Arrival Date: 1659, aboard the Faith
Children: Hendrik Jansen Van Den Bos b.1663, d.Abt 1715
The Name Woutersen over a period of time became Bush. Henry Bush was a descendant of Jan Woutersen. At the time of the Revolution, Henry Bush joined up with Chief Joseph Brant, moved to the Delaware, and eventually to Upper Canada. He is a United Empire Loyalist.
6665. Weyntie Pieters Meet
Arrived on the ship "Rosetree" March 1663.
Something to double check %%% Weyntje Peters Meet, born 1645 in Netherland; died Unknown. She was the daughter of Rutgert Wouters and Stynthe Jacobs. Source:<http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/h/e/n/Cynthia-L-Henning/BOOK-0001/0002-0024.html>
6670. Stephen Etienne Gaineau
arrived on "THE BEAVER"
Sailed from Amsterdam 9 May 1661 [NWI] arrived 29 July 1661 New Amsterdam [JJ]
Etienne Genejoy, from Rochelle, and Wife and three children.
Hendrick Jochemse Schoonmaker, a native of Hamburg, Germany who came to America in the military service of Holland, settling in Albany about 1655, where he kept an inn. He was a man of considerable social and financial standing, purchased a great deal of property and loaned money to Gov. Peter Stuyvesant " in time of need". A lieutenant in the command of his Noble Honor, the Director General, he defended Esopus from the Indians in 1659 and Later moved there, disposing of his Albany property. He continued to be prominent in military affairs, and though wounded, fought bravely and well in the Indian outbreak of June 7, 1663. He also lead the Dutch burgers in their mutiny against the English garrison.
Arrived 1661 aboard "The Purmerland Church".
6680. Nicholas Du Pui
Arrived aboard the "DE PURMERLANDER KERCK" (THE PURMERLAND CHURCH)
Sailed from Amsterdam Oct. 12 1662, arrived New Amsterdam 18 Feb 1663.
Nicolaes Du Pui from Artois, wife and 3 children ages 6, 5 and 2.
Arrived abaord the "Gelderse Blom (Gelderland Flower)." Sailed from Amsterdam after 20 March 1651, arrived New Amsterdam before 31 July 1651.
Ships log shows the following: "Cornelis Evertss Wiknkooop from Wekerom near Ede hired by Johan van Rensselaer, patroon of the Colony of Rensselaerswijk for 3 years. Age 24. "[NNC:5:1.26,27]
They lived at Rensselaerwyck until 1664-1667, and then settled at Esopus. Their children, Johannes, Marytje, Evert, 1665, and possibly Gerret, were born at Rensselaerwyck.
The following record has been found, of Cornelius: February, 5, 1655, at the house of Marselis Janse, Johan de Hulter desires at this sale to dispose of certain personal property, on certain specified terms. Beneath, under date of February 18, is a memorandum: "one piece of money Kees Wyncoop f. 3.06." 14 On January 29, 1657, Marcelus Jansen (van Bommel), at the village of Beverwyck, offered for sale at public auction, the house in which he then lived, for which there were to be two payments, one on the first of the then next May, and the other on the first of May of the year following. After much bidding, Cornelis Wynkoop remained the highest bidder, for the sum of nine hundred and eleven guilders. He signed the contract, writing his name Cornelis Wynckoop. On September 19, 1657, at Beverwyck, he was surety for William Brouwer, on the purchase by the latter of a brewhouse at Greenbush, in the sum of twelve hundred and seven guilders. On May 1, 1658, he brought an action of debt, at Albany, against Cornelius Teunissen, for his share of the expense of foddering and taking care of the town bull, during the winter. Judgment for the plaintiff, ten guilders, equal to $4. On August 18, 1659, at Fort Orange, Claes Ripse van Dam made an acknowledgment of indebtedness to Henderick Anderissen (van Doesburgh) and Cornelis Wyncoop, in the number of nine and thirty whole beavers, the indebtedness growing out of the purchase by van Dam from Anderissen and Wynkoop, of a house and lot, at public sale. An order was made, on November 25, 1659, upon the request of Wynkoop, for the appointment of curators over the estate at Esopus, of Gysbert Philipsen, who had been murdered by the savages of that region. On December 11, 1659, Marcelis Janse (van Bommel) declared a grant to Cornelis Wynkoop, of a house and lot, in the village of Beverwyck [bounded] to the south [by] the grantor's [land] -- to the north by [land of] Peter Bronck -- to the west by the hill -- to the east by the street: the lot was in breadth thirty wood feet, and in length, according to the patent, except [what] was taken for a street: which lot the grantor had received by conveyance from Goosen Gerritse (van Schaick), and Goosen Gerritse, by patent from the Heer Director General and Council of New Netherland, of the date of October 25, 1653; for which house and lot, the grantor acknowledges to have received satisfaction. On May 30, 1662, he made a lease of lots one and sixteen at Esopus, to Lambert Huybertse. On August 31, 1665, he was the purchaser of a coat, and of other articles, for f. 15.10, at public sale, made by the administrators upon the effects of Jan Ryerson. On October 19, 1665, he is recorded in the Deacon's book at Albany, as giving for alms 17 guilders, 10 stivers. On August 25, 1666, he made a declaration of conveyance, to Claes Ripse (van Dam), of the house and lot, conveyed to Wynkoop by Marcelis Janse (van Bommel), according to the conditions of the public vendue, on January 10 and 17, 1658, the land being at Albany.
Cornelius is said to have settled at Esopus, in 1664. This opinion was held by Jonathan W. Hasbrouck, the incipient historian of Ulster County, and by Dingman Versteeg, an explorer among the ancient records of that place. It is possible that he was not an actual settler there, until about 1667, although an owner of land in that region, and identified with it, before the latter date. He had a child baptized at Esopus, in 1668. The name Esopus was applied to an indefinite tract of land, probably in allusion to the hijzop plant. This region was, at first, called Wildwyck, meaning Indian quarter, or a refuge from savages. Hurley was embraced within this name. The name Wildwyck continued to be born by a hamlet, between Rondout and Kingston, until the three places were consolidated under the name of Kingston.
On April 25, 1663, Cornelius obtained a grant of twelve morgens of land, at Esopus, equivalent to about twenty-six acres. In the Book of Patents, in the Secretary of State's office, is a confirmatory patent, to Cornelius Wynkoop, dated June 28, 1667, of a parcel of land at Esopus, near the new village, to the west of Nicholas Varlett, on the west side of the run, containing about twenty-four acres; also the lot west of the highway, and west of Lambert Huybertse's; both granted originally by Director Stuyvesant. This "new village" was Hurley. On March 30, 1670, the Commissioners for laying out lands at Esopus allowed Cornelius to lay out his two parcels in one tract, on condition that he would set off five morgens of land, for the "assistance" of Marbletown. In the annexed Register of Patents to the inhabitants of the town of Hurley, there is, for Cornelius Wynkoop, twenty-four acres, and forty-eight acres.
Cornelius settled in that portion of Esopus which is known as Hurley. The place there, now owned by James D. , may be the site of the original settlement of this family, in Ulster County. (See Family 147.) A sketch of this house is given as a frontispiece to this work. In April, 1669, Cornelius was appointed a Commissary of Kingston, and remained in office until 1671. On June 10, 1672, he was appointed one of the two new Commissaries; and he was reappointed on October 6, 1673, and served until August 14, 1674. On July 5, 1674, he was witness to the renewal of the treaty with the Indians.
Cornelius was a Schepen of Hurley, during the re-occupation of the province by the Dutch. The Netherlanders re-captured the Province of New York, July 30, 1673. The victorious naval and army officers, immediately afterward, organized a council of war, which was held at the Stadt House, New York City. They issued a summons to the magistrates and constables of East Jersey, Long Island, Esopus, and Albany, to appear forthwith at New York, and take the oath of allegiance. The Esopus officers appeared, on September 1, 1673, and acknowledged allegiance. The Council made an order, changing the name of Kingston to Swanenburgh. Cornelius Wynkoop, Dr. Roelof Kiersted, Wessel Ten Broek, and Jan Burhans were appointed Schepens of Swanenburgh, and, respectively, took the oath of allegiance to the Staats General. The qualification required of them was, that they should be of the Reformed religion, and favorable to the Netherland Government.
An account of this Cornelius is given, in a list of names of Dutch-settlers at Esopus, compiled by D. Versteeg, from the original Dutch court records of Wildwyck (Kingston), as follows: "Wynkoop, Cornelius, 1664; nominated for Schepen, 1669: appointed Schepen, 1672, 1673, 1674: member of the Committee of Defense, against the French, 1674: received a grant of a location for a brick yard, 1675; died before July 8, 1679." On May 15, 1671, it was assigned to him as an inhabitant of Kingston, to renew his portion of the stockade.
Cornelius was chosen an Elder of the Reformed Dutch Church at Kingston, in 1671. The church had been organized in 1659, and Rev. Harmanus Bloem arrived there September 5, 1660, from the Netherlands, to take charge as pastor, and so continued until March, 1667, when he returned to Holland. After that, the church seems to have been without pastoral care, until 1675.
Jonathan W. Hasbrouck, in his incipient History of Ulster County, 1868, gives various items in relation to this Cornelius, as follows: 1670. Paid Cornelis Wynkoop for a cow for child of Christopher Davis, in sewan, one hundred and twenty-one florins. 1671. By the account of Hendrick Peters and Jan Cornelisse, the receipts were 435 florins, 1 styver, and disbursements, 321 florins---so that there remained in the chest, 50 florins, as is to be seen by the list. This account was examined in the presence of Elders Jan Willemse (Houghtaling), Cornelis Wynkoop, and Hendrick Aertsen. 1672. A meeting of the consistory was held, at the which were present, Rev. Gideon Schaets, C. B. Slecht, C. Wynkoop, Wallerand Dumont, and Joost Adriaens, when Lysbat Crafford seeks to be reconciled with her husband, Jeroeme Donwerse. He can not consent thereto. (Page 57.) 1670. January 17th, Cornelius Wynkoop wanted twenty-two schepels of rye, from Claes Teunise, which the latter offset by a bill for doctoring his cows, and attending his pigs. (Page 122.) 1671. May 3, Cornelius Wynkoop got permission to build a mill at Hurley, provided he had all the material in one year. (Page 123.) 1671. May 1, Harman Hendrix called Cornelius Wynkoop a rogue and villain. The latter retorted, that he had not been banished. Hendrix replied in a vulgar way. He was obliged to do penance, with uncovered head, in the presence of Wynkoop. (Page 123.) On May 15, 1671, the inhabitants were ordered to renew the stockade of Kingston. Among the allotments were, Hendrick Jochems and Cornelis Wynkoop, No. 33, thirty rods: small house of Wynkoop. (Pages 123, 124) 1672. January, Reyndert Petersen died, and Cornelis Wynkoop and Wallerand Dumont were made curators of his estate. (Page 127.) In 1675, Cornelis Wynkoop began the manufacture of brick, near the bridge at Kingston. Page 175.) In October, 1678, Rev. Laurentius van Gaasbeek arrived at Kingston, as pastor. The church there, and at Hurley and Marbletown, then consisted of one hundred and forty members. A few months afterwards there were one hundred and eighty; among them, Maritje Jans, widow of Cornelis van Wynkoop, deceased, and Maria van Wynkoop. (Page 152.)
The name of the wife of Cornelius appears frequently as Marytje Jans; but her will gives the family name as Langedyck. There was a Maria Jans, orphan daughter, a passenger in March, 1660, by the Gilded Beaver; and in the same month, Marytje Jansen, maiden, came as passenger, on the Love. Cornelius made his last will as follows: On August 11, 1676, before William La Montagne, Secretary for the Honorable justices at Kingston. Cornelius Wynkoop made his will, reciting that he was sick abed; that he had a lawful wife, and seven children; that his whole estate should be the property of himself or his wife, whichever should survive the other; but if the survivor should marry again, one half of the estate should be set aside, to be equally divided between said children. An inventory of the property, sold at auction, was made in 1677. The widow made her last will, on May 16, 1679. She was described therein as "Maria, widow of Cornelis Wynkoop, lying sick abed," and she signed as "Maria Langedyck, widow of Cornelis Wynkoop." She "appointed in a Christian-like manner, for tutors or guardians of her minor children, Wessel Ten Broek and Mr. William De Meyer, to have oversight over her minor children left behind, . . . enjoining the said guardians to lead her children in the fear of the lord." She gave to her "oldest son, Johannes,""the silver piece from the fleet of Piet Heyn." To her "oldest daughter, Maritje," she made bequests; also to her "youngest daughter, Catharine," and to her "youngest son, Benjamin." She was not an old woman, for she had a child baptized in 1675; the hardships of a new settlement may have shortened her days, as well as those of her husband. On February 8, 1681, the guardians, under her will, were ordered to account for the property, by spring. The executors let her property, in 1681. The silver piece was, no doubt, a memento of the capture of the Spanish treasure fleet, at Matanzas, in 1628, by Admiral Piet Pietersen Heyn.
A deed was made, on September 1, 1697, by Johannes, Evert, Gerret, and Benjamin Wynkoop, and Moses Dupuis, to Jacob Rutse, of lands whereof Cornelius Wynkoop, deceased, late of Kingston, was in possession. And a partition deed was executed, on April 26, 1715, by Major Johannis, Captain Gerrit, and Benjamin Wynkoop, and Moses Dupuis, to Evert Wynkoop.
Notes: The guilder was equal to forty cents, American.
MARIA JANSE VAN LANGEDYCK (JAN JANSZEN, JAN) was born Abt. 1637 in Utrecht or St. Martins, NordtHolland, and died 1679 in Hurley Twp, Ulster County, New York. She married CORNELIUS EVERTSZ WYNKOOP January 29, 1656/57 in New Amsterdam, New York, son of EVERT WYNKOOP. He was born Abt. 1627 in Neighborhood of Wyckerom by Eede, Gelderland, Holland, and died Bef. December 1676 in Hurley, Ulster County, New York.
Children of MARIA JANSE VAN LANGEDYCK and CORNELIS EVERTSZ WYNKOOP are:
8. i. MAJOR JOHANNES4 WYNKOOP, b. Abt. 1661, Albany, New York; d. Abt. 1733.9. ii. MARIA WYNKOOP, b. Abt. 1662, Albany, New York; d. Bef. October 16, 1724, Albany, New York.10. iii. EVERT WYNKOOP, b. March 24, 1664/65, Albany, New York; d. July 31, 1746, Beaverkill, Kingston, New York.11. iv. CAPTAIN GARRET WYNKOOP, b. Abt. 1666, New York; d. Aft. January 01, 1744/45, Bucks County, Pennsylvania.v. NICHOLAS WYNKOOP, b. Abt. October 15, 1668; d. Aft. August 1676, Kingston, New York.vi. CATHARINE WYNKOOP, b. Abt. June 15, 1671; d. Aft. 1679, Kingston, New York.12. vii. BENJAMIN WYNKOOP, b. Abt. April 18, 1675, Kingston, New York; d. Aft. December 1737.
"The name of the wife of Cornelius appears frequently as Marytje Jans; but her will gives the family name as Langedyck. There was a Maria Jans, orphan daughter, a passenger in March, 1660, by the Gilded Beaver; and in the same month, Marytje Jansen, maiden, came as passenger, on the Love. 35 Cornelius made his last will as follows: On August 11, 1676, before William La Montagne, Secretary for the Honorable justices at Kingston. Cornelius Wynkoop made his will, reciting that he was sick abed; that he had a lawful wife, and seven children; that his whole estate should be the property of himself or his wife, whichever should survive the other; but if the survivor should marry again, one half of the estate should be set aside, to be equally divided between said children. An inventory of the property, sold at auction, was made in 1677. The widow made her last will, on May 16, 1679. She was described therein as "Maria, widow of Cornelis Wynkoop, lying sick abed," and she signed as "Maria Langedyck, widow of Cornelis Wynkoop." She "appointed in a Christian-like manner, for tutors or guardians of her minor children, Wessel Ten Broek and Mr. William De Meyer, to have oversight over her minor children left behind, . . . enjoining the said guardians to lead her children in the fear of the lord." She gave to her "oldest son, Johannes,""the silver piece from the fleet of Piet Heyn." To her "oldest daughter, Maritje," she made bequests; also to her "youngest daughter, Catharine," and to her "youngest son, Benjamin." 36 She was not an old woman, for she had a child baptized in 1675; the hardships of a new settlement may have shortened her days, as well as those of her husband. On February 8, 1681, the guardians, under her will, were ordered to account for the property, by spring. The executors let her property, in 1681."
6684. Aldert Hymens Roosa
ALEARDT, Aldert or Albert Heymanse Roose came to this country from Harwyen, also spelled Herweyen, in Gelderland, Holland, on Waal river, five miles west of Bommel. Or it may be the present Heywennen, a short distance east of Bommel in Gelderland or the present Herwen in Gelderland twelve miles sontheast of Arnhem. With him came his wife, Wyntje (Lavinia) Allard or Ariens, and eight children in the ship Bontekoe (Spotted Cow), Captain Peter Lucas April 15, 1660; and settled in the Wildwyck district of Esopus, now Kingston, Ulster County, New York. Of these eight children: Heyman, born in 1643, married Maritje Roosevelt. Arie, born in 1645, married Maria Pels. Jan, bom in 1651, married Hellegond Williamse Van Buren. lkee or Aaghe married Dr. Roelof Kiersted. Maritje married Laurens Jansen. Neeltje married Hendrick Pawling after Nov. 3, 1676. Jannetje married Mattys TenEyck at Hurley Nov. 16, 1679. Aert. Two other children were born to him and his wife after coming to New Netherland, viz; Annatje and Guert.
From the fact that in Gelderland at the present time the language of its people is interspersed with Spanish words and idioms it has been supposed that many religious refugees from Spain during the first years of the Inquisition settled in this particular Province of Holland, among whom may have been ancestors of Albert Heymanse; if so, this can account for the spelling of the name, by the Hollanders-Roose -which to them would produce the same sound as Rosa, his name in Spanish.
On December 25, 1660, Aldert Heymanse Roosa and his wife, with Anna Blom, Jacob Joosten, Jacob Burhans, Mathias Blanchan and wife, Anton Crespel and wife, Andries Barentse and wife, Margaret Chambers, Gertruy Andries, Roelof Swartwout and wife, and Cornelise Sleght and wife participated in the first administration of the Lord's Supper at the Esopus or Wildwyck. Aldert Heymanse Roosa was a wealthy man for those days, bringing with him considerable property from Holland, and he speedily occupied an influential position in the early making of Kingston, in all of which he appeared as a leader and director of events. On the fourth of March, 1661, he joined with Thomas Chambers, Cornelis Barentse Sleght. Gertruy Andries, Roe of Swartwout and Jurian Westvael in a contract guaranteeing a salary to the Reverend Hermanus Blom, who had been called as pastor of the Dutch church at Wildwyck. Of this church he was for many years an elder; and because of the energy with which Domine Blom and he sought to conserve the surplus of the estates of deceased parents for the benefit of the poor of the village he was sometirnes called " the consistory " of the church.
On the 5th day of May, 1661, Evert Pels, Cornelis Barentse Sleght and Aldert Heymanse Roosa were appointed commissaries at Wildwyck and took their oath of office, and on the 16th day of the same month Peter Stuyvesant, in behalf of the Mighty Lords, the States General of the United Netherlands, and the Lord Directors of the Privileged West India Company granted its first charter to Wildwyck, in which Evert Pels, Cornelis Barentse Sleght and Aldert Heymanse Roosa were appointed schepens, and therein designated as '- interested, intelligent persons, possessing Real Estate, peaceable men, professors of the Reformed religion as it is now preached in the, United Netherlandish Churches in conformity through the Word of God, and the orders of the Synod of Dordrecht." And new lots were then laid out at Wildwyck, Of which Aldert Hymanse Roosa was allotted No. 24 and his son Jan No. 30.
On April 6th, 1662 permission was given by the Director-General to lay out a new village at the Esopus. It was called Nieuw Dorp, now Hurley, at which place Matthew Blanshan and his sons-in-law, Anthony Crespel and Louis DuBois settled the same year. Directly after this warnings were received and sent to New Amsterdam of pending troubles from the Indians at the Esopus. (Col. Hist. N. Y., Vol. XIII., pages 227-228). On the 11th of October, 1662, Aldert Heymanse Roosa was commissioned to proceed to New Amsterdam to obtain one hundred pounds of powder and two hundred pounds of lead for the protection of the old and new settlements. (Col. Hist. N. Y., Vol. XIII., page 231.)
Aldert Heymanse Roosa must have been among the earliest settlers of the new village because on March 30, 1663, he, Jan Joosten and Jan Garretsen were appointed by Director-General Stuyvesant commissaries to lay out and fortify it with palisades for protection against attacks of savages. (Sylvester's Hist. Ulster county, page 36).
On the 7th of April, 1663, Aldert Heymanse Roosa and his fellow commissaries reported to Governor Stuyvesant that the savages would not allow the building of palisades or fortifications at the new village, because the land was not included in the treaty made with them in the year 1660, and had not been fully paid for; and praying that the gifts promised the savages the previous autumn be sent at once, and that the new place and village be assisted with a few soldiers and ammunitions of war, at least, until the new settlement should be put into a proper state of defense and inhabited by a good number of people; that 'your humble and faithful subjects may remain without fear and molestation from these barbarous people, and with some assurance for the peaceful, undisturbed and unhindered continuation of the work begun, for if rumors and warnings may be believed, it would be too anxious, if not too dangerous an undertaking for your humble petitioners and faithful subjects to continue and advance their work otherwise." (Col. Hist. N. Y., Vol. XIII., pages 242-3).
These warnings were not heeded and these earnest requests were not complied with, and on June 7th, 1663, the Indians attacked the New Village and Wildwyck. At Wildwyck they burned twelve dwelling houses; murdered eighteen persons, men, women and children, and carried away ten persons more as prisoners. The New Village was burned to the ground and its inhabitants mostly taken prisoners or killed. Only a few of them escaped to Wildwyck, among wnom were Roosa, Blanchan, Crespel and DuBois. So there were sixty-five persons missing in general, either killed or captured, besides nine pesons who came to Wildwyck, severely wounded. Among those taken prisoners at the New Village were the wife and two children of Louis DuBois; wife and one child of Anton Crespel; two children of Matthew Blanshan; two children of Aldert Heymanse Roosa and wife and three children of Lambert Huybertse Brink. (Col. Hist. N. Y. Vol. Xlll., pages 245-6, 256- 372).
An account of the massacre was sent to New Amsterdam on the 10th of June, and written instructions were received from the Director-General, under date of June 14th for the guidance of the officers at Wildwyck. Martial law was proclaimed and a council of war formed to consist of Ensign Niessen, Captain Chambers, Lieutenant Hendrick Jochem Schoonma ker of the Burgher Guard and the schout and commissaries of the village to deliberate and decide what might be necessary for the welfare of the village after the massacre. Mattys Capito was appointed secretary of the council. Aldert Hermanse Roosa was one of the commissaries. He was also corporal of the Burgher Guard of which Hendrick Jochem Schoonmaker was lieutenant.
Captain Martin Cregier reached Esopus on the 4th day of July, 1663, and proceeded to Wildwyck, where he found that the magistrates had examined some Esopus Indians and the wife of Dr Gysbert van Imbroeck, who had been a prisoner, and had practically located the place where the prisoners were held. On the 7th day of July, Aldert Heymanse Roosa and some other farmers, being indignant at the neglect of those in authority at New Amsterdam in sending them relief when requested in the early part of April, and sorely vexed at the delay of Captain Cregier in conducting the organization of the expedition against the Indians for the rescue of the prisoners, appeared armed before the council, who were examining two Wappinger Indians and upon being asked what they were doing there with their guns, gave answer: "We intend to shoot these Indians " Upon being told that they must not do that, they replied to Captain Cregier that they would do it, even if he stood by.
On July 26th an expedition about two hundred strong, of which one hundred and forty-five were inhabitants of Wildwyck, set out for the Indian "old fort" at Kerhonkson where the captives were reported to be. Reaching it on the 26th they found it deserted. Cregier destroyed about two hundred and fifteen acres of maize and burned about one hundred pits of corn and beans. A second expedition guided by a young Wappinger Indian started on September 3rd for the Indian entrenchment known as "new fort," which was situated in Shawangunk. Besides the troops, on this expedition, seven of the citizens of Wildwyck accompanied it. Although the names of the citizens are not given in Captain Cregier's report the seven, probably, were Matthew Blanshan, Louis DuBois, Anton Crespel, Cornelis Barentse Sleght, Tjerck Claesen DeWitt, Aldert Heymanse Roosa and Lambert Huybertse Brink, members of whose families were among the captives of June 7th, and each of whom must have accompanied either the first or second and, possibly, both expeditions.
Here at the "new fort" the Indians were attacked and a chief, fourteen warriors, four women and three children were killed, probably many others were wounded, who escaped. Of Cregier's forces three were killed and six wounded Twenty-three Christian prisoners were rescued. " New Fort" was situated in the town of Shawangunk on the east bank of the Shawangunk kill, two miles south of Bruynswick and twenty-eight miles from Kingston (Schoonmaker's Hist. of Kingston, page 39. OLDE ULSTER, Vol II, pages 1-9).
After the Dutch had surrendered New Netherland to the English in 1664 and Richard Nicolls had become governor, Captain Daniel Brodhead, with a company of English soldiers was sent to Wildwyck. Against the arbitrary conduct of Captain Brodhead and the indignities put upon the Dutch settlers by the English soldiers, Aldert Heymanse Roosa led the revolt of the burghers in 1667 against the military authorities, which is referred to historical books as the " Mutiny at Esopus."
Marius Schoonmaker, in his history of Kingston, commenting on this revolt writes: Mutiny is resistance to the exercise of lawful power. If an officer invades the house of a subordinate to steal, commit an assault or a trespass, resistance is not mutiny; and much more, the moment a military officer or soldier steps outside of his military calling and wilfully commits an assault or a trespass against a citizen, or unlawfully deprives him of his liberty, the military character or privilege is at once doffed and thrown aside, and resistance is not mutiny. It was justifiable resistance to tyranny and oppression-an outburst of the same spirit which subsequently threw off the oppressor's yoke in 1776, and carried this country triumphantly through the Revolution.
For instigating this revolt Aldert Heymanse Roosa and other burghers were tried before Cornelis van Ruyven, one of the king's justices of the peace, and on May 3, 1667, he was sentenced to be banished from the colony for life, and a fine of one hundred bushels of wheat, or the value thereof, was levied on his estate in Esopus for charges of the Court; and his son Arie, Antonio Delba and Cornelis Barentse Sleght were banished out of Esopus, Albany and New York for shorter terms.
The report and findings of this trial show that the matter was prejudged under secret instructions to carry out private orders, and not governed by the merits or the evidence in the case. The trial however resulted in the suspension of Captain Brodhead from his command and in less than three months, on July 14th he died at Esopus leaving his widow and three sons -Daniel, Charles and Richard -- surviving him (History of Kingston, page 57).
The sentences of the burghers participating in this revolt were subsequently modified and Aldert Heymanse Roosa was permitted to retum to Wildwyck, and with Louis DuBois was appointed by Governor Francis Lovelace September 16th, 1669, overseer for Hurley (Col. Hist. N. Y. Vol. XIII., page 436).
On the 30th day of March, 1670, he set over to Governor Lovelace eight acres of land as part of " the Transport" to satisfy the inhabitants of the town of Marbletown for the grant given to them under the authority of the governor (Col. Hist. N. Y. Vol. XIII., page 445). At this time he received a patent tor ten acres and four hundred and fifty rods at Hurley, and was commissioned sergeant of the militia directed to be present at the rendezvous at Marbletown April 5th, 1670.
On April 7th, 1670 he was appointed overseer of Hurley and Marbletown and on October 25th, 1671, in an order of Governor Lovelace " Regulating the Civil and Military affairs of Kingston," Aldert Heymanse Roosa was appointed commissary for Hurley, and the eldest commissary for Kingston (Col. Hist. N. Y. Vol. XIII., pages 448, 450, 460).
When Charles II. of England joined Louis XIV. of France in a compact to destroy Dutch freedom, war broke out again. In Holland the Dutch cut the dykes, put their country under water and drove out the French invaders. The news of a Dutch fleet approaching New York was received with joy and on the 7th of August, 1673, twenty three Dutch war-ships with 1,600 soldiers entered New York Bay and on the 9th of August the flag of Holland floated again over Manhattan, and Captain Anthony Colve was made governor. In this state of war delegates from Esopus, under date of September 1st,1673, presented a petition to the Dutch governor, praying that certain persons be appointed to govern the village of Esopus, formerly Wildwyck, then called Swanenburgh, Hurley and Marbletown, with a military organization and the necessary ammunition. The petition was granted on condition that no one should be nominated who was not of the Reformed religion, nor " who was not well inclined towards the Dutch nation." Aldert Heymans Roosa was on October 6th, 1673, appointed captain of Hurley and Marbletown by Governor Colve, and described as " Captain Aldert Heymans, who had been prominent in the riot of 1667." (Col. Hist. N. Y. Vol. XIII., page 475. Vol. II., page 626 Report State Historian New York, Colonial Series (1896) page 384).
Aldert Heymanse Roosa died at Hurley, New York, February 27th 1679. (See New York Gen. and Biog. Record, Vol. VXXI., pages 163-166, 235-237. Anjous Ulster County Wills, Vol. I., page 74).
Arrival Date: 1652, aboard The Spotted Cow Albert Heymanse Roosa was sometimes listed as Allert Heymanse and Aldert Heymans. Albert Heyman lived in Wildwyck and later in Hurley, Ulster Co NY.
6685. Wyntje Ariens de Jongh
Some marriage records show date of birth as 1622, some records show death date as 1697.
6686. Everett Pels
Arrived on "Den Houttuyn" which sailed June 1642. [Jaap Jacob's thesis indicates that Den Houttuyn sailed from the Texel 14 June 1642 and arrived New Amsterdam 4 August 1642]
Later changed to Pells and then to Pultz.
6736. Ensign Hugh Mosher
Ensign Hugh Mosher sailed for America and reached Boston between 1632 and 1636.
He settled in Salem and became friends with Rev. Williams, pastor of the Salem Church. In 1669, Hugh Mosher was appointed ensign of a Military Company by the general court and took part in King Philip's war, during which two o fhis sons were killed. He was ordained a pastor of hte Baptist Church in Dartmouth, Massachussetes, but was always called by his military office of Ensign.
6738. Richard Maxson
Believed to have come over on the "Griffin" .Was a follower of (and possible relative of) religious dissenter Anne Hutchinson.He joined the Church of Boston in 1634. When Anne was banished from Boston, Richard and his family went with her to Rhode Island.He was one of the founders of Portsmouth (Poasset).Killed by the Indians during the "Pequot Wars".
6740. William Davol
"The Devol family in the United States numbers many thousands, and throughout their history the name has been spelled about 25-30 different ways. At the present time, the spellings most used are Devol, Devoll, Davol, Deuell, Deuel, Duel, Duell, and Devel. "Holmes 'Dictionary of Ancestral Heads of New England Families' says the name Devol (in it's various spellings) is of French origin, derived from Deyville, a village or district in France, Anglicized from the name David. The following is a copy of a memorandum received from the executor of the estate of George Devol (Brielle, NJ, 11/1933): Dayville's Original House: Alanson, Normandie. de Deivell d'Deivell (Sir Gosceline) and his brother Robert hanged at York (1317). John de Eiville, Yorkshire, Son of Gosceline (1257). Walter Bartabus Lord of Daiville witnessed the Charter of Treport (1056). Walter de Daiville, his son, accompanied William the conqueror, Castle at the Hode, Yorkshire, 1066. William Davol was living at Newport, RI in 1681." - Source: Boyd, Elbert E., "A Devol Family Lineage" reprinted in DSGR Magazine Vol. 3, #6, March, 1940, p. 115. Constable, 1649. Oct. 2, 1650, he and his wife were presented by the Grand Jury with others, for continuing of meeting upon the Lords day from house to house contrary to order of this court enacted June 12, 1650. Freeman, Newport, RI, May 17, 1653. -Source: Letter From Robert L. Webster, Idaho Falls, ID (email@example.com) 12/11/1997. William Deuel [Davol, Deuell, Devell, DeVille] first appeared in American documentation in Duxbury, Plymouth, Massachusetts on 3 August 1640 when he applied for a parcel of land. He was married to Elizabeth "Isabel" Anderson in Spalding, Lincolnshire, England sometime during 1639 (you might say they came to America as honeymooners). Both were presented to a Puritan court "...for the continewing of a meeting uppon the Lords day from house to house..." on 2 October 1650. William was made a freeman of Newport on 17 March 1653! --Source: Jay L. Deuel (http://www.cc.utah.edu/~jay/deuel.html) 1998 William decided to leave England after the death of his first wife, Ann and daughter Elizabeth, and his marriage to Isabel. - Source: GEDCOM Import From Sarah A. Bitter (firstname.lastname@example.org) 3/28/1998 More About WILLIAM DAVOL:Fact 2: Probably A Farmer </users/d/e/u/Patrick-D-Deuel/GENE5-0012.html>Fact 13: East Providence was formerly a part of Rehoboth, Massachusetts. Children of WILLIAM DAVOL and ISABEL ANDERSON are:
i.JOHN DAVOL, b. June 24, 1643, Braintree, Norfolk County, MA; d. July 15, 1643, Braintree, Norfolk County, MA
ii.JOSEPH DAVOL, SR., b. 1645, Rehoboth, Bristol County, MA; d. February 24, 1715/16, Westerly, RI.
Notes for JOSEPH DAVOL, SR.: Joseph Duvol was a surveyor in western RI in 1692-1695. He had the title of Captain for some years. In 1702 he and his second wife Elizabeth (Peabody) Devol deeded land in Narraganset to son William. Inventory on death in 1716 was £28.14s and among other items included 12 silver spoons, silver cup, and a Bible. His descendants later spelled their name DeVol and resided on Shelter Island and Shag Harbor, NY. Source: Icks, Gertrude Geneveive Duel, "330 Years In America" Privately Published
More About JOSEPH DAVOL, SR.: Fact 2: Militia Captain and Surveyor
iii. JONATHAN DAVOL, SR., b. 1647, Newport, Newport County, RI; d. Aft. 1737, Dartmouth, Bristol County, MA.
iv. BENJAMIN DAVOL, b. Abt. 1650, Rehoboth, Bristol County, MA; d. NJ. Monmouth, NJ. - Source: *Rich Patton Homepage (http://www.sound.net/~rpatton/html) 1996
6742. John Audley Odlin
John was a wealthy cutler and armorer of Boston, Massachusettes.
6784. Tomys Swartwout
Tomys Swartwout was the first New Netherlander to buy and sell American tobacco in the Netherlands and he started a wholesale tobacco business in Amsterdam in 1629. He married Hendrickje Barents in 1631, and in March, 1652 they emmigrated from Amsterdam to what later became Flatbush, Long Island, New York. They later moved to New Amsterdam. From; LDS U.S. & Can Film Area 1035985 item 3. SWARTWOUT.
The Swartwoods were involved in the settling of America from 1650 to the present day. They helped to fight the Indians, clear the land, plant the crops. They fought wild animals, built their homes out of logs or whatever else was available. Often times they paid with their lives for their pioneering spirit. There were 28 Swartwoods who fought in the Revolutionary War. Afterwards, they returned to their farms and families and picked up where they had left off.
From the original Swartwout (Tomys in 1650) to the present day, there have been thousands of Swartwood descendents.
Tomys Swartwout came to America about 1650 and settled in what is now Brooklyn, New York. In 1664, England seized New Netherlands from the Dutch and changed the name to New York. The Swartwouts then spread out, up the Hudson River and across the State of New York to the Delaware River, and down into New Jersey. In 1741, Bernardus Swartwout (1697-1773) purchased land in Lehman Township in what is now Pike County, PA. By the year 1802, Peter, James, John and Daniel Swartwout had changed the spelling of their names to Swartwood and were living in what is now Swartwood, NY. They were primarily farmers or lumbermen, and as the towns became crowded and the timber got scarce, they moved westward trough New York into Ohio, Illinois and Michigan. After the Civil War, they continued moving westward and southward into Kansas, Texas, California and Washington state. Today, you can find Swartwoods, Swartwouts, etc. in almost every state.
It is not known where in Europe the Swartwood family originated. But the Swartwoldt family belonged to the Free Manor Holders who during the whole of the Middle Ages from the time of Charlemagne (800) protested against Romanism and Feudalism -- against Pope and Emperor. They welcomed the Reformation as the final break with Roman domination.
Holland, the country where the Swartwoods came from, had been ruled by several countries. After the Reformation, it was ruled by Germany and then Spain. In 1579, the Northern Provinces of Holland banded together under William the Silent, Prince of Orange. In what is known as the Union of Ulbrecht, they pledged their mutual support of each other while retaining individual control of their respective Provinces. They agreed to form a Federation called "The States General." This body was to control foreign affairs as well as maintain a defense of its individual members. This led in 1581 to their independence from Spain.
In 1614, The States General granted a patent to a group of merchants for exclusive trade on the Hudson River. These merchants, known as the West Indian Company, established a colony at what is now Albany, NY.
New Netherlands was established in 1624 when Henry Hudson left eight men on Manhattan Island while he sailed up the Hudson River to what is now Albany. In 1626, Peter Minuit bought the Island of Manhattan from the Man-a-hat-a Indians for trinkets valued at about $24. In 1664, British troops seized New Netherlands from the Dutch who yielded peacefully. Charles the Second, King of England, then granted the Province of New Netherland to his brother, the Duke of York, who renamed it New York. The Dutch recaptured it in 1673 but ceded it to Britain in 1674.
Thomas and Roeloff SwartwoutFor the 350th anniversary of the Swartwout Family in AmericaCopyright 2002 by Peter R. Christoph, Used with permission
"Usually for a talk after a banquet, the speaker is asked to provide something light and entertaining, sort of an extra little dessert, enjoyable but not very filling. But I have been asked to talk about Thomas and Roeloff Swartwout, men who are deserving of our serious consideration. Were it not for them, we would not be gathered here tonight. Or, more to the point, were it not for them, most of you gathered here tonight would not be gathered anyplace.
I understand that you have received a copy of an article by Andrew Brink, whom I have known for probably 25 years. It is a good piece, and I hope you have all read it or will read it. You may pick up on some differences between what he has written and what I have to say, but that is because there is plenty of room in the original records for supposition and interpretation, and we make of the facts what we can. At least this way you will have two people's ideas about what was going on, and you can weigh one against the other. And if you are really interested, there are some sources that no one has ever checked, so far as know, and as I go along I will point out some things that really could be researched.
Thomas Swartwout was born in Groeningen about 1607, and it was there he grew up. However, by 1629, the 22-year-old Thomas had joined his older brothers Wybrant and Herman in the tobacco business in Amsterdam. Tobacco will be the family business for decades.
It is interesting that they have a family name. Most people in the Netherlands in the 17th century did not. They may already have been a cut above the average.
In 1630 Thomas married Adrientjen Symons, whose father was a broker. The Swartwouts and Symonses, then, were people of the merchant class at a time when it was a very good thing to be a merchant in Amsterdam, during the Golden Age of the Netherlands, when Dutch goods were among the world's best and the Dutch navy ruled the seas.
Less than a year after her marriage, Adriaentjen Swartwout died, survived by her husband Thomas, and a baby son, Jan. It was the custom for widowed parents to remarry quickly, and so a few months later Thomas married Hendrickjen Barents.
Hendrickjen, was the daughter of an Amsterdam printer and book dealer. Barent Otsen. Again, we have someone from the merchant class, someone who had an acquaintance with learning, and this would be passed on to her children. The first child was Roeloff, who was baptized June 1, 1634, at the Oudekerk, the old church, in Amsterdam. There would be four more children, but two of them died young, as did their half-brother Jan, so that only Roeloff and two girls survived to adulthood.
The children grew up in what we presume was a comfortable situation, and then in 1652, when Thomas was in his 45th year, he and his family sailed for America. Some merchants would distribute their brothers among trading ports, and that may explain Thomas's coming to Manhattan, where he could purchase American tobacco to ship to his brothers back in Amsterdam. His wife Hendrickjen came along of course, she appears in Manhattan records. But I do not find the two daughters in America, and I do not think they immigrated. Since they were still young and unmarried, they may have stayed with one of their uncles in Amsterdam Another family member who did come over, perhaps at this time but more likely later, was Thomas's brother Aldart, whose stay was apparently brief. He appears in the New Amsterdam records only once, in 1656.
At first the Swartwouts lived in New Amsterdam on Manhattan Island, where Thomas and Hendrickjen joined the Reformed church. However, they and several other families soon moved to Long Island and founded a community, called at first Midwout, and later Flatbush.Thomas seems to have been a community leader from the beginning. In 653, only his second year in America, he was among the delegates from several towns, he being the Midwout representative, who lodged a formal protest with the colony's director-general, Petrus Stuyvesant, over the lack of popular elections, the danger from Indians who had not been paid for their land, and the lack of deeds for the farms on Long Island. In 1655 Thomas was nominated by the Midwout court to serve a term as a schepen, or magistrate, to which office he was appointed by the colony's Council.
In that same year he was sued by Gysbert van Imbroeck for delivery of an overdue shipment of grain. This was in September, when Thomas had not ye- threshed that year's crop, but the plaintiff was unwilling to wait. Oloff van Cortlandt, one of the colony's more important merchants and public officials, offered to pay the debt if Thomas would reimburse him with either grain or tobacco. While there is nothing unusual in this suit - merchants high and low were forever running into delivery problems, and suing or being sued - it is interesting that possible payment in tobacco is mentioned. It would seem to confirm that Thomas was still involved in the tobacco trade. It is also worth noting that a major merchant such as Oloff van Cortlandt was willing to cover the debt for Thomas. It suggests that he was considered a person of consequence.
In 1658 Thomas was granted the privileges of a burgher of New Amsterdam, which entitled him to freedom of trade in the city Since only residents of the city could be granted the burgher right, we can assume that he had a year-round residence there, while presumably continuing to farm at Midwout. Or, he may have shifted his base of operations to Manhattan and leased his farm to someone else. We would need to check the Flatbush records to find out whether he was still involved in affairs at Midwout, and to what extent.
Thomas last appears in the Manhattan records, a decade after his arrival here, in church on January 8, 1662, as godparent for a grandson. It is possible that he died at about this time. Or, perhaps he returned to the Netherlands. I do not believe that anyone has ever checked the Amsterdam notarial records to see if he appears back in the old country. It would be worth while checking the Flatbush records as well, to see when he last appears there.
But what has Roeloff been up to? One of our problems in following him from the Netherlands is that he had a first cousin also named Roeloff Swartwout. We know that cousin Roeloff received the degree of doctor of medicine from the University of Harderwyk in 1665. Ten years earlier, one or the other of them graduated from the University of Groeningen with a degree in theology. Arthur J. Weiss, author of The Swartwout Chronicles, thinks that this is one person. But Andrew Brink thinks the theology student was your Roeloff. In fact, we have no references over here to your Roeloff until 1657. Either he was over here for five years without being mentioned even once, or he stayed behind to complete his university education. Which is it? I don't know. But that is one thing more that you may want to investigate.
In any case, we would expect that he was here by 1656 at the latest, in order to give him time to properly woo the woman he married in 1657. Her name was Eva Bradt, and perhaps we should take a moment to discuss her life before she became Mrs. Swartwout. Her parents had met in Amsterdam, they being Albert Bradt from Norway and Annatie Barents from Germany. Eva was baptized in 1633, at the Lutheran church in Amsterdam. Her father was, among other things, a tobacco farmer outside of Amsterdam. Isn't that interesting? Tobacco, again. The family immigrated to New Netherland, arriving at Rensselaerswyck near present-day Albany in 1637. By then there were three children, Eva being the eldest, and eventually there would be eight in all.
Eva's father at first was involved in two enterprises, building a sawmill and starting a tobacco farm. He and his brother Arent grew tobacco for several years, sending it to Kiliaen van Rensselaer in Amsterdam, who then sold it to tobacco dealers in that city. Since Thomas Swartwout's brothers were tobacco dealers in Amsterdam, it is possible that the Swartwouts and Bradts knew of each other's existence long before Roeloff and Eva ever met.
This would be Eva's second marriage. Her first husband was Anthony de Hooges, the business manager of the colony of Rensselaerswyck, and quite a catch for a young girl. When they married, De Hooges was pushing thirty, and Eva was fourteen. You are free to draw whatever conclusions you like.
Anthony de Hooges died in 1655, leaving Eva, still only twenty-two, with five children, all less than eight years old. Two years later Eva married Roeloff Swartwout. Had Roeloff been living in Beverwyck (modem Albany) when he met Eva, as most writers assume? I think it more likely that they met in Manhattan, where Eva's father had an office and warehouse and Roeloff's father had a house. I have seen nothing to indicate that Roeloff was actually living in Beverwyck prior to his marriage.
Through his marriage to Eva, Roeloff acquired several parcels of land and a house in Beverwyck that had belonged to her first husband, de Hooges. By keeping the property 'm Beverwyck, Roeloff became eligible to engage in the fur trade there. A year after his marriage, Beverwyck records show him with two debts totaling 344 trade for furs, he noted that other men were also in the woods, including Roeloff Swartwout, Eva's brother Storm, and Eva's brother-in-law, Teunis Slingertand. Obviously Roeloff was involved with his brothers-in-law in the fur trade.
We do not know when Roeloff first acquired property here in the Esopus. By 1660 and possibly before that, Roeloff and Eva were maintaining homes in both Beverwyck and here. At least in 1660 the new minister of the Reformed church here recorded their names among the members of the congregation, while records show Roeloff still maintaining property in the Beverwyck area five years later. It is a good guess that he was planting in the Esopus area in the spring, trading for furs in Beverwyck during the summer, and then back to the Esopus in the fall to reap his crops.
Sometime in 1659, perhaps after the fall harvest, he sailed for the Netherlands on business. Seventeenth-century ocean voyages be no vacation, Eva and the mg children stayed at home. While in Amsterdam, Roeloff petitioned the West India Company, which owned the colony of New Netherland, to appoint him as schout (court officer) for the Esopus. The directors granted him the commission and issued him instructions for conducting his office just before he sailed in April 1660 they also wrote a letter to Petrus Stuyvesant, informing him of their action.
Stuyvesant was not pleased with the appointment. He protested to directors, "We have been very much astonished by the appointment . . . on account of his unfitness for the position." What was required, according to Stuyvesant was "a man of greater age, capacity and esteem . . . who at the same time is able to attend there to the duties of Commissary for the Company. " In any case, Stuyvesant added "There is for the present no court of justice there and it does not appear that one shall be there in a long while, for lack of inhabitants fit to sit on the bench." Stuyvesant obviously did not think much of any of the settlers at Esopus, and so there was no court and no schout that year.
Roeloff was back in the Netherlands that next winter. He called on Jan Baptist van Rensselaer to collect on a debt owed to the estate of Anthony de Hooges, and, no doubt, also stopped in at the West India Company office before returning home. A series of letters had been passing back and forth between the directors in Amsterdam and Stuyvesant and his council, concerning the appointment of Roeloff. The directors even informed Stuyvesant that they had made their decision, and he was to abide by it. Stuyvesant in 1661 laid out the village of Wiltwyck, now Kingston, appointed schepens (magistrates) to the court, and installed Roeloff as schout.
The Dutch term schout is often translated as sheriff, but the office is more complex than that. Roeloff as schout was in charge of law enforcement, and he was the prosecuting attorney in criminal cases, and he joined the schepens as a magistrate in hearing civil suits You can see why Stuyvesant might think that a 26-year-old would be a trifle young to serve as sheriff, district attorney, and chief Justice for the local court. And administer the government of the Esopus: since there was only one branch of government, the members of the court were the region's administrators, legislators, and judges. But the court met only occasionally, and so the day-to-day administration fell to the schout. Which also meant that Roeloff as head of the local government had to look after the West India Company's interests as well, and the Company's chief expectation of any of its officers here was that they do what they could to make the colony profitable.
THE SECOND ESOPUS WAR
Roeloff in his official capacity sent a rather desperate letter to Stuyvesant and the Council in September 662. "We could not omit informing your Honors that the situation here is such that if no precautions are taken we are in great danger of drawing upon us a new war." What he feared was a repeat of the war with the Esopus Indians that had occurred just three years earlier, and several points of contention remained unsettled. Stuyvesant dawdled for nine months before deciding to visit the Esopus. The Indians were informed on June 5 that Stuyvesant would be coming to meet with them. They apparently did not see this as a positive development, because two days later they began the Second Esopus War. Most of the townsmen were out in their fields when the Indians drifted into the Nieuw Dorp now Hurley, by ones and twos, apparently peaceful, their intentions well concealed At a signal they began their rampage. All the homes in Nieuw Dorp were burned to the ground three men were killed, 34 women and children were taken captive. The Indians then moved on to Wiltwyck, but refugees had arrived here first and warned the town. Schout Swartwout raised the alarm and seventeen townsmen, together with a few soldiers in town, rallied to his call. Few had guns-presumably those who didn't grabbed axes or hoes or clubs-and mounted a counterattack which drove the Indians from the village. Sixteen adults and two children were killed in Wiltwyck, eight men wounded, 11 women and children taken captive, and twelve houses burned. That night, sixty-nine more-or-less able-bodied men kept guard and did what they could for the injured and homeless. Roeloff must have been relieved that no one in his family had been injured or captured, and his house was safe, but his farm was badly damaged and he incurred heavy financial losses. A military force came up from Manhattan and eventually rescued twenty-three captives.
ROELOFF SWARTWOUT AS PUBLIC OFFICIAL
One would think that during the period from the Indian attack in 1663 until the signing of the peace treaty a year later, people would be willing to cooperate with the authorities, but in fact military and civil officers were constantly having to deal with people wandering off without an armed escort, or selling liquor to Indians. It was common at all times for the schout to suffer various sorts of abuse during the performing of his official duties, and no exceptions were made for Indian wars. For example, when Roeloff read a court order to Aeltje Sybrants not to sell brandy to Indians, nor to the Militia who were preparing to march against the Indians, she told him he could use the court order for toilet paper for such rude talk. The court fined her 100 guilders needy.
After the rescue of the prisoners, the church took charge of collections for the while the civil authorities superintended the estates of persons who had died without leaving a will. Soon enough, church and civil officials were interfering in each other's affairs, and Stuyvesant's Council tried to arbitrate. The Wiltwyck court thereupon sent a letter questioning the council's actions in language that Stuyvesant found insolent. He retaliated with an order censuring the magistrates, and suspending Roeloff from office. Roeloff made an unusual winter trip to Manhattan unusual because the river was usually closed by ice and there was no road - presenting a to petition to Stuyvesant and the council. In it he apologized for his in-considered behavior and asked to be reinstated, noting that the salary was necessary for the support of his wife and eight children, and the upkeep of his little farm. The farm was not that little, but hyperbole is understandable under the circumstances. The council was satisfied with his apology, and reinstated him that same day.
The duties of schout, as with any peace officer, were occasionally dangerous and there are several references in the records to Roeloff being attacked. To take one example, a case in October 1663 started in a private suit and escalated to a public knockabout. Poulus Tomassen had hired himself out to thresh Roeloffs grain, and then had run away from the work, so Roeloff took him to court to force him to complete his contract. Not long afterward, Poulus fired off a gun in the house of Aert Martensen Doom, and when Roeloff investigated, Poulus told him, "Schout, I'll shoot you!" This, of course, resulted in Poulus's arrest. On the way to the guard house, Poulus punched Roeloff with both fists, and when they arrived inside the guardhouse, Poulus landed a blow on Roeloff's head that knocked him over a bench. In court, Poulus claimed that he had not struck Roeloff in the street, but had only been warding off blows he had received from Roeloff. He did not remember what he had done in the guard house because he was drunk. The court ordered Poulus to settle with Roeloff or be sentenced to work for a month, and either to give bail against running away or he would be shackled on the job.
ROELOFF'S BUSINESS CAREER
Roeloff was in court on personal business almost as often as he was as schout three times in 1662, thirteen times in 663 sometimes suing for debt, sometimes being sued. There were suits and countersuits with Tjerek Claesen de Wit, Roeloff indebted to de Wit for having some cows pastured and for the loan of a bridle he had neglected to return, de Wit 'indebted to Roeloff for having sent some wheat to Beverwyck on which Roeloff had placed a legal attachment. Earlier in the year they had an argument at Cornelis Barentsen Slecht's house, which had led to blows, and then to Roeloff drawing his sword and challenging de Wit to step outside. But three days later, they appeared without incident at an auction, where de Wit outbid Roeloff for a horse.
A LONG-STANDING BUSINESS ACCOUNT
In 1664 Roeloff was in debt to two Manhattan merchants, David Wessels and Nicolaes de Meyer. By 1665 Roeloff owed de Meyer 423 guilders. He mortgaged his house and lot in Rensselaerswyck, the house and lot in Wildwyck, lands below the Nieuw Dorp in the Esopus, and three milch cows. Roeloff in 1666 sued Pieter Hillebrants for payment due for butter and for some house beams, as well as for wages for carting four loads of wood, and for plowing eight acres for Hillebrants,
All these dealings and odd jobs make it sound as though Roeloff was scuffling to get by, as was everyone else who had lost property in the Esopus War. The debt for 423 guilders was still outstanding eight years later, and Roeloff asked that he be allowed to pay only the interest, "because he has lost his effects in the troubles with the savages," but the court ordered him to pay up. He re-mortgaged his house and lot in Kingston and farm at Hurley to make the payment. Yet this long-standing debt did not discourage the same merchant from extending additional credit to Roeloff of 1,012 Guilders for goods and merchandise. If he were scuffling as a farmer, he was obviously still wheeling and dealing as a merchant.
THE ENGLISH CONQUER NEW NETHERLAND
In September 1664 the city of New Amsterdam was captured by a British military and naval force. On September 4 at a special session of the court at Wiltwyck, Schout Swartwout asked what should be done in case the English should approach the village, and it was resolved to assemble the burghers under arms and parlay outside the village. As to what happened, however, the court record is silent, resuming on October 7 when all had long been resolved and most local officials replaced. Roeloff on that day was appointed by the court to help arbitrate a suit out of court, something he would be asked to do in other suits over the next two years. Roeloff was replaced as schout, but was appointed vendue-master (collector of government fees, a nice political plum). In 1666 he was appointed a schepen for a year, and thereafter continued to appear in various capacities at the court house.
Well regarded by many local residents, Roeloff appeared as attorney for four people in one year. In another year, the court appointed him a financial guardian for the children of five widows and a curator of two estates. Such duties did not always go smoothly, as the guardians sometimes had to take adults to court to protect the children's inheritances, and family members sometimes took the guardians to court to force an accounting,
In 1667 Roeloff was appointed one of the curators of the estate of Hendrick Cornelissz Lyndraeyer. Mattheu Blanchan notified the court that Lyndraeyer had In owed him money, and that "Roeloff Swartwout having been appointed curator is a man without means, and all his property having been mortgaged he is, on that account, poor, wherefore he is not fit to administer other people's estates, and requests to have him dismissed." The court ignored the request.
I think Blanchan was exaggerating. One gets the impression of Roeloff as a farmer with somewhat more farmland than he can manage by himself, and a small trader whose suppliers are as cash-short as himself. Mortgaged at times to the hilt, one has the feeling that he was land-rich and cash-poor, a person with more status than money, much like Thomas Jefferson a century later.
THE ESOPUS MUTINY
Trouble between occupying English troops and vanquished Dutch colonists occurred with disturbing frequency at the Esopus. Between 664 and 668, there were numerous incidents of townsmen being assaulted and townswomen insulted and harassed. A soldier named George Porter assaulted civilians on several occasions, on one particularly bad day assaulting first Jan Comelissen Smith, and then Roeloff Swartwout. There were many such confrontations between soldiers and civilians, and finally a group of soldiers went too far, beating Cornelis Barentsen Sleght in his own home and dragging him off to the fort. The burgher guard mutinied, and nearly attacked the British regulars at the fort, but a combination of their own officers and a freezing February night finally reduced their passions. The English governor appointed a military commission to investigate, and the senior British officer at the Esopus was suspended. In time the Dutch settlers and English soldiers would get used to each other, but at first it was not easy,
Roeloff in 1669 moved from Kingston to Hurley, where he had a house in the village and two lots of meadowland on the north side of Esopus Creek. Perhaps this was a larger house, because the family continued to increase. Although his step-children were grown and beginning to move out, Roeloff in time would have eight children of his own, the last born when Eva was forty. Eva had had 13 children over 25 years, only one of whom died in infancy.
In 1688, William of Orange invaded England, at the head of a Dutch army King James II, support collapsing all around him, fled to France. William and Mary were installed as monarchs "the Glorious Revolution When word of the change in power was received in New York, the government of the colony collapsed, since the appointments of all officials ended with the fall of the king, and no message was received as to either their reappointment or replacement. A period of anarchy ensued. New York City militia captain Jacob Leisler eventually took control of the government, although parts of the colony refused to recognize his authority. The rich and well-connected almost universally opposed him.
Roeloff Swartwout, however, was an enthusiastic Leisler supporter and was elected as Ulster County's representative to the colony's General Assembly. Leisler also appointed Roeloff justice-of-the-peace and collector of the king's revenue in Ulster County. When war was declared between England and France, Leisler proposed to mount an offensive against French Canada, and Roeloff was appointed to procure grain for the provincial army forming at Albany, so obviously Leisler had a great deal of confidence in him.
The Leisler administration was pro-Dutch and Protestant; anti-French and anti-Catholic, and distrusted anyone, Dutch or English, who had served in the previous government. Support came mostly from the middling classes. There is nothing in the record to explain clearly Roeloff s support for Leisler. For years he had juggled a variety of jobs to support his large family, everything of value was heavily mortgaged, and he may simply have thought that he had a better chance with a new government, especially one that made him feel better about himself by putting the blame for his problems on the exiled King James and his followers.
It is also possible that he had a religious affinity with Leisler. Leisler had decided opinions about religion, and in fact was the son of a clergyman. If Roeloff were a one-time theology student, he also undoubtedly had firm opinions. But we really have nothing that I know of that would tell us whether or not Roeloff shared Leisler's views, which were of a somewhat fundamentalist sort.
After two years of Leisler's rule, a new governor arrived from England. Leisler's enemies immediately brought charges against him and his chief supporter, Jacob Milborne. Leisler and Milborne and some thirty-two of their followers were tried on such charges as treason, murder, and riot. Leisler and Milborne and twenty-eight others were convicted and sentenced to death, among them Roeloff Swartwout and his son Anthony. On the day that Leisler and Milborne were put to death a general pardon was issued for all persons who had supported them, excepting the twenty-eight already convicted. The twenty-eight were paroled, but remained under the shadow of the death sentence for another eight years. That one can hardly find a trace of Roeloff or any of them during this period is not surprising; they must have kept very low profiles, trying to do nothing that would displease anyone, since their parole could have been revoked and they could have been put to death at any time. However in 1699 they were pardoned and all judgments against them and their estates were declared null and void. If Roeloff had anything much left of his estate, he at least had free title to it once again,
By this time he was widowed. While it is uncertain when Eva died, it was probably early in 1691, the year that Roeloff was sentenced to death. Talk about having a bad year! But then on November 22, 1692 Roeloff took as his second wife Francyntie Andries, a widow and the mother of eight grown children.
Roeloff appears only rarely in the records thereafter. In 1702, three years after his pardon, he was indicted at the Ulster County court of sessions for an assault upon Jacob Dingman of Hurley. He posted bond, and nothing more is known of the matter. We have records of him paying his taxes, but otherwise he does not appear in the records,
Roeloff wrote his will on March 30, 1714, saying that he was in his eightieth year, sick and weak, but he survived for another year, and died in May of 1715.
Two years later, the legislature passed a law to pay people for services performed a generation earlier at the time of the Glorious Revolution. It was determined that Roeloff had served in his offices faithfully during that period, and the sum of sixty-four ounces of silver was awarded to his children. It is ironic that Roeloff's public service, for which his heirs were paid, was the same service for which he had once stood under sentence of death
The immigrant Swartwouts were not among the huddled masses, the wretched refuse of some foreign shore. They were educated, they came here as merchants with money in their pockets. They were hardworking, public-spirited citizens usually engaged in the ordinary pursuits of supporting their families and in doing their part to improve their communities. And yet they were also adventurers, coming to a savage land where errors in judgment could have cost them their lives. It would have been easy for them to remain in Amsterdam and enjoy the comforts of the Netherlands' Golden Age. But they came here, and played a significant part in the development of New York colony We can say of them, they made a difference.
I would like to close with a challenge. Little has been written about Thomas Swartwout, and quite a bit of what has been written is 'in need of correction. Many church records in the Netherlands have been microfilmed and are available in this country They should be checked for Thomas's baptism. Abstracts of Amsterdam's notarial records relating to New Netherland are also available on microfilm, and could reveal more about the comings and goings of Thomas and Roeloff between Amsterdam and America. The records of the town of Flatbush, on Long Island, have been translated into English and are available in New York City, and they might well help us determine when Thomas was living in Flatbush and when in New Amsterdam, and when he either died or returned to the Netherlands When did Roeloff first acquire land in Esopus? The English land confirmations at the State Archives in Albany should help out there. So there are resources available, which so far as know, have not been utilized. It seems to me that a study of Thomas Swartwout in the Netherlands and on Long Island, and of Roeloff in the Netherlands and in Kingston, would be an appropriate project for the Swartwout Family Society to institute in this 350th year."