five sch. of peas for their share. Defendant answers that the fire was caused by accident in the straw, and thus spread to the peas, therefore judges not being obliged to pay, but will submit to the judgment of the court. Defendant is ordered to pay plaintiffs to pay as much as his partners have paid or promised to pay.Vol. I, Page 365-366, 15/25 Oct 1667
Madaleen Dircx, Plaintiff vs. Annetie Adriaens, Defendant
Plaintiff complains that defendant yesterday came to her house with the intention of making trouble, whereupon she was told to leave the house. She not being willing to do so, plaintiff took hold of her sleeve, and said to her that she should go outside, whereupon defendant attacked her, and beat her so that her flesh became discolored in her house. Defendant says that she came to her house for the purpose of paying Jannetie Pels for a sch. of apples, and that then a few words were said which caused the trouble, Jannetie Pels and Henry Palingh declare, at the request of plaintiff, that they were at the house and that they saw and heard that p;aintiff did not treat defendant badly, or give her cause for the assault. The hon. court recommends parties to keep the peace, or else it will be obliged to punish according to law.Vol. I, Page 380, 3/13 Dec 1667
Thomas Quick, Plaintiff vs. Reyner Van Coelen, Defendant
Plaintiff says that defendant hired him till May for 40 sch. of wheat and that defendant has now discharged him without reasons. Therefore, he demands his full hire. Defendant says that he hired his man Thomas Quick till May and that he ordered him to cart wood which he refused, and that he several times fed clean wheat to the horses, which he did to cause trouble. Plaintiff denies having fed the horses clean wheat. Defendant agrees to prove the same and produces his threshers Jacob Van Etten and Jan Broerssen, who declare having seen several times wheat in the horses' manger. Leendert Barents also a thresher declares having taken a quantity of wheat out of the horses' manger and all the threshers together say that said Thomas Quick has several times fed the threshed wheat against their will to the horses. The hon. court, having considered the case, orders defendant to pay plaintiff in proportion of his rendered services and time.Vol. II, Page 399, 3/13 Mar 1667/8
Albert Govers, Plaintiff vs. Jacob Janss Van Etten, Defendant. Default.Vol. II, Page 400, 10/20 Mar 1667/8
Albert Govers, Plaintiff vs. Jacob Jansen, Defendant
Plaintiff demands of defendant seven sch. of wheat on account of the sale of a little house and lot, also four sch. of wheat for cooperage earned by his predecessor Willem Hap. Defendant admits owing the seven sch. of wheat, but he cannot pay thefour sch. of wheat, because all of his wife's estate was at the time sold by the creditors. The hon. court orders the defendant to pay the demanded seven sch. of wheat to plaintiff on account of the purchase of the little house and lot, and in regard to the four sch. of wheat for cooperage, it is decided that he does not owe the same, because her former husband, Aert Peters Tack, left her, and on this account got into difficulties, and the estate was sold by the preferred creditors.Vol. II, Page 413, 26 Oct 1668
Joris Hal, Plaintiff vs. Jacob Van Etten, Defendant. Default.Vol. II, Page 429, 22 Mar 1668/9
Annetie Adriaansen, Plaintiff vs. Arent Teunesen, Defendant
Plaintiff says that she had loaned defendant a pot and defendant had broken the same, and requests that she shall be compensated for the pot. Defendant says that he is not obliged to pay for a new pot. The hon. court orders that the pot shall be appraised by impartial persons to find out how much the pot was worth when plaintiff loaned the same to defendant, and he shall pay for its value.Vol. II, Page 430, 22 Mar 1668/9
Lowies DuBois, Plaintiff vs. Jacob Van Etten, Defendant
Plaintiff demands of defendant an amount of 10 sch. of wheat balance for the purchase money of a cow he bought of plaintiff. Defendant says to only owe 7 sch. and no more. The hon. court orders defendant to pay plaintiff the 7 sch. of wheat and plaintiff is ordered to prove that defendant owes 10 sch. of wheat.Vol. II, Pages 536-537, 7 Apr 1664 From the Kingston, Ulster, New York Secretary's Papers
Conditions and terms upon which the barn of Aert Pietersen Tack shall be sold by Albert Gerretsen to the highest bidder at Lord's execution. 1) The abovenamed shall be paid for by the buyer in three installments. The first one shall take place on Oct. 1 of this current year; the second on January 1 of next year 1664/5, the third on April 1 of the same year. The delivery to the purchaser shall take place on May 1, next. 2) The payment shall be made in good deliverable winter wheat, the schepel valued at three gldrs. 3) The purchaser shall furnish sufficient security at the pleasure of the executor. 4) In case the purchaser shall not furnish satisfactory security, said barn shall again be offered for sale at the expense of the purchaser, and in case it should be sold at a higher price he shall not be benefited thereby. 5) The stiver money shall be and remain at the charge of the purchaser. Thus enacted at Wildwyck this Apr. 7, 1664, in the presence of Albert Gysbertsen and Tjerck Claesen De Wit, commissaries.
Albert Gerretsen makes the first bid for 300 gldrs. Henderick Cornelis Lyndraeyer increases the bid with 50 gldrs., making 350 gldrs. Albert Gerretsen increases it with 25 gldrs., amounting to 375 gldrs. Henderick Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, increases it, and offers 25 gldrs. more, being 400 gldrs. Albert Gerritsen increases and bids 25 gldrs. More, being 425 gldrs. Henderick Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, bids 25 gldrs. more, being 450 gldrs. The highest bidder is Henderick Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, for 450 gldrs. which remain fixed. Then this was increased with 400 more gldrs. and gradually lowered until it reached 150 gldrs., and said Henderick Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, remained purchaser for the amount of 600 gldrs. in wheat, furnishing as securities Albert Gerretsen, the executor himself and Jan Jansen Van Oosterhout who, each as principal besides the purchaser, have signed the present with their own hand in the presence of Albert Gysbertsen and Tierck Claesen DeWit as witnesses invited and requested for this purpose. Done at Wildwyck on the date and in the year as above. (Signed) The mark'A'of Albert Gysbertsen; Known to me: Tierck Claeszen DeWitt. The markof Henderick Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, Albert Gerretsen, Jan Jansen Van Oosterhout. In my presence to which testifies (signed) Mattheus Capito, Secretary.
Vol. II, Pages 537-538, 7 Apr 1664
Conditions and terms whereupon the horse 't Swartje (the Black) by name, belonging to Aert Pietersen Tack is to be sold at Lord's execution by Gysbert Van Imborch to the highest bidder. 1) The abovenamed horse shall be paid for by the buyer in two installments, the first, being one-half, shall take place on Oct. 1 of this current year; the second on Candlemas of next year 1665. The delivery to the purchaser shall take place immediately. 2) The payment shall take place in good deliverable winter wheat, the sch. valued at three gldrs. 3) The purchaser shall furnish sufficient sureties to the satisfaction of the executor. 4) In case the purchaser shall not furnish sufficient sureties, said horse shall again be offered for sale at the expense of the previous purchaser who shall not be benefited in case it should bring a higher price. 5) The stiver money shall be and remain at the charge of the purchaser. Thus enacted in the presence of Albert Gysbertsen and Tjerck Claesen De Wit, commissaries, at Wildwyck this Apr. 7, 1664.
Henderick Jochemsen makes the first bid for 100 gldrs. Aert Jacobsen increases it, and bids 25 gldrs. more, making 125 gldrs. Roelof Swartwout increases it, and bids 25 gldrs. more, making 150 gldrs. Roelof Swartwout increases the same, and bids 10 gldrs. more, making 160 gldrs. Roelof Swartwout is the highest bidder at 450 gldrs. which remain fixed. Then this was increased (by the auctioneer) with 100 gldrs. and ran down to 40 gldrs., and Tjerck Claesen DeWit became purchaser for the amount of 200 gldrs. in wheat, and furnishes as sureties Albert Gysbertsen and Mattys Roelofsen who, each as principal besides the purchaser, have subscribed to the present with their own hand in the presence of Henderick Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, and Jan Jansen Van Oosterhout as witnesses invited and requested for this purpose. Done at Wildwyck on the date and in the year as mentioned above. (Signed) The mark'A'of Albert Gysbertsen; Jan Jansen Van Oosterhout; the markof Mattys Roelofsen. In my presence, to which testifies (signed) Mattheus Capito, Secretary.
Vol. II, Pages 540-541, 13 May 1664
Annetje Ariaens, wife of Aert Pietersen Tack, petitions the members of the hon. court who are present, viz., the schout Roelof Swartwout and Gysbert Van Imborch commissary, that an inventory shall be taken of her personal and real estate, because her husband Aert Pietersen Tack has absented himself, for the purpose of satisfying the creditors and paying the debts incurred by her husband, and points out: a farm containing 20 morgens of arable land wherein there have been sown 11 sch. of winter wheat, is situated under (the jurisdiction of) the village of Wildwyck between Jan Willemsen Schoon's and Tjerck Claesen DeWit's, a dwelling and lot at Wildwyck, two mares and a young mare one winter old, a cow and a heifer two years old, a plow and its belongings, a wagon, a sleigh for wood (may also mean wooden sleigh), a short beam or girder sleigh, a trundle cart, two harrows-one with wooden and the other with iron teeth, a fathom of rope (may also mean rope for one team), a rein with two bridle-bits, a winnow, two forks (probably hayforks), an old forest axe, a chest with old things (these pieces Annetje Ariaens appropriates for her own use), a pair of tongs and a dinner dish, a pothook, a blanket, an old bed (these three pieces Annetje Ariaens appropriates to her own use), a waterpail, a kettle, two wooden troughs, a strainer, a "stoof" (a piece of furniture used for keeping the feet warm by putting live coals inside), an earthen pot, a kettle filled with tar, a half barrel, a table without feet, 27 or 28 fir wood plates, a churn without bottom, some old tubs, a spoon plate, four pewter spoons, a ladder for the loft, some "dreps" lying on the loft, some oats lying on the loft, amounting to about 18 or 19 sch., about 1 or 1 1/2 sch. of peas, a bench and a chair, two lengths of old edges. Thus made at Wildwyck, this May 13, 1664. In presence of me, to which certifies, (signed) Mattheus Capito, Secretary.Vol. II, Page 541, 10 Jul 1664
On this July 10, 1664, we, Evert Pels and Aert Jacobsen, both appointed good men by the hon. court at Wildwyck, sat in regard to the case and claim concerning a mare, it having been stipulated in the conditions of the contract of sale dated Sept. 7, 1661, by the deceased Jan Barentsen Wemp that the buyer, Aert Pietersen Tack, shall keep said mare for six years at the seller's risk, being (at the risk) of the aforesaid Jan Barentsen Wemp, deceased, and that the buyer Aert Pietersen Tack at the end of said six yearswas to return the mare to the aforenamed seller. And whereas the buyer Aert Pietersen Tack has absented himself from Wildwyck, therefore, his wife, being unwilling to have anymore to do with them, has caused the effects to be inventoried, and though the time of six years of the mare has not yet expired, yet Sweerus Teunissen, successor to the aforesaid Jan Barentsen Wemp, petitions to judicially attach said mare, which claim or pretence against the aforesaid mare has, by us good men to the best of our knowledge, been impartially examined, and has been appraised as follows: Sweerus Teunissen, when appropriating the aforesaid mare, shall pay out in satisfaction of the claim or title of Aert Pietersen Tack 160 gldrs. heavy money. Thus enacted at Wildwyck on the day and in the year named above, and for said purpose we have signed the present with with our own hand. (Signed) Evert Pels, Aert Jacobsz., Quod Attester Rogatus, (signed) Mattheus Capito, Secretary.Vol. II, Pages 543-546, 7 Oct 1664
Conditions and terms whereupon, by "Lord's execution" shall be sold to the highest bidder the land of Aert Pietersen Tack, as also the house and lot of the same, the same not being enclosed with a fence, on October 7, 1664, in the presence of officer Willem Beeckman and the commissaries Tomas Chambers and Jan Willemsen Hooghteylingh. 1) The land and also the house and the lot belonging to the same shall be paid for by the purchaser in three installments, the first being ready cash, meaning inside of six weeks, the second on the first of March of the next year, 1665,, and the third on October 1 of the same year. 2) The payment shall take place in grain, viz., the wheat at three gldrs. per sch., the oats at one gldr. per sch. buckwheat at 30 st. per sch., peas at 50 st. per sch., barley at 50 st. 3) The moveables being horses, cows, farming implements and furniture shall be paid for in cash by the purchaser, viz., inside of six weeks on the above-mentioned payments. 4) The purchaser shall be obliged to furnish two sufficient sureties to the satisfaction of the executor, each as principal. 5) In case the buyer cannot produce sufficient sureties, the above specified effects shall again be offered for sale at the expense of the first purchaser, in case they should be sold at a higher price, the previous purchaser shall not profit thereby. 5) The stiver money shall be and remain at the charge of the purchaser. Thus enacted at Wildwyck on the above date.
First the land was offered for sale, being 20 morgens in extent, and bidders were: Teunis Jacobsen for 600 gldrs., which was increased by Tjerck Claesen to 700 gldrs., which was increased by Jan Jansen Van Oosterhaut to 800 gldrs., which was increased by Teunis Jacobsen to 900 gldrs., which was increased by Gerrit Fooken to 1,000 gldrs. These 1,000 gldrs. remain fixed, and are increased with 1,000 gldrs. (by the auctioneer) and run down to 130 gldrs. and Mattheus Capito, attorney for Sweerus Teunissen, bought the same for 1,130 gldrs. for Sweerus Teunissen.
The house and lot are offered for sale and bidders are: Hendrick Cornelissen for 50 gldrs., which was increased by Jan Jansen Van Oosterhout to 100 gldrs., which was increased by Hend. Cornelissen Slecht to 150 gldrs., which was increased by Walran DuMont to 200 gldrs., which was increased by Jan Jansen Van Oosterhout to 225 gldrs. These 225 gldrs. remain fixed, and this amount is (by the auctioneer) increased by 225 gldrs., which runs down to 140 gldrs., and Mattheus Capito, attorney for Sweerus Teunissen became purchaser for 365 gldrs. for Sweerus Teunissen.
The old mare is offered for sale and bidders are: Tjerck Claesen De Wit for 150 gldrs., which is increased by Aert Jacobsen to 175 gldrs., and is increased by Tjerck Claesen to 200 gldrs. These 200 gldrs. remain fixed, and an additional 100 gldrs. added (by the auctioneer) which are bid down to 42 gldrs., and Tjerck Claesen De Wit becomes purchaser for 242 gldrs.
The young mare is offered for sale, and bidders are: Albert Gysbertsen, 100 gldrs. This is increased by Tjerck Claesen to 125 gldrs., and is increased by Jan Jansen Van Oosterhout to 150 gldrs., and by Hend. Conelissen, Lyndraeyer, to 175 gldrs., and by Jan Jansen Van Oosterhout to 200 gldrs., which 200 gldrs. remain fixed, and (by the auctioneer) increased with 100 gldrs., which 100 gldrs. are bid down to 38 gldrs. and Aert Jacobsen became purchaser for 238 gldrs.
A cow was offered for sale, and bidders were: Jan JansenVan Oosterhout, 60 gldrs. This was increased by Teunis Jacobsen to 80 gldrs., was increased by Jan Jansen Van Oosterhout to 100 gldrs.. These 100 gldrs. remain fixed. (The auctioneer) increased the bid with 50 gldrs. which are run down to 11 gldrs., and Tjerck Claesen DeWit became purchaser for 111 gldrs.
A heifer 2 1/2 years old was offered for sale and bidders were: Henderick Martensen, 40 gldrs. This was increased by Hend. Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, to 60 gldrs., and by Albert Gysbertsen to 80 gldrs., and by Jan Jansen Van Oosterhout to 90 gldrs. These 90 gldrs. remain fixed, and are increased (by the auctioneer) with 50 gldrs. which are bid down to 10 gldrs., and Albert Gysbertsen became purchaser for 100 gldrs.
A plow and its appurtenances were offered for sale and bidders were Henderick Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, 30 gldrs., which was increased by Jan Jansen Van Oosterhout to 40 gldrs. These 40 gldrs. remain fixed, and were increased with 40 gldrs., which are bid down to 12 gldrs., and Henderick Cornelissen Slecht became purchaser for 52 gldrs.
A wagon was offered for sale, and bidder was Henderick Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, 30 gldrs. These 30 gldrs. remain fixed, and are (by the auctioneer) increased with 20 gldrs., which are bid down to 2 gldrs. and Henderick Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, became purchaser.
A fathom of rope was put up for sale and bidders were: Henderick Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, 9 gldrs.; was increased by Jan Jansen Van Oosterhout to 10 gldrs. These 10 gldrs. remain fixed, and were (by the auctioneer) increased by 8 gldrs., which amount was bid down to 1 gldr. and Jan Willemsen Hoochteylingh became purchaser for 11 gldrs.
A wood sleigh, short girder sleigh and trundle cart were offered for sale and bidders were: Henderick Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, 9 gldrs., which was increased by Jan Jansen Van Oosterhout to 12 gldrs. These 12 gldrs. remain fixed, and are increased with 12 gldrs. (by the auctioneer) and bid down to 1 gldr., and Jan Joosten remains purchaser for 13 gldrs.
A harrow with iron teeth was offered for sale, and bidders were Jan Jansen Van Oosterhout, 20 gldrs., which was increased by H. Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, to 23 gldrs., which was increased with 23 gldrs., while the above 23 gldrs. remain fixed, and (the increase) was bid down to 7 gldrs., and Henderick Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, became purchaser for 30 gldrs.
A rein with two bridle bits, two forks, one old wood axe, one pair of tongs, one water-pail, one kettle, two wooden troughs, one strainer or sieve, one "stoof," one earthen pot, one kettle filled with tar, one half-barrel, one table without feet are offered for sale, and bidders are: Henderick Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, 18 gldrs., which is increased by Jacob Joosten to 20 gldrs. These 20 gldrs. remain fixed, and are increased (by the auctioneer) with 12 gldrs., which are bid down to 1 gldr. and Jan Jansen Van Oosterhout became purchaser for 21 gldrs.
A churn without bottom, an old tub, a spoon plate with four pewter spoons, a ladder for the loft, a bench, a chair, four old wheels are offered for sale, and bidder was Henderick Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, 6 gldrs. These 6 gldrs. remain fixed, and were increased (by the auctioneer) with 6 gldrs., which were bid down to 1 gldr. and Henderick Cornelissen, Lyndraeyer, became purchaser for 7 gldrs.
Seven planks and 11 deal board are offered for sale and bidder was Jacob Joosten, 13 gldrs. These 13 gldrs. remain fixed, and are increased (by the auctioneer) with 13 gldrs., which are bid down to 2 gldrs. and Jacob Joosten remained purchaser for 15 gldrs.
In my presence (signed) Mattheus Capito, Secretary.On Dec. 3, as per Gysbert Van Imbroch's report, Thomas Chambers took one winnow, belonging to the aforesaid estate, off Mr. Gysbert's hand for three sch. of wheat. This aforesaid winnow was again returned to Mr. Gysbert. (The above had been crossed out in the original.)
Vol. II, Page 572, 9 Sep 1665 (NS)
(From list of items sold at auction from "the effects of the deceased Mr. Gysbert Van Imbroch, surgeon")
...Long Jacob-a copper kettle, 24 gldrs...Long Jacob-a new gray hat, 29 gldrs...Vol. II, Page 612, 23 Aug 1666 (NS)
On this August 23, N. S., 1666, appeared before me, Mattheus Capito, Secretary of the village of Wildwyck, and the below-named witnesses Arent Teunissen and Pieter Gillessen who declare having agreed as follows: Pieter Gillessen declares having contracted with Arent Teunissen that the latter shall for him and in his place take care of the cows and pasture them with Jacob Jansen Van Etten, in the same manner as stipulated by previous contract in regard to herding the cows...Vol. II, Pages 629-30, 11 Dec 1666
On this December 11, N. S., 1666, appeared before me, Mattheus Capito, Secretary of the village of Wildwyck, and the below-named witnesses Jacob Barentsen Cool, of the first part, and Jan Cornelissen Van Gottenborch, of the second part, who declare having contracted in the following manner: Jacob Barents Cool declares having sold and Jan Cornelissen Van Gottenborch having bought of the aforesaid seller a shed and the half of the lot belonging to the same...On which account the appearers, besides Henderick Palingh and Jacob Jansen Van Etten as witnesses invited and requested for the purpose, have subscribed to the present with their own hand at Wildwyck on the day and in the year named before. (Signed) The mark IB of Jacob Barents Cool, Jan Cornelissen Van Godtenburg. (Signed) Henry Pawling, the markof Jacob Jansen Van Etten. In my presence, (signed) Mattheus Capito, Secretary.
Vol. II, Page 631-632, 12/22 Dec 1666
(From list of items sold at a public sale by Henderick Martensen)
...For a sword and a bullet-bag Jacob Jansen Van Etten bids two sch. of wheat, being 6 gldrs. Cornelis Barents increases the same to 7 gldrs. And Cornelis Barents becomes purchaser at the said amount of 7 gldrs...
Bidders for the cow are...(amount increased) by Jacob Jansen Van Etten to 26 sch. of wheat, 78 gldrs. These 78 gldrs. remain fixed, and are increased (by the auctioneer) with 78 gldrs. which are bid down to 14 gldrs., and the seller keeps it to himself.Vol. II, Page 664, 2 Jul 1667 (NS)
(From list of items sold at auction by Capt. Daniel Broodhead)
...A parcel of oats, marked No. 3, lying next to the above-mentioned oats, for which Jacob Jansen Van Etten bids 70 gldrs., Reynier Van der Coele draws one sch. of wheat and bids 88 gldrs...Vol. II, Page 674, 23 Mar 1670
Appeared before me, W. laMontagne, Secretary for the Hon. court at Kingston, and the afternamed witnesses Roelof Swartwout, who becomes security-principal-for the person of Reynier Van der Coelen...The aforesaid Van der Coelen also furnishes as counter pledge or security to the aforesaid Swartwout the two mares, and further 126 sch. of oats which are coming to Van der Coelen from Poulus Poulusen and Jacob Jansen, residents at Horley...Vol. II, Page 679, 10 May 1670
I, the undersigned, Eduwaerdt Wittekar, declare having taken upon myself the condition of Robin Goulsberry, to pay to Mr. Kip the amount of 380 gldrs., to be paid in summer wheat, market price, as per condition, and discharge Poulus Poulussen and Jacob Jansen Van Etten as securities, this May 10, 1670. (Signed) Ed. Whitaker.Source: Versteeg, Dingman, New York Historical Manuscripts: Dutch: Kingston Papers, 2 vols., Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1976.
Records of Baptisms of the Reformed Church at Kingston, Ulster, NY.
Page Number Baptism Number Baptism Date Parents Child Witnesses 1 7 1661 Aart Pietersen Tack Cornelis Andries Harmensen. 14 Aug Annetje Adriaensen Pieter Lookermans. Geertruy Andriessen, from Fort Orange. 3 26 1663 Aart Pietersen Tack Grietjen Jacob Jansen. (torn) Aug Grietjen Vooght Barber Andries. 5 65 1666 Jacob Jansen Jan Jan Cornelisse. 3 Jan Annetjen Ariaens Jan Tyssen. Willempje Jacobs. 6 92 1668 Jacob Jansen Sytje Jan Broers, 25 March Annetje Adriaens and his wife. 7 106 1670 Jacob Yansen Van Etten Adriaen (No witnesses named.) 26 June Annetie Adriaens 12 182 1679 Jacob Jansse Van Etten Heiltie Jacob Jansse Decker. 21 April Annetie Gelvins Bp'd "at Marbleton" (Marbletown) Gysbert Albertsse. Jannetie Craffers. 15 246 1681 Jacob Jansz van Ette Emanuel Leendert Barents [13] Cool. 29 Dec. Annetie Adriaandr Maritie (surname not given). [14] 21 353 1684 Jacob Janse van Etten Tietie Nicolaus Antoni. 24 Feb. Annetie Adriaanz Engeltie Heyndrix. 26 467 1686 Jacob van Etten Jacobus Jan Rosa. 2 May Annetie Ariaans Hillegond Willemz. 32 600 1688 Jacob Jansen Van Etthe Geesje Barabara Metselaer. 25 Dec. Annetje Adriaentse Kam Jannetje (surname not given.) Page 501 Marriage Number 16 11 Jan. 1665 Kingston Marriage Register.
JACOB JANSEN, j. m. of Etten, in Brabant, and ANNETJE ARIANS, of Amsterdam, deserted wife of AAERT PIETERSEN TACK, both resid. Here (in Wildtwyck, now Kingston). First publications of Banns, 28 Dec., 1664; second, 4 Jan.; third, 11 Jan. 1665.Page 508 Marriage Number 79 1685 (Date of marriage not given)
JAN EVERTZ, j. m., of Vianen, under the jurisdiction of the "Stigt Vtregt" (Diocese of Utrecht), and SYTIE JACOBZ VAN ETTEN, j. d., of Kingstouwne, both resid. in Marmur (Marbletwon). First publication of Banns (probably), 23 Apl.Page 510 Marriage Number 96 18 Nov. 1688
CORNELIS TACK, j. m., born in Kings Touwn, and BARBAR METSELAER, j. d., born in Nieuw=Yorck (New York). Date of Banns not given.Page 512 Marriage Number 118 21 June 1696
ALDERT ROOS, j. m., born in Horle (Hurley), and PETRONELLA VAN ETTEN, j. d., born in Mormel (Marbletown), both resid. in Horle (Hurley). Banns published, but dates not given.Page 513 Marriage Number 133 12 Oct. 1697
PIETER VAN ETTEN, j. m., and EVA DE HOOGES, j. d., both parties born and resid. in Horle (Hurley). Banns published, but dates not given.Page 515 Marriage Number 150 12 Nov. 1699
WILLEM VAN VREDENBURG, j. m., born in N. Jorck (New York), and resid. in Kingstouwn, and HEYLTJE VAN ETTEN, j. d., born in Mormelt (Marbletown), and resid. in Horle (Hurley). Banns published, but dates not given.Page 518 Marriage Number 191 10 May 1702
EVERT ROOSA, j. m., born in Horle (Hurley), and TIETJE VAN ETTEN, j. d., born in Mormelt (Marbletown), and both resid. in Horle. Banns published, but dates not given.Page 518 Marriage Number 192 10 May 1702
EMANUEL VAN ETTEN, j. m., born in Mormelt (Marbletown), and ANTJE DE HOOGES, j. d., born in Horle (Hurley), and both resid. there. Banns published, but dates not given.Page 520 Marriage Number 218 6 Dec. 1703
HENDRICK CORTEGT, born in Kingstouwn, and resid. in Mombackes (Mombaccus), and CATHRYN CROM, widow of ARIE VAN ETTEN, resid. in Wouwaarsching, (Wawarsing). Banns published, but dates not given.Page 522 Marriage Number 232 1704 (Date of marriage not given)
JACOB JACOBSE DECKER, born in Marbletowne (Marbletown), and GEESIE VAN ETTEN, born in Horle (Hurley). First publication of Banns, 25 Nov.Page 560 Marriage Number 717 22 June 1731
JAN VAN ETTEN, widower of JANNETJEN ROOSA, and CORNELIA VAN AAKEN, widow of JAN CHAMMERS, born in Zeland, and both resid. in Horley (Hurley). Banns registered 30 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).
[1] He was apparently baptized in the Catholic church there. According to Frans Gouverneur: "Aert Peters Tack, and also Jacob Jansz van Etten were Catholic. I think that Adriaen van der Donck (the man who contracted them for New Netherland) was aware of that: Adriaen was from Breda, just a few miles from Etten, and his mother originates from Etten. I also think Aert and Jacob did know that they had to become 'Protestant' if they wanted the job. It happened all the time...So in Aert and Jacob's case they simply declared to be protestant, got the job, went to NN and acted officially as protestant..."
[2] Kingston court records list the following for Jacob Jansen: Jacob Jansen van Etten, Jacob Jansen van Stoutenburg, and Jacob Jansen de lange (long Jacob). Van Etten and van Stoutenburg were two separate people as indicated by the use of different place names. There is little indication whether Jacob Jansen de lange is a separate person or a nickname for one of these two. Court records of 1663 (pg. 73) list those being sued for violating an ordinance to not work in the fields during the Second Esopus War-including Jacob Jansen Stoutenborch, followed immediately by Jacob Janse de lange. The fact that Stoutenborch and de lange are listed in separate cases hints that van Stoutenburg and long Jacob were two different people. A record of 1664 (pg. 162) relates that long Jacob was "defendant's servant", the defendant being Annetje Ariaens Tack. Another record of the same year tells us that Jacob Jansen van Etten was the "farm hand of Aert Pietersen Tack". Therefore, there is a strong possibility that van Etten and de lange were the same person. For this reason, I have included the court records of Jacob Jansen de lange in this account.
[3] According to Frans Gouverneur: "The wife Annetje Adriaens is still another problem; I do have an Amsterdam bapt record on Aug 29, 1645; but where is the proof that this is our Annetje. There are a lot of Adriaens's (and Gelijns's too) in the Etten records, acting as sponsors for 'Tack' baptisms, but the problem is of course that the Amsterdam baptism is in the Old Church, so the parents were protestant then. Another problem is that if this is our Annetje that she was only 14/15 years when she married Aert."
[4] Frans Gouverneur found several relevant records in Etten: "12 Oct 1647 Aert is present in Etten. 26 Nov 1659 and 14 Jan 1661 he was 'uutlandig' (out of the country). 9 May 1663 and 23 June 1663 he was in Etten, declaring he resided in New Netherland (he left his family by then: look at the baptism of his daughter Grietje in Aug 1663, Kingston). 4 Febr 1669 is the last time he was mentioned (well the last one I found): he was then 'uitlandig' again."
[5] Dorothy A. Koenig wrote, "I am sorry to have to tell you that the actual petition was destroyed in a fire in the archives in Albany, NY." However, E. B. O'Callaghan mentioned the record in his Calendar of Historical Manuscripts, thus preserving the date of the divorce.
[6] Frans Gouverneur reports that Arnoldus (the Latin version of Aert), the son of Peter Petersz Maria Anthonis was baptized in the Catholic church at Etten 26 Jul 1626. As further proof, he cited two other records. From the Old Judicial Archives from Etten, 24 Feb 1639: "Quirijn Anthonius Quirijns, guardian, and Cornelis Peters Tack, co-guardian, of the three orphans of Peter Peters Tack and the late Maijke Anthonis Quirijns (the children are: Cornelis, Aert and Peter)." From the Early Records of Albany, Notarial Papers: "Oct 23, 1660. Aert Pieterszen Tack paid part of an inheritance of his grandfather Teunis Crijnen, to Jan Hendrix van Bael (Note from FG: I think 'Bavel' is meant here); at the same time empowering that man to collect the inheritance for him from his brother Cornelis Pietersz Tack, dwelling at Etten."
[7] Tradition states that Grietjen Tack was the daughter of Aert and Annetje. However, at first glance at the baptismal record, it appears that Aert had returned to Kingston with one Grietjen Vooght and had a daughter baptized there. It seems strange, though, that Aert (with his new wife) would have returned to Kingston after causing so much trouble there. Cynthia Middaugh-Zuber offers a good explanation to reconcile the mystery: "...little Grietjen was baptised in the KRDC as Grietjen Jans, little Grietjen's maternal grandmother, stood in at the baptism as "vooght' which means 'guardian'." Also, according to Frans Gouverneur: "One remark for Grietje Vooght: I don't think Aert Pieterszen Tack married Grietje Vooght. Aert had deserted his wife before Aug 1663. Grietje Vooght has to be read as: Grietje, voogd (guardian); most likely Grietje is the child's grandmother and acting as guardian; as far as I know now Annetje Adriaens was the daughter of Adriaen (?Geleijns) and Grietje Janssen." Therefore, the elder Grietjen was more likely to be the grandmother and guardian to the child (whose father had abandoned her just prior to birth) and not the child's mother and the second wife to Aert. Further proof of this hypothesis can be found in the analysis of the Kingston baptismal records-Grietje Aert Tack's two eldest daughters were named Styntje and Annetje, which, if the Dutch naming tradition was followed (which it would most likely would), would be the names of Grietjen Tack's mother-in-law and mother. Also, Van Ettens appear as her children's baptismal witnesses, indicating a close relationship between Grietje Tack and this family, which would have been less likely if Grietje's mother had been "the other woman". Therefore, I have listed Grietjen as a daughter of Annetje Adriaens. MB
[8] As proof of the marriage of Grietje to Leur, in the Kingston baptismal register are found the baptisms of Styntie, the daughter of Leur Jacobz and Grietie Aartz Tack (#258) and Seytie, the daughter of Leur Jacobse van Kuykendaal and Gritetie Tak had their daughter (#1599) baptized.
[9] I have found no extant baptismal records for either Pieternella or any children of Pieternella and Aldert. However, Pieternella and her husband appear as witnesses for several of the baptisms of the grandchildren of Jacob and Annetje. In addition, the only van Etten family having children in the time period when Pieternella would have been born (indicated by her marriage date) was Jacob and Annetje. Because of these facts, I believe Pieternella was a daughter of Jacob and Annetje.
[10] Pieter and Eva's first recorded daughter in the Kingston baptismal record was named Annetje (#1055) and their second recorded son was named Jacobus (#1445). Several members of Jacob Jansen and Annetje Adriaens' family were witnesses at the baptisms of the children of Pieter and Eva. This gives proof that the Jacob and Annetje had a son, Pieter.
[11] Jacobus and Rebekka's first recorded daughter in the Kingston baptismal record was named Anna (#1907) and their second recorded son was named Jacobus (#2779). Several members of Jacob Jansen and Annetje Adriaens' family were witnesses at the baptisms of the children of Jacobus and Rebekka. This gives proof that the Jacobus who was the son of Jacob and Annetje was the same person as the Jacobus who was the husband of Rebekka.
[12] Jois is an abbreviation for Joannes or Johannes.
[13] Note from R. R. Hoes: "'Jacobz' in corresponding list in Vol. II.
[14] Note from R. R. Hoes: "'Simons' supplied in corresponding list in Vol. II.
© 2014 by Michelle Boyd, All rights reserved.