The first public officer appointed by the Dutch Government for this town
after its settlement in 1625, was a “Superintendant,” whose duties were
to preserve the peace, and regulate the police of the town. A few years
after the office of Superintendant was abolished, and the offices of
Schout, Secretary, and Assessor, created; these officers were also
appointed by the Governor. In 1646, the town having considerably
increased, the inhabitants were permitted to elect two magistrates;
subject, however, to the approval or rejection of the Governor. These
magistrates had increased powers: they were authorised to give judgment
in all cases as they might think proper; provided that the judgment so
given be not contrary to the charter of New-Netherland. Subsequently
this Town Court was new modelled by the Dutch Government, and its power
and authority more clearly defined.
The inhabitants suffering very much under the arbitrary exercise of
power on the part of the government, frequently remonstrated against the
same. Finally a convention of delegates from this, and the other towns
under the Dutch government assembled at New Amsterdam, November 26th,
1653, on an invitation from the Governor. Where they, on the 11th of
December, following, entered into a remonstrance against the exclusion
of the people from their share in legislation, and generally against
their mode of government. The Governor and his Council sent them no
answer, but entered one on the minutes; in which they denied the right
of this town, Flatbush, and Flatlands, to send deputies, and protested
against the meeting, notwithstanding the same was held at the Governor’s
request. Entertaining a just sense of the responsibility attached to
them, the deputies made another, but ineffectual attempt, to obtain a
recognition of their rights, and on the 13th of the last mentioned
month, presented another remonstrance, in which they declared, that if
they could not obtain them from the Governor and Council, they would be
under the necessity of appealing to their superiors, the States
General.--The Governor in a fit of anger dissolved their meeting, and
sent them home.
In 1654, it appears that the country was very much infested with
robbers; to disperse whom, April 7, 1654, the magistrates of this town,
together with those of Midwout and Amersfort, united in forming a
company of soldiers to act against “robbers and pirates,” and determined
that there should be a military officer in each town, called a Sergeant.
In order to prevent the depredations of the Indians, the Governor in
1660, ordered the inhabitants of Brooklyn to put the town in a state of
defence; and commanded the farmers to remove within the fortifications,
on the pain of forfeiting their estates.[15]
For the first two or three years under the English government, the
magistrates of this town were but temporary officers. Nearly all that we
know about the government previous to 1669, is, that Town Courts were
established in this Colony.--The inference would be, that as this town
was granted “all the rights and privileges belonging to a town within
this government,” a town Court was also organized here.
The Town Clerk of this town was appointed by the Governor, and confirmed
by the Court of Sessions, as will appear by the following record: At a
Court of Sessions held at Gravesend for the West Riding of Yorkshire
upon Long-Island, December 15, 1669. “Whereas Derick Storm presented an
order from his Hon. the Governor, for the approbation of the Court of
Sessions, to allow him to be towne clerk of Breucklen, taking his oath,
the Court having allowed thereof, and doe hereby confirme him of Clerke
of the said towne.”
In the year 1669, the first mention is made in the records of the
“Constable of Breucklen;” which office at that period was held by
Michael Lenell. The duties of constable as laid down in the Duke’s laws
were, holding town courts with the overseers, and with them making
assessments, &c. whipping, or punishing offenders, raising the hue and
cry after murderers, manslayers, thieves, robbers, burglarers; and also
to apprehend without warrant such as were overtaken with drink,
swearing, Sabbath breaking, vagrant persons, or night walkers;
“provided they bee taken in the manner, either by the sighte of the
constable, or by present informacon from others; as alsoe to make
searche for all such persons either on ye Sabbath daye, or other, when
there shall bee occation in all houses licensed to sell beere or wine,
or any other suspected or disordered places, and those to apprehend and
keepe in safe custody till opportunity serves to bring them before the
next Justice of ye Peace for further examinacon.” The Constable was
chosen out of the number of Overseers, whose term of service had
expired.
The following is a list of the Constables of Brooklyn, from 1669 to
1690:
1669. Michael Lenell.
1671. Lambert Johnson.
1675. Andries Juriaensen.
1676. Cornelius Corsen.
1678. Thomas Lambertse.
1679. John Aeresen.
1680. Andries Juriaensen.
1682. Martin Ryersen.
Brooklyn and Newtown were ordered to make a new choice according to law.
1683. Jan Cornelis Dam.
1684. Thomas Ffardon.
1687. John Aertsen.
1688. Volkert Andriese.
1689. Jacobus Beavois.
1689. Jurian Bries.
1690. Jurian Hendrickse.
Shortly after the conquest of this Colony by the English from the Dutch,
the towns of Brooklyn, Bushwyck, Midwout, or Flatbush, Amersfort, or
Flatlands, and New-Utrecht, were formed into a separate district for
certain purposes, by the name of the “Five Dutch towns.” A Secretary was
specially appointed for these five towns, whose duties appear to have
been confined to the taking acknowledgment of transports, and marriage
settlements, and proof of wills, &c. This office in 1674, was held by
“Nicasius De Sille, in the absence of Sr Ffrancis De Brugh.” This same
Mr. De Sille, was in authority under the Dutch government, in the year
1658, as Schout of the city of New-Amsterdam. He was styled, “Heer
Nicasius De Sille.” There was no uniformity in the title of those
acknowledging officers of the Five Dutch towns. In 1675, Machiel
Hainelle exercised that office, and styled himself “Clerk.” In the same
year the Court of Sessions for this Riding, after setting forth the
appointment of Hainell, and calling him “Secretary,” said, “It is the
opinion of the Court that for what publique or private business he shall
doe he ought to have reasonable satisfacon.[16]
There were also in this town, officers, who were called “Overseers.” The
Duke’s Laws provide for their appointment in the following manner.
“Overseers shall be eight in number, men of good fame, and life, chosen
by the plurality of voyces of the freeholders in each towne, whereof
foure shall remaine in their office two yeares successively, and foure
shall be changed for new ones every yeare; which election shall preceed
the elections of Constables, in point of time, in regard the Constable
for the yeare ensuing, is to bee chosen out of that number which are
dismist from their office of Overseers.”
The following is a copy of the oath which was administered to the
overseers elect.
“Whereas you are chosen and appointed an Overseer for the Towne of
Breucklen you doe sweare by the Ever-living God, that you will
faithfully and diligently discharge the trust reposed in you, in
relation to the publique and towne affaires, according to the
present lawes established, without favour, affection or partiality
to any person or cause which shall fall under your cognizance; and
at time when you shall bee required by your superiors to attend the
private differences of neighbours, you will endeavour to reconcile
them: and in all causes conscientiously and according to the best
of your judgment deliver your voyce in the towne meetings of
Constable and Overseers. So helpe you God.” These officers were
commonly sworn by the Court of Sessions; but in the year 1671, the
Constable of Newtown objected to the Court’s swearing the overseers
of that town, “alledginge that accordinge to the amendments of the
law iff special occation required, itt is in the power of the
Constable to sweare them, otherwise not, which is left to his Honor
the Governor to decide.” The inhabitants of the town for which the
overseers were elected were authorised to determine by a major vote
whether the said overseers should, on admission to office, take the
oath prescribed as above; and in case the said overseers were not
sworn, it was a legal objection against their proceedings on the
part of any person prosecuted in their court, unless the overseers
immediately on objection being made, took the oath, which the
Constable was permitted to administer.
It was the duty of the overseers, together with the Constable, to
hold Town Courts, for the trial of causes under £5. Their other
duties are contained in the following summary. On the death of any
person, they were to repair with the Constable, to the house of the
deceased, and inquire after the manner of his death, and of his
will and testament; and if no will was found, the Constable in the
presence of the Overseers was, within 48 hours, to search after the
estate of the deceased, and to deliver an account of the same in
writing, under oath, to the next Justice of the Peace. They,
together with the Constable made all assessments. If any Overseer
died during his term, the rest of the Overseers by a major vote,
made choice of another in his place; and if the person so chosen
refused to serve, he forfeited the sum of £10, towards defraying
the town charges. They were to settle the bounds of the town,
within twelve months after the bounds were granted. They had the
power of regulating fences. They were authorised together with the
Constable to make choice of two out of the eight overseers of
Church affairs.
They and the Constable, were frequently to admonish the inhabitants
“to instruct their children and servants in matters of religion,
and the lawes of the country.” They, with the Constable, appointed
an officer “to record every man’s particular marke, and see each
man’s horse and colt branded.” The Constable and two of the
Overseers were to pay the value of an Indian coat for each wolf
killed; and they were to cause the wolf’s head to be “nayled over
the door of the Constable, their to remaine, as also to cut of both
the eares in token that the head is bought and paid for.”
The following is the only list that the Compiler could obtain of the
Overseers of this town.
1671. Frederick Lubertse and Peter Perniedeare.
1675. John Peterson Mackhike, and Jerome
De Rapostelley.
1676. Tunis Guis Bergen, and Thomas Lambertson.
1679. John Harrill, and Martyn Reyandsen.
1680. Symon Aeresen, and Michael Harsen.
1683. John Aeresen, and Daniel Rapellie.
In the year 1683, the “Overseers” were changed to “Commissioners.” The
“act for defraying the publique and necessary charge of each respective
citty, towne, and county throughout this province; and for maintaining
the poore and preventing vagabonds.” Passed by the General Assembly of
this colony, November 1st, 1683, provides--“That annually and once in
every yeare there shall be elected a certaine number out of each
respective citty, towne, and county throughout this province; to be
elected and chosen by the major part of all the ffreeholders and
ffreemen; which certaine number so duely elected shall have full power
and authority to make an assessment or certaine rate within their
respective cittys, townes and countys annually, and once in every yeare,
which assessment and certain rate so established as aforesaid, shall bee
paid into a certaine Treasurer, who shall be chosen by a major part of
all the ffreemen of each respective citty, towne, and county; which
Treasurer soe duly chosen, shall make such payment for the defraying of
all the publique and necessary charges of each respective place
above-menconed, as shall bee appointed by the commissioners, or their
President, that shall be appointed in each respective citty, towne, and
county within this province, for he _supervising the publique affaires
and charge_ of each respective citty, towne and county aforesaid.” And
the said act proceeds further to say, “And whereas it is the custome and
practice of his Majesties realme of England, and all the adjacent
colonyes in America, that every respective county, citty, towne,
parrish, and precinct, doth take care and provide for the poore who doe
inhabit in their respective precincts aforesaid; Therefore it is
enacted, &c. That for the time to come the respective commissioners of
every county, citty, towne, parish, precinct aforesaid, shall make
provision for the maintainance and support of their poore
respectively.”[17]
The following is a list of the Commissioners of this town from 1684, to
1690, inclusive.
1684. Thomas Lambertsen, Randolph Emans,
and John Aeresen.
1685. Tunis Guis Bergen, and Daniel Rapalie.
1686. Michael Hansen, and Jeromus De Rapalie.
The town made choice of Hansen and De Rapalie; and were ordered by the
Court of Sessions to make a new selection by the 12th of April, 1686,
and return the same to one of the Justices of the Peace for Kings
County.
1687. Adriaen Bennet, Thomas Lambertsen,
and Tunis Guysbert.
The Court of Sessions ordered the town to make choice of a new
Commissioner in the place of Tunis Guysbert; which they according did,
and elected Jan Gerritsen Dorland.
1688. Simon Aertsen, Micheal Hansen, and
Claes Barense.
The Court of Sessions refused to swear Michael Hansen.
1690. Joris Hansen, Hendrick Claasen, and
Jan Gerbritse.
The office of “Commissioner” continued until 1703, when a “Supervisor”
was elected. The Supervisors of Kings County had their first meeting on
the first Tuesday of October, 1703; at which meeting Captain Joras
Hansen was the Supervisor from Brooklyn. The duty of the Supervisors
was, “to compute, ascertaine, examine, oversee and allow the contingent,
publick, and necessary charge of each county.” Two assessors were also
elected for this town, whose names were, Peter Garrabrantse, and John E.
Bennet; and one Collector. This is not the first mention of the
assessors and collectors of this town in our County Records. In 1688,
Michael Hansen, and Daniel Rapalie were chosen assessors, for the
purpose of assessing this town’s proportion of a tax of £308 8s 0d,
which was imposed on Kings County. It is the opinion of the Compiler,
that these were distinct officers from the Commissioners, whose duty it
was to assess the ordinary rates; and that these assessors were but
temporary officers, appointed to assess this particular tax. In 1699,
Jan Garretse Dorlant is mentioned as Collector of Brooklyn; and in 1701,
John Bybout held the same office.
In 1691, a majority of the freeholders of the town were impowered to
make orders for the improvement of their public lands; and annually to
elect three surveyors of highways. The duties of these svrveyors were to
amend and lay out highways and fences. The town meeting at which these
orders were made, and officers elected, were held by the direction, and
under the superintendance of one or more justices of the peace.
November 8, 1692. The court of sessions for Kings county, ordered that
each town within the county, should erect “a good pair of stocks, and a
good pound;” and that the clerk of the court should issue a warrant to
the constable of every town, requiring them to see this order complied
with “at their peril.” The following is a list of the constables of this
town, from the new organization of the colony in 1691, to 1711, as far
as the compiler has been able to ascertain the same:
1693. Volkert Brier.
1697. Volkert Brier.
1698. Jacob Hansen. [This man was complained of by the last constable
for not making his appearance at court; and the sheriff was ordered to
summon him to appear at the next court.]
1699. Jacobus Beauvois.
1700. Cornelius Verhoeven.
1701. Jacob Verdon.
1702. Thomas Davies.
1703. Thomas Davies.
1704. William Brower.
1705. Jacob Ffardon.[This constable refused to call a town meeting in 1706,
in compliance with the requisitions of a warrant he had received from
Justice Ffilkin, for the election of town officers; and the inhabitants
complained of him to the court of sessions, who ordered that a town
meeting should be held for the election of town officers, and that
Ffardon should hold over until a new constable was elected and sworn in
his stead.]
1707. Abram Sleghter.
1708. Cornelius Collier.
1709. William Brower.
1711. Thomas Davies.
For some time previous and subsequent to the year 1693, the colony was
in a very disordered state, arising probably from its new organization
after the revolution in Great Britain.
At the same period, both the civil and military governments in this town
and also in the county, were very unpopular. In order to support their
authority, the justices of the peace resorted to the exercise of very
arbitrary measures: arresting and confining many persons under the
pretence of their having uttered scandalous words against them, and the
government; by which proceedings they completely alienated the people’s
affections, and exasperated them to such a degree that they committed
many excesses: all which will appear by the following extracts from the
records:
“October 11, 1693, at a meeting of the justices of Kings county, at
the county hall. Present, Roeleff Martinse, Nicholas Stillwell,
Joseph Hegeman, and Henry Ffilkin, esqrs. justices. John Bibout, of
Broockland, in the county aforesaid, we aver being committed by the
said justices to the common jail of Kings county, for divers
scandalous and abusive words spoken by the said John against their
majesties justices of the peace for the county aforesaid, to the
contempt of their majesties authority and breach of the peace; the
said John having now humbly submitted himself, and craves pardon
and mercy of the said justices for his misdemeanour, is discharged,
paying the officer’s fees, and being on his good behaviour till
next court of sessions, in November next ensuing the date hereof.”
In another instance, during the same year, in the month of October, in
the town of Bushwyck, a man named Urian Hagell, was imprisoned for
having said, on a training day, speaking jestingly of the soldiers, “Let
us knock them down, we are three to their one.” The justices called
these “mutinous, factious, and seditious words;” which, with the like,
appear to have been favourite terms with them. Again, in the same month
and year, Hendrick Claes Vechte, of the town of Brooklyn, was imprisoned
by the justices, on a charge of “raising of dissension, strife, and
mutiny, among their majesties subjects.” And May 8, 1694, two women of
Bushwick were indicted at the sessions, for having beat and pulled the
hair of Captain Peter Praa, whilst at the head of his company of
soldiers on parade. One of them was fined £3, and the cost, £1 19_s._
9_d._; and the other 40_s._ and the cost, £1 19_s._ 9_d._ In the last
mentioned year, (1694) Volkert Brier, constable of Brooklyn, was fined
£5, and the costs of court amounting to £1, by the sessions, “for
tearing and burning an execution directed to him as constable.”[18]
Brier afterwards petitioned the governor to have the fine remitted; a
copy of which petition is in the appendix, marked C.
This town with respect to legal matters was under the jurisdiction of
the court of sessions held at Gravesend, for the West Riding of
Yorkshire, upon Long-Island,[19] until the year 1683; when an act was
passed by the first legislative assembly of this colony, dividing the
province into counties, by which the ridings were abolished. The court
however continued to be held at Gravesend until 1686, when it was
removed to Flatbush, in conformity to an act of the colonial assembly,
passed in the year 1685. This town continued under the jurisdiction of
that court, and the court of common pleas, which was afterwards
established, until the close of the revolutionary war. At the close of
the war the courts were re-organized, and this town still continues
under their jurisdiction.