The Schout In Rensselaerswijck: nflict Of Inter

Colonial Albany Social History Project Hew York State Museu

T he colony of New Netherland was a commercial be expandedand permanentsettlements offering regular venture through which the mercantile barons who, as life servicesand comforts would have to be established. directors of the Dutch West India Company, sought to However, few Dutchmen could be persuadedto emigrate challenge theFrench for control of a potentially lucrative to risk their lives in the New World for the sole benefit -North American fur trade. Within three decadesof the of the West India Company directors. Inducements initial exploration, the company leadership realized that would be required. the successof their venture was tied to Dutch ability to settle some of the land with colonists who could grow In 1629,the company issued the Charter of Freedoms and otherwise produce goods and services that would and Exemptions which permitted certain responsible support the activities of company fur traders.Among the individuals to establish personal estatesin New Nether- principal considerationsfor the successfulestablishment land. These so-called “patroons” were authorized to of European-stylecivilization in the New World was the appropriate large acreageplantations, to contract with necessityof imposing order in the American wilderness. farmers,agricultural processors,and artisans to become Although they disagreed on most other matters, the their tenants,and to rule their patroonshipswith many of company directors collectively understood that the the samerights, privileges, and responsibilities that had . imposition of such order followed the establishmentof been bestowedon feudal lords in Europe. The fur trade, Roman-Dutch law and the subsequentadministration of however, was to be the exclusive domain of the West justice in the colony.’ India Company. By establishing patroonships, the company hoped to populate the colony with permanent In 1626, the directors appointed Jan Lampo to serve settlers who would concentrate on the development of in America as schout fiscal, or chief officer of the law. natural resources other than those of the fur bearing This office was to combine the duties of a modem-day animals.3 sheriff and public prosecutor. Lamp0 was engaged to oversee the administration of justice for the entire Several patroonships were authorized. But the only province. But becauseearly New Netherland consisted permanent success was Rensselaerswijck, the 600- ofjust two fortified outpostslocated over 150miles apart square-mile domain of Killiaen van Rensselaer, an and inhabited by only a few hundred E ropeans, the Amsterdamdiamond magnateand West India Company actual law enforcementat the northern tradi g post called director. This director was the leader of the company Fort Orange was left to the fort’s comma der. As long faction that advocatedintensive and long-term, internal as the number of settlersremained small, an while these development of the colony as the best way to achieve colonists lived in close proximity, order 1 d discipline permanent success. During the 1630s and 1640s he could be maintained by the West India Company repre- searched across Holland for able and even-tempered sentativesat the fort on the site of today’s Albany.2 settlers, signed them to service contracts, and sent them (often with their families) acrossthe Atlantic to Rensse- Although prospects for great successin the North laerswijclc. At every opportunity, Van Rensselaer American fur tradewere considerable,as late as 1629the reminded them and their overseersof the virtues of tilling permanent existence of New Netherland still was in the land and of providing the services specified in their doubt. While the European demand for beaver hats and contracts. coats continued to increase,pelts becamemore difficult to obtain once the initial supply in the Hudson and lower Among other things, thepatroon wascharged with the Mohawk valleys had beenexhausted. Company officials responsibility for implementing and enforcing company soon understood that to reach more deeply into the orchnancesand policies in his domain, particularly those American interior for beavers,the frontier would have to prdhibiting tenants from privately engaging in the fur

3 4 SELECTED RENSSELAERSWIJCK SEMINAR PAPERS trade. Practically speaking, Van Rensselaer was to be the most powerful and important person in the expected to take charge of the administration of justice patroonship. However, the patroon’s vision was not on his patroonship. The patroon approachedthis respon- sharedby his first appointee.When he finally got around sibility both philosophically and pragmatically. He to commenting on Van Rensselaer’s commission and believed that his plan for development would benefit all directives, Van Soestrefused the appointment asschout- concerned,landlord and tenant alike. He also knew that officer and also decided not to renew his contract as a the guiding precepts of his patroonship-namely the tenant farmer. Perhaps Rutger Hendricksen was over- terms of tenant contracts and his frequent, more general whelmed by Van Rensselaer’sopening instructions. He instructions-must be strictly followed. Thus, it was may have been put off by the ambiguous nature of the clear that the term “justice” was synonymous with the schout’s remuneration; orperhaps Rutger Hendricksen maintenanceof the patroon’s rights and privileges.4 simply had enough of life in America. In any event, the patroon’s first law enforcementofficer left. the colony in To that end, on July 1, 1632, the patroon appointed 1634.6 Rutger Hendricksen van Soest, a recently arrived Rensselaerswijck farmer, to serve as schout. In turn, Kiliaen van Rensselaer sought to apply what he Rutger Hendricksen was authorized to administer the learned from his dealings with Rutger Hendricksen van oath of office to five newly appointed schepens or Soest to the appointment of the next schout. Van magistrates who also were in residence on his estate. Rensselaer contracted with a North HolXander named Three weeks later from his Amsterdam counting house JacobAlbertsen Planck to serve as schout for a period of Van Rensselaer issued instructions for the schout and three years which began with his arrival in the colony in schepens. First, the schout was directed to call on the August 1634. Recognizing the importance of maintain- commis or West India Company managerat Fort Orange, ing continuity in the schout’s office, the: patroon had and to offer service of every favor, assistance, and insisted that Planck agree not to leave the position for friendship that could bemutually beneficial. Thepatroon three years on pain of heavy reparations. Like his was anxious for his representative to cultivate the predecessor,Jacob Albertsen also was given the position cooperation of the company and especially of its soldiers of officer which entitled him to a remune.rationof one- stationed at the fort. That connection would be critical to third of the fines he collected on ordinance violations, the maintenanceof his prerogatives. and also to a silver-plated sword and belt, which he was to receive from the company Director-General in New To solidify his new representative’s position, Van Amsterdamupon taking the oath of office. Rensselaerempowered the schout to hold the additional position of “officer.” As such, Rutger Hendricksen was Planck’s duties asofficer and schout were more clear- designatedas the senior memberof the governing coun- ly defined and would be exacting as well as diverse. He cil of the patroonship. The officer was to make certain was directed to exercise “proper supervision over all the that the council met regularly at his house, and that it men, farms, animals and everything else that may have observedproper Christian procedure in its deliberations. to be done” in the nameof the patroon. Like his predeces- In general, the council was to implement all Dutch laws sor, he wasreminded to keep an exact record and account and customs.As the enforcement arm of this governing and was to report on activities in the colony at every body, the schout was authorized to admonish those who opportunity. In that way, the absenteepatroon would be “should misbehave themselves, especially those who informed on the stateof his estateto the minutest detail- through quarreling or fighting, through lazinessor drink- if the s&out was following his orders. Planck was ing, neglect the profit of their patrmn.“5 This was Van instructed to seekthe best advantageof the patroon in all Rensselaer’sprime directive to Rutger Hendricksen.The his endeavors, to perform the function of reader on patroon also askedthe schout to submit an annual inven- Sundays and holidays, and also to offer up the public tory and account of the state of the patroonship. Kiliaen prayers. Execution of the latter directive entitled Planck van Rensselaerwas willing to invest considerable trust to one stiver (five percent) from every guilder of the in his first appointee. He envisioned the schout-officer patroon’s net annual profit. as his personal representative-serving as chief administmtive officer of Rensselaerswijck-acquiring As with other things, Kiliaen van Rensselaer.held’ property, engaging tenants,and dispensingjustice in the strongoptions regarding exactly where in the colony his name of the patroon. This official clearly was intended schoutzofficershould reside.Planck hadbeen diiected to THE SCHOUT IN RENSSELAERSWIJCK 9 not proper for you and you far exceedyour boundenduty and to prosecutethose who were in violations of Rensse- in criticizing my administration and this once more on laerswijck ordinances and by-laws. In this way, the slanderous statementsthat I am sending informers into patroon reasoned, the officer would be prepared to the c~untry.“~~ The patroon then made it clear that he further the principles upon which the colony had been thought that none of his employees,least of all his chief founded a decadeand a half earlier. Those preceptswere officer, should be “reproaching, hindering, worrying and permanentsettlement as the basisfor the patroon’sprofit. accusing” his regulation of the patroonship. Reflecting again on the subjectof promotions, the patroon reiterated But the patroon’s agenda was not the development that the proper and indeed only avenue for advancement plan followed by his placemen. The case of Adriaen would be through the faithful observanceof the officer’s Comelissen van der Donck provides a prime example. oath and of the patroon’s instructions and advisements. Upon arriving in the colony, Adriaen Cornelissen Finally, he chided Van der Donck on what had become quickly surmisedthat the opportunities for accumulating the chronic problem of the infrequency and brevity of the his own fortune were too abundantand too easily realized officer’s reports on affairs in the colony.26 to resist. From the beginning, he seemsto have more or less ignored Van Rensselaer’sinstructions and admoni- Kiliaen van Rensselaer had placed great stock in tions. In fact, the only legal action recorded as initiated Adriaen Comelissen’s ability and willingness to serveas by him involved a certain JannetjeTeunisz, a casewhich his eyes and earsin the New World. Diligent attention to camebefore the Council of New Netherland in Novem- the duties of the positions of schout and officer would ber 1643. Van der Donck charged that the young lady maintain order and discipline in the colony and would had refusedto servethe patroon asher contract specified. pave the way for the responsible development of the However, that action was unsuccessful as the case was large Hudson Valley estate. But, above all, the continued indefinitely when it became known that administration of justice would protect and further the Vrouw Teunisz was in an advancedstate of pregnancy.28 patroon’s own interests. Likewise, Kiliaen van Rensselaer’sfrequent exhorta- The patroon’s chargesagainst Chief Officer Van der tions to his other administrators to seek the advice and Donck were well founded. Despite subtle reminders that assistanceof Van der Donck were retuned by reports of he could replace Adriaen Comelissen with any of several the SChour-officer’s uncooperativeness. Arent van individuals (and particularly with one Nicholas Coom Curler, for one, complained to the patroon in June 1643 whom Van Rensselaerbelieved understoodthe duties of that he could not forward tenant accounts to his uncle the chief officer), the patroon continued to receive becauseVan der Donck “does not even speak to them reports of Van der Donck’s self-seeking life-style. (the tenants) about it, according to his instructions, nor Although the officer did erect a small house on Castle has he done anything about it as long as he has been in Island to serve as his regular domicile, he had relin- the colony.” Arent also reported that his efforts to uphold quished neither title to nor interest in the tract of land on the fiied price of wheat were undercut by the officer who the Groote Vfuckte or Great Flat of the Mohawk River personally had “. . . paid not attention to it, nor has he west of today’s Schenectady. In addition, Adriaen tried to prevent such fraud (the free sale of wheat by Comelissen also had expressedinterest in patenting and manor farmers).“2g developing the land at the mouth of the Nepperhan(later Sawmill) River. As a postscript to this story, Van der According to Van Curler, Van der Donck also was Donck’s ambition was fulfilled for the city of Yonkers negligent in enforcing regulations prohibiting the trading in WestchesterCounty now standson the site of the land of furs in private. When a sloop appearedin the river near he establishedas the estatecalled Colondonck later in the Rensselaerswijckin 1642, the patroon’s tenants freely decade.” dealt their furs after they had claimed they had no beavers to sell to Van Curler. This was a clear violation of the fur Kiliaen van Rensselaerclearly intended for the holder trading ordinance which included a provision for a tax of the positions of officer and schout to be responsible on exported furs. Van Curler called on Van der Donck to for upholding the patroon’s rights and prerogativesin the searchthe housesof those suspectedof trading in hope colony. To that end, he had invested Van der Donck with of find the goodsthe suspectshad received for their pelts. considerable power and had directed his other Adriaen Comelissen and Hans Vos, his assistant,went administrators to look to the officer for support, advice, to several homes, conversed with the owners, but 10 SELECTED RENSSELAERSWIJCK SEMINAR PAPERS searchedonly the home of Dirck Jansen-who was Van sibilities of his office. Instead he took title to his own der Donck’s enemy. Finding contraband duffles there, plantation of Colendonck and left Rensselaerswijck the officer seized them. But no other searcheswere permanently after his farm on Castle Island burned in made.30By that time, Van Curler understood that Van January 1646?3 der Donck was determined to ruin him in the colony and to discredit him in the patroon’s eyes. In addition to the By the summer of that year, Nicholas Coom had above incidents, he further denounced officer Van der succeededto the offices of schout and officer. He held Donck as “self-seeking and grasping,” and as a “dog thosepositions until the arrival of the new director, Brant [who] biters] me and daily seek[s] to render me Aertsz van Slichtenhorst, in March 1648.Coom then was suspected.“31 relegated to the position of Oficer Luytenant (deputy sheriff), and servedin that capacity until replacedby Van The testimony of his kinsman, Van Curler, theequally Slichtenhorst’s nephew, Gerrit van Wenckum.34 unflattering remarks of his friend and Rensselaerswijck minister, Johannes Megapolensis, and other reports of The administration of justice under the first patroon Van der Donck’s cavalier attitude toward the wishes of was really the story of Kiliaen van Rensselaer’sefforts his employer, combined to persuadeVan Rensselaerto to seehis rights and investments in the colony managed take drastic stepsto put an end to the chaoscaused by the by a succession of handpicked employees who were absenceof law enforcement in the colony. given the titles of officers of the law or of justice. But since the law was defined by Van Rensselaeras the rights By 1643,French and New England traderswere active and privileges granted by the Charter of Freedoms and all over the patroonship and threatenedto siphon off all Exemptions and subsequentdocuments, it is not surpris- of the wheat and furs and thus the patroon’s profits from ing that no record exists of tenant rights being upheld. In the labor of his tenants. To check the encroachmentsof fact, the subjectwas not even mentioned in passingin the illegal traders as described by Van Curler in 1642, the Van Rensselaer Bowier Manuscripts, the most com- patroon appointed Nicholas Coom as commander and prehensive source for assessing the patroonship of commis of RensselaersSteyn on Beeren Island which Kiliaen van Rensselaer. commanded the southern entrance to the colony. With the appointment of Coom in late August 1643, the The first patroon’s officers of justice were invested authority of Van der Donck had been superceded.Beeren with the authority to safeguard their employer’s rights Island was strategically located so that any ship attempt- and property in the upper Hudson Valley. Kiliaen van ing to enter the colony would have to passbefore the guns Rensselaersought to direct and motivate his schouts and of RensselaersSteyn which the patroon had fortified in officers separated by over 3,000 mil.es of ocean. September.Thus, water-borne attempts by outsiders to Meanwhile, the patroon’s appointees in America took poach on the patroon’s domain could be nipped in the advantage of their positions for personal aggrandize- bud. At the sametime, the majority of Van Rensselaer’s ment. The tenuresof JacobPlanck and Adriaen van der tenants would fall under the watchful eyes of Nicholas Donck have been particularly good examples of the Coom.32 triumph of personal ambition in an arena,characterized by tremendous opportunities available to those who Adriaen van der Donck did not appear to be came to the New World. While Kiliaen van Rensselaer intimidated by the appointment of Coom and seemsto admonished his officials to hold Rensselaerswijck have beenpreoccupied with his own affairs. Although he tenants to the terms of their contracts, his own enforce- technically held the position of chief officer until the ment officials were too preoccupied with their own death of the patroon later in 1643, Van der Donck long affairs to be concerned with the patroon’s pleas for since had ceasedany pretenseof discharging the respon- ‘justice.” THE SCHOUT IN RENSSELAERSWIJCK 11

Notes lThe historical debateover the purpose of New Nether- ‘VRBM,211. land was defined during the 1960sby Thomas Condon %Iissenson,Patroon’s Domain, 92-93; CMR,7-9. The and Van Cleef Bachman. See Thomas J. Condon, New patroon’s instructions to Van Soest are translated in York Beginnings: The Commercial Origins of New VRBM,201-2,204-5,208-l 1. Netherland (New York: New York University Press, 7 crvt~, 9. “Planck as schout, 1634,” in Nissenson, 1968), and Bachman’s Peltries or Plantations: The Patroon’s Domain, 97-99. “Contract between Kiliaen Economic Policies of the Dutch West India Co. in New van Rensselaerand Jacob Albertsz Planck,” March 4, Netherland, 1623-39 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins 1634, VRBM,250-54; “Instructions to Jacob Albertsz University Press,1970). The latestand most comprehen- Planck, schout,” April 27,1634; ibid., 292-96. Planck’s sive summary and analysis is Oliver A. Rink’s Holland biographical notice also is in ibid., 809. Additional infor- on the Hudson: An Economic and Social History of mation on Jacob Albertsz’s activities appearsin Ellis L. Dutch New York (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, Raesly,Portrait ofNew Netherland (New York: Colum- 1986). bia University Press, 1945, reprinted Port Washington, 2For the appointment of Lampo, see Edmund B. :965), 65. O’Callaghan, compiler, The Register OfNewNetherfand, CMR,9. J. Franklin Jameson,ed., Narratives of New 26246674 (Albany: J. Munsell, 1865), 11.For theduties Netherland, 1609-1664 (New York: Charles Scribner’s of the schout-fiscal, see O’Callaghan’s History of New Sons, 1909),84. Philip E. Mackey, “Capital Punishment Netherland and New York Under the Dutch (New York: in New Netherland,” de Halve Muen, XLW (1972): 7-8, D. Appleton & Co, 1866), 101-03; and O’Callaghan’s 14. “Description and First Settlement of New Netherland,” ‘CMR, 10. VRBM,201, 204, 229, 266, and 67n, 300. in The Documentary History of the State of New York Planck also held the position of “precenter and distiller (Albany: Weed, Parsons& Co., 1850), KU:25-64, espe- of brandy,” ibid., 67. Nissenson,Patroon’s Domain, 98. cially page 47. “VRBM, 430. 3Theissuance of the Charterof Freedomand Exemptions “Kiliaen van Rensselaerto Willem Kieft, May 12,1639, is consideredby Rink, Holland on the Hudson, in chapter quoted in CMR, 10. Van Rensselaerto Planck, May 24, four. In general, Rink’s discussion supercedesCondon 1635, September 21 and December 25, 1637, VRBM, in New York Beginnings, 123-27. The charter appearsin 313-14,330,353,391,396-97,467. Planck’s failure to Dutch and in translation in Van Rensselaer Bowier keep the patroon informed disturbed Van Rensselaerto Manuscripts: Being the Letters of Kiliaen van the extent that his stated reason for appointing Van Rensselaer, 1630-1643, and other Documents Relating Curler was so that an assistant could “copy everything to the Colony of Rensseiaerswyck, translated and edited and write me of all more at length than has been done by Arnold J. F. van Laer (Albany: University of the State thus far,” ibid., 398. Van Rensselaer to Wouter van of New York, 1908), 137-53, and hereafter cited as Twiller, ibid., 396. VRBM. This source also documentsthe patroon’s efforts lZcArent van Curler,” sketch by Richard E. Day, The in contracting tenantsto develop his American holdings. Dictionary of American Biography, edited by Dumas Van Rensselaer’sintentions regarding the fur trade are Malone (New York Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1936)xxx: describedin Rink, Holland on the Hudson, 194. 165-66. Van Curler later was a principal figure in the 4The standard work on Rensselaerswijck during the founding of Schenectady,vRB~,398,402,817.~~~, 10. seventeenthcentury still is Samuel G. Nissenson, The “Instructions to Comelis Teunisz van Breuckelen as Patroan’s Domain: The Patroon System as Embodied in representativeof the patroon,” August 4, 1639, VRBM, Rensselaerswyck New York Through the Dutch and 459-63.Hisbiographicalnoticeappearsinibid., 139-41. English Periods (New York: Columbia University Press, 13Van Rensselaer to Van Breuckelen, June 25, 1640, 1937).Although Oliver Rink haspresented considerable ibid., 495. Biographical notices of Van der Donck appear new material on Rensselaerswijck(most impressively on in The Dictionary of American Biography, XIX, 178,and its tenant population), the development of the manor is Documents Relative to the History of the State of New not the major focus of Holland on the Hudson; see York, Edmund B. O’Callaghan, editor (Albany: Weed, especially 144-56, and 194-98 for the ambitions of Parsons& Co., 1856), I: 532n. Van Curler’s role in the Kiliaen Van Rensselaer.A morecomprehensive study of SchenectadyPatent is describedin ThomasE. Burke, Jr., Rensselaerswyckover time is needed.Minutes of the “The ExtreemestPart of All: The Dutch Community of Court of Rensselaerswyck, 1648-1652, translated and Schenectady,New York, 1661-1720” (Ph.D. disserta- edited by Arnold J. F. Van Laer (Albany: Univ. of the tion, SUNY Albany, 1984), chapter I. VRBM 824,524, Stateof New York, 1922), 7, and hereaftercited as CMR. :527, 534. Van Rensselaer to Van der Donck, May 4, 12 SELECTEDRENSSELAERSWIJCKSEMINAR PAPERS

1641,ibid.,547.~m, 10. ~~~~:534,543,547,549,557. 221bid.,640. Van Rensselaer to Van Curler, July 18, 1641, ibid., 231bid.,641. 58-59. O’CaIlaghan, History ofAkwl\retherkznd, I: 327- 2‘%bid.,642. 28. 25Ibid., 642. 14Van Rensselaer to Van der Donck, July 23, 1641, 2eIbid., 642-644. VRBM, 571-72. Van Laer’s translation of the fifth article 27Van Rensselaer to Megapolensis, March 13, 1643, of the Charter of Freedomsand Exemptions appearsin ibid., 649-50. For the “Great Flat,” seeibid., 616-17. ibid., 139-41. 28Calendar of Historical Manuscripts in the Ofice of the “Van der Donck, “Ordinance of the colony of Secretary of State: Dutch, edited by Edmund B. Rensselaerswyck regulating trade,” August 12, 1641, 0’Callagha.n (Albany: Weed, Parsons& Co., 1865), 83. ibid., 573-74. 29Van Curler to Van Rensselaer,June 16, 1643, trans- %an Rensselaerto Van Curler, September29, 1641, lated by Arnold J. F. van Laer and printed in the Yearbook ibid., 577-78. Seealso ibid., 626-27. ; the Dutch Settlers Society, III (1927-28): 18,23. 17Van Rensselaer to Johannes Megapolensis, June 3, i id., 25. 1642, ibid., 616-17, seealso 824. I am unclear whether ‘31Ibid., 23,23n. the “Great Flat” referred to at this point during the early 3%RBM649-50,65 5; “Commission to Nicolaes Coorn,” 1640swas located on the west bank of the Hudson or the August 26,1643, ibid., 680-82; “Account of ammunition south side of the Mohawk above what becameAlbany for RensselaersSteyn,” ibid., 706-7, which included and Schenectady,respectively. threecannon, shot,powder, firelocks, pistols, spears,and 18Van Rensselaer to Van der Donck, March 9, 1643, a “silver-plated sword for Coren,” CMR,11. ibid., 63 1. 33VREtM,824. Adriaen van der Donck, A Description of “Ibid., 630644. the New Netherlands (Syracuse: Syracuse University 201bid.,636. Press,1968). 211bid.,637. 34VRBM,830; CM& 11-12.