Research

Series:

Scanned Document:

May 1, 1646

Jan de Fries, plaintiff, vs. Tobias Esaias and Doom Hendricksen, defendants. Plaintiff says that the testimony given by the defendants on July 27, 1645, at the request of Gysbert de Leuw, is untrue. Ordered that de Fries prove that defendants testified falsely.

May 3, 1646

Cornelis Teunesen, plaintiff, vs. Cornelis Mauritsen, defendant, for payment of fl. 77. Parties on both sides having been heard, as well as the arbitrators who made the agreement and who declare that the defendant was promised fl. 77 at once if the plaintiff sold the house for cash payment, or else, if he sold it on credit, after two months, it is ordered that the decision of the arbitrators shall be carried out and that the money shall remain in Mr. Wilcocx's hands until Cornelis Mauritsz shall have been paid by the plaintiff or Wilcocx.

Jan Damen, plaintiff, vs. Jan Wilcocx, defendant. Plaintiff says that under an agreement with Wilcocx he was to receive for one hundred guilders of loose seawan whole beavers at market price. Ordered that Jan Damen shall retain possession of his money until Wilcocx obtain beavers here, when he shall have to pay promptly.

Everardus Bogardus appeared in court and produced interrogatories on which Jacob Wolphersen and Hendrick Kip are to be examined. They request time. Ordered here that they shall answer yes or no next Tuesday, at ten o'clock.

Jan de Fries, plaintiff, vs. Gysbert de Leuw, defendant, for slander. Default.

Willem Goulder, plaintiff, vs. Tomas Gridj, defendant. 3d default. Three defaults having been entered for non-appearance, the defendant is condemned to pay fl. 20.

La Violette, plaintiff, vs. Michiel Piket, defendant. 1st default.

May 8

Hans Tymonsen, gunner of the ship T’Amandere, plaintiff, vs. Jan Snediger, defendant, alleging that the defendant called him a branded thief. The defendant says that he knows nothing of the plaintiff but what is honest and honorable and that in using the opprobious words he did not mean the plaintiff.

The fiscal, plaintiff, vs. Borger Jorisen, defendant, for slander which the defendant uttered to the defamation of the fiscal. The defendant acknowledges his fault, begs the fiscal's pardon and promises not to repeat the offense. As to the fine, it is ordered that the parties shall choose two referees.

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.