Research

Series:

Scanned Document:

Interrogatory of Willem Harker

Where was he born?	Answer. In Lingconschier.
How old?	Answer. Twenty-four years.
Who was the principal person that brought them thither, and what did they intend to do on States' ground?	Answer. Lieutenant Houw, master of the bark, with Mr. Foret's consent; they intended to plant.
Were there not many more people to come?	Answer. He does not know.
Did Governor Wintrop know that they were to plant there?	Answer. Yes; and he wrote a letter to Mr. Foret.
Did he not see the States' arms?	Answer. Did not see them on thetree, but when brought on board.
Who tore them down?	Answer. Heard Lieutenant Houw say that he had tom them down and that Mr. Foret had lent him a hand.
Does he not know who carved a fool’s face in the stead of the States’ arms?	Answer. Does not know and does not believe that any of their company did it.

All of which he declares to be true and truthful and confirms the same on oath before the honorable director.

On the 19th of May, being Saturday

It is resolved in council inasmuch as the six Englishmen who were brought in were found not to be guilty of having tom down the arms of the Lords States, to discharge them from confinement and to set them at liberty, on condition that they promise to depart forthwith from our territory, and never to return to it without the director's express consent; whereto they shall be obliged to pledge themselves in writing.

Whereas we, Jop Sears, G[ e ]orge Wilbi, Jan Farington, Philip Cartelin, Nataniel Cartelandt, William Harker, some days ago, came to settle on territory belonging to their High Mightinesses, the States-General, without knowing the fact, being deceived by Mr. Foret, a Scotchman, wherefore the honorable director-general of New Netherland has had us removed and requires us immediately to break up and depart beyond the limits of the honorable Chartered West India Company, which we are bound to do, we promise on our word of honor to set about it forthwith without fall, on pain of being punished as deliberate trespassers, subjecting ourselves not only to this, but to other courts in the world. In testimony of the truth and sincere good faith, we have subscribed this with our own hands, in Fort Amsterdam, in New Netherland, the 19th of May anno 1640. Signed, Jop Ceyrs, G[ e ]orge Welbe, John Farington, Philip Cartelandt, Nataniel Cartelandt, Willem Harker.

On the 7th of June 1640

Maryn Adriaensen, plaintiff, vs. Hendric Pietersen, mason, defendant, regarding the delivery of a tobacco plantation. Having seen the complaint and the defendant's answer, the defendant is condemned to lease the plantation for six years, commencing the first of January 1641, at fl. 60 a year, provided that the defendant may deduct from the first payment one pistole.

Symon Pos, plaintiff, vs. Jan Celes, defendant. Plaintiff demands payment for 24 quarts of peas which he delivered to the defendant on account against the crop, or at the discretion of the defendant. The defendant having admitted the claim, he is condemned to pay the plaintiff fl. 5.

Davit Provoost and Jan Damen, as guardians of Jan van Vorst, plaintiffs, vs. Jacob Stoffelsen, defendant. Plaintiffs, in the capacity aforesaid, demand Jan van Vorst's share of his deceased father's estate. Defendant answers that he has found many claims against the estate of the late Cornelis van Vorst and requests two months time to make an accounting of the debts due by and to the estate. The defendant's request is granted.

Gillis de Voocht, plaintiff, vs. the fiscal, defendant. Plaintiff demands payment of 24 gl. The complaint and answer being heard, the case is adjourned until the next court day.

On the 7th of June Master Hans has caused the court messenger to attach 6 gl. in the hands of Maryn Adriaensen, on account of Hans Steen.

On the 20th of June

Cornelis van[ der ] Hoykens, fiscal, plaintiff, vs. Hans Fredricxsz, soldier, defendant, regarding a complaint made by Gillis de Voocht. Upon consideration of the complaint and the answer of the defendant Gillis de Voocht and Hans Fredricxsz are each fined 6 stivers to be paid to the poor.

The fiscal, plaintiff, vs. Pietertjen Jans, defendant, for slander. Plaintiff demands proof, or, on default thereof, reparation of the injury. Parties granted 14 days to produce proper proof of the slander.

Tomas Hal, plaintiff, vs. Philip Gerritsen, defendant. Plaintiff demands payment for two schepels of wheat which he delivered to the defendant and which were stolen from the mill. Defendant admits the receipt and is condemned to restore the two schepels of wheat or to pay [ for them ].On the 4th of July Willem Hont caused the tobacco of Nataniel Martyn in the hands of Jacob van Corl[ e ]r to be attached for 6 months, on condition that he is to bring proof from Virginia of the debt of the said Nataniel Martyn.

References

Translation: Scott, K., & Stryker-Rodda, K. (Ed.). New York Historical Manuscripts: Dutch, Vol. 4, Council Minutes, 1638-1649 (A. Van Laer, Trans.). Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc.: 1974.A complete copy of this publication is available on the New Netherland Institute website.