Research

Series:

Scanned Document:

Ordinary Session Held in Fort Orange

April 24,1657

President, Johannes Lamontagne
Rutger Jacobsen
Anderies Herbertsen
Jacob Schermerhoorn
Philip Pietersen
magistrates

Jan Lambertsen, plaintiff, against Jan Gouw, defendant.
The plaintiff demands payment of ƒ18:10:- for wages.
The defendant admits that he owes ƒ12:-.
The court having heard the parties, orders the defendant to pay the plaintiff the sum of ƒ12:- and one half of the costs.

Baefje Pietersen, plaintiff, against Jan de Cuyper, defendant.
The plaintiff says that she caused the defendant to be cited for the third time to obtain payment of the sum of ƒ25:- for wine and beer consumed by the defendant at her house, and as he remains in default, she requests that he be ordered to pay the plaintiff the sum of ƒ25:-, according to her account, which she produces, and the costs of the suit estimated at ƒ3:2:-. The defendant failing to appear for the third time, he is by default condemned to pay the plaintiff the sum of ƒ25:-, demanded within the space of eight days, under penalty of attachment, and the costs of the suit estimated at ƒ3:2:-.

Baefje Pietersen, plaintiff, against Meuwes^[1] Hoogenboom, defendant.
The plaintiff says that she had the defendant cited for the third time to obtain payment of ƒ38:10: for wine and beer consumed by the defendant at her house, and as he remains in default, she requests that he be ordered to pay the sum demanded according to her account, which she produces, and the costs of the suit.
The defendant failing to appear for the third time, he is by default condemned to pay the sum demanded, to wit, ƒ38:10:-, to the plaintiff within the space of eight days, under penalty of attachment, with costs of the suit, estimated at ƒ3:12:-.

Baefje Pietersen, plaintiff, against Poulus Martensen, defendant.
The plaintiff says that she has had the defendant cited for the third time to obtain payment of the sum of ƒ56:- for wine and beer consumed by the defendant at her house, and as the defendant remains in default, she requests that he be ordered to pay the plaintiff the sum demanded according to the account, which she produces, and the costs of the suit, estimated at ƒ3:12:-.
The defendant failing to appear for the third time, he is by default condemned to pay the plaintiff the sum of ƒ56:- demanded within the space of eight days, under penalty of attachment, with the costs of the suit estimated at ƒ3:12:-.

Both parties in default

Gerber[ t ] Gijsbertsen, plaintiff, against Abraham Vosborch, defendant. Poulyn, plaintiff, against Claes Teunissen and Marten, Corlaer’s servant, defendant.

The officer, plaintiff, against

Poulyn Martensen	} defendants.
Gerrit Slechtenhorst
Harmen, de Brouwer
Marten Metselaer
Henderick Bierman,

The plaintiff says that on the 19th of this month Pieter Bronck fought with Poulus Martensen and drew his knife in the house of Henderick Bierman , in the presence of Harmen de Brouwer, Gerrit Slechtenhorst, Marten Metselaer, Henderick Bierman, and others. Requests that the said defendants be examined in regard to the said deed.

Poulus Martensen, appearing before the court and being asked:

1. Whether he fought with Pieter Bronck?	1. Answers, Yes.
2. Whether he saw Pieter Bronck draw his knife?	2. Answers, That he cannot tell, as he was drunk.
1. Harmen de Brouwer being questioned whether he was present when Pieter Bronck and Poulus Martensen were fighting?	1. Answers, Yes.
2. Whether he took Poulus Martensen’s side against Pieter Bronck?	2. Answers, Yes.
3. Whether he did not see that Pieter Bronck drew his knife?	3. Answers, That he is not an informer and will not say it. Being asked again on the 26th ditto, he answered that Pieter Bronck drew his knife.
1. Gerrit Slechtenhorst being asked whether he was present when Pieter Bronck and Poulus Martensen fought together?	1. Answers, Yes.
2. Whether he did not see that Pieter Bronck drew his knife on Poulus Martensen?	2. Answers, No, as he went into the other room when they began to fight.
1. Marten Metselaer, being asked whether he did not see Pieter Bronck and Poulus Martensen fight together?	1. Answers, Yes.
2. Whether he did not see that Pieter Bronck drew his knife on Poulus Martensen?	2. Answers, No.
1. Henderick Bierman being asked whether he saw Pieter Bronck and Poulus Martensen fighting together?	1. Answers, Yes.
2. Whether he saw Pieter Bronck draw his knife on Poulus Martensen?	2. Answers, No. Being afterwards, on April 26, again examined, he answered that he saw that Pieter Bronck had his bare knife in his hand, but did not know what he intended.

Notes

References

Translation: Gehring, C., trans./ed., New Netherland Documents Series: Vol. 16, part 2, Fort Orange Court Minutes, 1652-1660 (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press: 1990).A complete copy of this publication is available on the New Netherland Institute website.