(4)  A legal summary prepared at my request by Evelyn
Hansen-Davis, an attorney, in 2006, of the legal aspects outlined
in a three part article on the story of Anthony Van Salee and his
neighbors in Gravesend during the mid 1600's, written by Hazel
Van Dyke Roberts, PHD.  This article follows the summary.
Summary of legal events described in Hazel Van Salee
article about Anthony Van Salee:

Anthony Jansen Van Salee bought land from Indians in the Long Island area.  
Permission of the West India Company may have been required for this purchase
from Indians.  Anthony Jansen Van Salee acquired No. 26 in Gravesend, a farm
parcel, prior this acquisition

Anthony Jansen of Vaes and William Bredenbent, with their neighbors at Gravesend
were summoned to produce proof each was the owner of the land he claimed.  The
matter was postponed.  The dispute was over a meadow where Jansen grazed
cattle.  The town of Gravesend claimed ownership of the meadow.

Governor Stuyvesant wrote to Lady Moody that he had appointed commissioners to
settle the boundary dispute between the town of Gravesend, Anthony Jansen, Coney
Island, and the land formerly in the possession of Robert Pennoyer.  Nothing was
resolved.  Presumably the commissioners either took no action or could not agree.

Anthony Jansen from Sallee served the magistrates of Gravesend with a complaint
requesting a restraining order to stop the town fencing off his land from him.

In the case of Anthony Jansen, Robert “Pinoyer” and other parties vs. the town of
Gravesend for trespass judgement was granted in favor of   Anthony Jansen, Robert
“Pinoyer” and other parties.  But the case did not end.

Anthony Jansen filed a complaint alleging that the town of Gravesend had driven  
cattle off his land.

Notice was given that commissioners would determine the bounds between Anthony
Jansen Van Salle and the town of Gravesend.  The commissioner reported that
Anthony Jansen Van Salle claimed more land than he could document.  The next day
Jansen was ordered to have his land surveyed within 8 days, with markers being
placed.  Then he and the town would know where the boundaries lie.  It appears the
survey was completed.  This did not end the dispute

Jansen sent a message to the Governor and Council that an armed party had
impounded 24 of his cattle grazing within his boundary at a point east of his house.  
That same day the magistrates of Gravesend were ordered, presumably by the
Governor, the Council, or both, to return the cattle and file suit against Jansen for
trespass if that was their contention.  The town presumably returned the cattle and  
did file suit.

The case of the town of Gravesend vs. Jansen was decided on favor of Jansen.  The
town accepted this.  Jacques Corteljow was to have surveyed the lands of Jensen,
Pennoyer, and Bredenbent that adjoined Gravesend.  This seems to have finally
settled the case.

During the next year the Dutch and the English in the area were not getting on well,
and the Dutch, fearing the town of Gravesend would not protect them if necessary,
established a new town of New Urecht and a deed to the land for the town was  

08/27/1657.  This new town also adjoined Jansen’s land, and the problems

Jacob van Corlear, one of the leaders of New Urecht, filed a petition in court stating
that Jansen did not hold proper title to the land purchased from the Indians because
he did not have the permission required to make the purchase, that the meadow in
question belonged to the town, and that Jansen could not graze his livestock in this
meadow.  The decision directed the Fiscal (Attorney General) to tell Jansen to keep
his livestock out of the meadow, and if Jansen still claimed a right to the meadow he
should make that known to the Director General and the Council.  The Fiscal was  
also directed to impound all cattle and hogs found in the meadow. Jansen had little
chance of winning.  The Fiscal of New Netherland, Nicasius de Sille, was very
influential and a founder of New Urecht.

Jansen presented his petition for favorable treatment to the Governor and his Council,
of which de Sille was a member.  In the petition Jansen stated that he bought the
meadow from Indians 06/26/1651, and that the meadow was later granted to the new
village on New Urecht.  Jansen asked that the part of the meadow near his house be
given to him.  The decision, made on the same day, was that the petition be decided
by the people of New Urecht, and if it be determined that giving the whole meadow to
New Urecht meant Jansen had no meadow for making hay, then some of the meadow
should be given to Jansen as to others.  That appears to have ended the matter.  
Later, when the town lands were distributed Jansen, with the original heirs of the
grantee of New Urecht, each received two shares.  Other proprietors received one
share each.
Anthony Janse van Salee, and van Vaes of New
Amsterdam and Long Island

ANTHONY JANSE VAN SALEE is a unique and most interesting, and a not
unimportant, figure in the early history of New Amsterdam. The form of his name
indicates that his father, probably a Hollander, was named Jan, and the local
designations "Van Salee" and "Van Vaes" indicate that he had lived at these towns in
Morocco sufficiently long for them to be regarded as his home. These clues have led
to much speculation as to his history, and to a considerable amount of careful
investigation in the Dutch and French records relating to North Africa.

The late Hon. Teunis G. Bergen, founder and first president of the Long Island
Historical Society, compiler of a Register of the Early Settlers of Kings County
(Brooklyn, New York, 1883), and a member of Congress, declared in a letter dated at
New Utrecht, February 11, 1851, and published in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle his belief
that evidence as to the place of birth and the parentage of Anthony Janse van Salee
might be found in a Dutch book published in 1715 dealing with the maritime career of
Claes G. Compaan and his companion and later rival, Jan Jansen van Haarlem, both
sea rovers. He said that Anthony was undoubtedly of mixed descent, and that when
young, he had been subject to the Mohammedan faith sufficiently to give rise to the
several instances of his being referred to (erroneously) in records as a "Turk," and to
the designation of his farm on Long Island as the "Turk's Plantation." There was also
very early a family of the name "Turk" (Turck) in New Amsterdam, with which our
Anthony is not connected.

A copy of the book having to do with Claes G. Compaan, referred to by Dr. Bergen, is
to be found in the New York Public Library. Its title is Historisch Verhael Aller
Ghederck Waerdigher Gheschiedenissen die hier en daer in Europa, als Duytslant,
Vranckenrijck, Enghelant, Spaenjen, Hungarijen, Polen, Sevenberghen, Sweeden,
Walachien, Moldavien, Turckijen, Switzerlant, Barbarijen, en Nederlant, Voorgevallen
syn, by Nicholaes van Wassenaer. It is in twenty-three volumes.

This remarkable work gives in sufficient detail the career of Jan Janse of Haarlem,
who turned buccaneer and became Admiral of the fleet of Muley Zidan, Sultan of
Morocco, and who married, secondly, a lady of the Mohammedan faith, to make it
evident that Anthony Jansen van Salee might have been his son, born at Salee in
Morocco, where Jan Jansen made his headquarters.

The records of New Amsterdam and of Long Island reveal personal characteristics of
Anthony Jansen van Salee in harmony with such a theory as to his origin. Further
evidence bearing on Jan Jansen's remarkable career, and upon Anthony van Salee's
possible origin may be found in the publication issued by the Dutch Government in
1910 under the title Bronnen tot de Geschiedenis van den Levantschen Handel. The
work is edited by Dr. K. Heeringa; the title means "Sources for the history of the
Levantine trade." References that show that Jan Jansen was at Salee at various times
between 1600 and 1630, and five references to an Anthony Janse at Salee in
1623-1624, will be found in Comte Henry de Castries' Les sources inedites de l'histoire
du Maroc.

We now give our attention to the records concerning the life of Anthony Jansen van
Salee in the New Netherland, and to the records of his descendants.

There is good evidence that Anthony Janse van Salee brought to New Amsterdam  
with him a copy of the Koran. The late Robert Bayles, president of the Market and
Fulton National Bank of New York City, a descendant through the Van Sicklen and
Gulick families, compiled an account of some of his ancestors, now in the New York
Public Library, in which he wrote:

Fernandus van Sicklen, the father-in-law of Johannes Gulick, was the son of
Fernandus van Sicklen, the emigrant, whose wife Eva was the daughter of Anthony
Jansen van Salee, who, before coming to this country, lived for a time at Salee or  
Fez, a seaport town under the Turkish rule on the coast of Africa, at that time said to
be a resort for pirate vessels. Anthony Jansen van Salee was known at Gravesend as
"The Turk" and the farm on which he lived was referred to in the records of  
Gravesend as "Turk's Plantation."

A few years since (about 1886) at a sale of the household goods of Joachim Rule,
adescendant of Joachim Gulick, a lot of old books was sold for a trifling sum, one of
which attracted the buyer's attention by the strange characters it contained. On
submitting it for examination to an expert it was declared to be the Koran in the Arabic
language and of quite an old date. At the same time a small brass pan of peculiar and
unusual pattern was also sold, which is now in the possession of the writer. A member
of the family, Catherine Gulick, then over eighty years of age, stated at the time that
the pan and book, with a copper teakettle, had kept company for many years as  
family relics and were supposed to have been brought to the New Netherlands by an
early emigrant, one of her ancestors. A tradition (for a long time unexplained) to the
effect that one of the ancestors of the Johannes Gulick family was a Turk seems now
to be accounted for by the fact that that ancestor was Anthony Jansen van Salee, a
Dutchman of Long Island, known there as the "Turk." It is said that the purchaser of
the Koran [Richard M. Johnson of Kingston, New Jersey] sold it to a book collector in
Philadelphia for nearly $100. [Extract from Mr. Bayles' MS in the MS Department of
the New York Public Library.]

Richard M. Johnson, a descendant in the eighth generation, on being asked if he
remembered having purchased the book, replied:

Feb. 21-1925. MR. HOPPIN. Dear Sir: Yours of nineteenth at hand. Would reply that I
remember very well the Sale, and I bought many articles for curiosity and speculation.
Among the books bought was a large book in a foreign language. I tried many to read
it, but none could. I was told that there was a Jew in Trenton that kept a kind of curio
shop. They called him "Jerusalem." I took it to him and he told me it was a Bible called
the Koran--the Mohammedan Bible--and it was valuable. As it was no use to me I
asked what he would give me for it. He said he could sell it and get me fifty dollars for
it. I said, "give me the money." He said he would give me $25. and when he sold it
$25. more. I never got the other $25. as he died shortly after. In a few days after I
sold it a gentleman came to me and wanted the book, as his ancestors were
connected. I told him I had disposed of it and to whom. Some years later Mr. Robert
Bayles came to me, as he was tracing his genealogy, for the Koran as he traced the
book to me, Mr. Bayles had a letter stating that Alexander Gulick often saw the book,
and it had very many records in it. He stated the book was his aunt Katy Gulick's . . .


The Register of the Provincial Secretary of the New Netherland, now preserved in the
State Library at Albany, begins on April 19, 1638. The first record relating to Anthony
Janse van Salee is dated only nine days later--April 28, 1638. It is the declaration of
Ryer Stoffelsen and Jan Gerritsen respecting the manner of the death of Anthony
Jansen van Salee's dog. [Dutch Manuscripts, Register of the Provincial Secretary,
Albany, I, 5.]

Under date of April 29, 1638, we have the declaration by Remmer Jewerden that
Hendrick Jansen, tailor, called Anthony Jansen from Salee, a Turk, rascal, and horned
beast. [Ibid., I, 6.] But it is evident from subsequent records that by 1638, he had been
in New Amsterdam between one and four years. He had secured a bouwery (farm)
"near Fort Amsterdam bounded westerly by Hendrick Jansen, tailor, and eastward by
Philip de Truy." He had married at least a year before 1638, Grietje Reiniers, of New
Amsterdam. She had been employed by Peter de Winters to assist in managing a
tavern in Amsterdam (not in New Amsterdam as the Calendar of Dutch Manuscripts [I,
80] has it). On what ship she came to New Amsterdam is not known, but under date of
April 28, 1639, in the Calendar of Dutch Manuscripts (I, 52), there is reference to her
complaint against two sailors of the ship because of some offense against her, and to
their being condemned to leave the country within two months.

Anthony Janse van Salee's farm was on the north side of the stockade built across the
island on the line of the present Wall Street. It was called "Wallenstein," apparently in
honor of the great general of that name, but the farm seems to have been laid out and
to have been given its name by the Dutch West India Company before Van Salee
acquired it. It occupied the area from Broadway to the East River between Ann Street
and Maiden Lane. A map of 1644 showing "Wallenstein" and other "bouweries" in the
neighborhood appears on page 1 of New Amsterdam and Its People, by Innes (1902).
In this same book, pages 310-313, is found a description of "Wallenstein" in 1640. Mr.
Innes says of this farm, page 310 ff. of his book, New Amsterdam and Its People:

This bouwery is spoken of as belonging to Cornelis van Tienhoven as early as the  
year 1640, though he did not receive his formal ground-brief or patent for it until 1644.
He was not, however, the first owner or tenant of the farm, which was in all probability
laid out at a very early date, and its buildings, perhaps, erected by the West India

May 7, 1639, Anthony Janse van Salee sold "Wallenstein" to Barent Dircksen, baker.
A translation of the record of the conveyance is found in Documents Relating to the
Colonial History of the State of New York, XIV, 20:

Deed for a bowery near Fort Amsterdam. This day, the 7th May Ao 1639, before me,
Cornelis van Tienhoven, secretary of New Netherland, came and appeared in their
proper persons, Anthony Jansen from Vees, of the one part, and Barent Dircksen
baker, of the other part, and acknowledged in the presence of the undersigned
witnesses, to have agreed and contracted in amity and friendship about the purchase
of the Bowery hitherto occupied by Anthony Jansen, situate near Fort Amsterdam,
bounded westerly by Hendric Jansen, tailor, and eastward by Philip de Truy, on the
conditions and terms here under written.

First said Anthony Jansen shall deliver, as he now is doing to Barent Dircksen
aforesaid, who also acknowledges to have bought and this day received from said
Anthony the land as it is sowed and fenced, the house and barn, together with all that
is fastened by earth and nail, except the cherry, peach and all other trees standing on
said land, which said Anthony reserves for himself and will remove at a more
seasonable time, on settlement of two years, on ditto of one year, 1 wagon, plough,
and one harrow with wooden teeth.

For all which Barent Dircksen shall pay to said Anthony Jansen the sum of fifteen
hundred and seventy guilders to be paid in two consecutive years; immediately after
the list of what is aforesaid, he Barent Dircksen shall pay to said Anthony Jansen, or
his order, one just fourth part of the above mentioned money, and six months after the
date hereof the second fourth part, and so on, one fourth part every half year until the
last payment inclusive.

For all which parties pledge their persons and properties, movable and immovable,
present and future without any exception under bond as prescribed by law, without
reservation or deceipt. Hereof are two copies made of the same term and signed by

This is the mark of ANTHONY JANSEN above named. This is the P mark of BARENT
DIRCKSEN. This is the R mark of HENRY C. HARMSEN.

Barent Dirckson leased the property to Cornelius Jacobsen van Tienhoven, the
secretary of the province, immediately, though van Tienhoven did not obtain the patent
for the property till 1644. Governor Kieft at his request granted Van Salee one hundred
morgens of land, the first grant within the limits of what became the towns of
Gravesend and New Utrecht.

[Book G.G. Land Papers. Albany, p. 61. Translated abstract]: PATENT FOR LAND
ON LONG ISLAND. We, Willem Kieft, Director General and Council of New  
Netherland etc., herewith testify and declare, that on the first of August 1639 we have
given and granted to Anthony Jansen of Salee 100 morgens of land lying on the bay   
of the North river upon Long Island opposite Coney Island, stretching along the shore
two hundred and fifty-three rods, N.N.W., from the shore about N.E. by E. two
hundred and thirty-six rods, again along a bluff one hundred and twenty-four rods
about S.E., S.W. by W., 24 rods, S. 54 rods, further to the strand S.W. by W. 174
rods, with some points of land lying on the south side, containing 87 morgens, 49-1/2
rods; also  a point of land stretching southward from the house, surrounded on three
sides by meadows, reaching S.W. by W. 72 rods, S.E. by S. ninety rods being an
oblong with some protruding points containing 12 morgens five hundred and fifty and
one-half rods, under the express condition and stipulation etc., at a perpetual yearly
rent of one hundred carolus guilders.

Done at Fort Amsterdam in N.N. this 27th of May 1643.
[Translation in Documents Relating to the Colonial History of the State of New York,
XIV, 45.]

He rented goats from Andries Hudde for his new plantation as the following record
shows: In February 13, 1640, Claes Jansen Ruyter manifested his confidence in
Anthony Jansen van Salee by becoming surety on Anthony's bond to Andries Hudde  
for his return of a number of milch goats which were loaned or rented to Anthony for
his temporary use at his new plantation below the Narrows. [Register of the Provincial
Secretary, I, 186.]

Though he probably continued to live at Gravesend till 1646, when he leased his
property there, May 24, 1643, he bought from Abraham Jacobsen van Steenwyck a  
lot in New Amsterdam. This lot and house are marked on "The Plan of Brouwer Straet
and Hoogh Straet in New Amsterdam, from Fort Amsterdam to the Stadt Huys, A.D.,
1655," page 80 of New Amsterdam and Its People. It is the third lot, facing the East
River, southward from the present Broad Street, on the westerly side of the present
Bridge Street, about one hundred feet from Broad Street. A picture of the house in
which Anthony must have lived, is given on page 104 of this book, reproduced from  
the drawing made by or for Justus Danckers and Visscher. The following record  
shows that he was living at Gravesend in 1643:

Cornelis van Tienhoven, secretary of New Netherland, appeared the underwritten
witnesses, who, at the request of Anthony Jansen from Salee, attest, testify and
declare in place and with promise of a solemn oath, that it is true and truthful that
about noon yesterday the crew of the Seven Stars and the privateers went together  
on the land of Anthony Jansen from Salee situate in the Bay, who, as an Englishman,
sailing in one of the said ships, took from there fully 200 pumpkins. The witnesses
asked, What were they doing there? They answered, We are in search of the hogs   
on Coney Island; if we find the hogs, we shall take them all away with us. Thereupon
the deponents replied, Those who are running there are Lady Moody's hogs. We shall
not then go there, said the Seven Stars' crew. Done the 13th October 1643.

This is the R mark of RITSCHERT AESTEN. This is the A mark of AMBROSIUS
LONEN. This is the + mark of RITSCHERT STOUT. [Translation from Register of the
Provincial Secretary, II, 79.]

Then three other men (not of record as related to Anthony Jansen) visited one of the
privateer vessels in the bay and reported:

We the undersigned attest that there is not on board the frigate La Garce more than  
1/2 barrel of cabbage, being about 20-30 heads therein; among these are small
cabbages not bigger than a fist, and about 70 pumpkins and a few turnips, 16 fowls  
for the Seven Stars and her crew, without having injured or taken any other animals.

This is the mark P of PHILIP JANSEN. This X is the mark of ABRAHAM JANSEN
By me SYMEON HOBBINS. ARY LEENDERSEN, pilot of La Garce. [Ibid., II, 79.]
[Philip Jansen and Abraham Jansen were part-owners of La Garce.]

In 1643 a colony of Englishmen under the leadership of Lady Deborah Moody secured
permission from the Dutch authorities to settle at Gravesend. She was a daughter of
Walter Dunch, and widow of Sir Henry Moody, Baronet, of Garesden, Wiltshire,
England. In 1640, with her son Sir Henry, she settled at Lynn, in Massachusetts. In
1643 she was expelled from that colony because of her disbelief in the efficacy or
necessity of baptism of infants. The formal patent is dated December 19, 1645. The
record of the lease of his farm at Gravesend to Edmund Adley follows:

[Register of the Provincial Secretary, II, 148. Translation in Documents Relating to the
Colonial History of N.Y. XIV, 73-74]: LEASE OF A BOWERY NEAR THE NARROWS
ON L. I.

Before me, Cornelis van Tienhoven, Secretary of New Netherland, appeared Anthony
Jansen from Salee, who in the presence of witnesses here underwritten declared and
acknowledged that he leased his bouwery situate below the narrows (door de
hoofden) on Long Island, to Edmund Adley, who also acknowledged to have hired it  
for the term of four consecutive years, commencing on the 2d of September 1650.
Anthony Jansen shall also be bound to have built a house fit to live in, and the Lessee
[evidently a mistake for "Lessor"] shall cause the arable land to be enclosed once for
all with posts and rails, which fence Edmund remains bound to deliver back, on the
expiration of the four years as good (at least tight) as it now will be delivered, and the
Lessee promises to keep the house and fence in repair at his own expense during the
lease. The Lessee shall annually pay as rent of the aforesaid Bowery, cattle and
implements which Anthony now delivers, the sum of two hundred guilders the first  
year, and two hundred and fifty guilders every year the three succeeding years, with
five pounds of butter annually. The other property which Anthony Jansen now delivers,
as per the subjoined inventory Adley is bound to restore at the end of lease, when the
number of the cattle that the Lessee [evidently a mistake for "Lessor"] now delivers
shall first of all be deducted, and then the increase shall be divided half and half
between the Lessor and the Lessee. It is also expressly stipulated that the risk of the
cattle shared be shared in common both by the Lessor and Lessee during the lease,
and if any of the cattle happen to die, the loss must first of all be made good from the
increase. [Remainder of MS destroyed.]

Inventory of the property, implements and cattle delivered by Anthony Jansen, lessor,
to Edmund Adley, lessee, who acknowledges to have received the same, and
promises to deliver them on the expiration of the lease, as appears by the preceding
contract, to wit: 1 stallion 12 years old; 1 stallion of 3 years. 1 mare of 4 years.
Edmund shall allow one stallion colt and two bull calves, at the end of the four years,
though the colt may be grown, and the bull calves, oxen; because Anthony receives   
so little butter; of which colt and calves the Lessee runs no risk, unless the animals be
lost through the Lessee's negligence. [Here follows a list of cattle and farming
implements.] In testimony this is signed by parties the 6th of September 1646. New

This is the X mark of EDMAN ADLEY, made by himself. This is the X mark of
HOYKENS, witness. ADRIAEN VAN TIENHOVEN, witness. To my knowledge.

That Anthony Janse van Salee was dissatisfied with the conduct of Edmund Adley,
appears from the following record: Anthony Jansen vs Edmund Adley, for damages;
ordered that the plaintiff prove damages to his cattle and bouwery, and that the case
be referred to Jan Evertsen Bout and Huyck Aertsen, magistrates of Breuckelyn, to
examine Jansen's stock and bouwery and determine whether Adley acts as an honest
tenant. If he do not, then he shall quit the premises or give security. [Council Minutes.
Court Proceedings, IV, 274.]

Adley's four-year lease expired September 2, 1651. In 1654 arose a controversy
between Anthony Janse van Salee and the town of Gravesend respecting the
boundaries of his land. The town arrested him on an allegation of trespass in  
February, 1654. Whereupon on February 25, 1654, the Director-General (Peter
Stuyvesant) and Council ordered "the magistrates of Gravesend to release Anthony
Jansen from Salee, and to appear and proceed before the Director and Council
according to law." [Council Minutes, V, 216.] The patent restricted the authority of the
magistrates of Gravesend to cases involving not more than fifty Holland guilders;
consequently they had acted ultra vires in bringing their action against Anthony Janse
van Salee, and the Governor and Council reminded them of the proper course of
action. In his turn Van Salee brought an action March 3, 1654, against the town of
Gravesend for trespass; the Council ordered him "to serve a copy of his complaint on
the defendants who are cited to appear. [Council Minutes, V, 230.] September 3,
1654, the Governor sent the following interesting letter to Lady Moody:

[Letter from Director Stuyvesant to Lady Moody at Gravesend in regard to the
appointment of commissioners to settle certain boundary disputes.]

My Lady. Agreeably to your Ladyship's request and our promise we have
commissioned Mr. Nicasius de Sille, Jan de la Montagne, members of our High
Council, and  Paulus Leendertsen van der Grift and Oloff Stevensen Cortlandt,
Schepens [magistrates] of this City, to settle the boundaries between the lands of  the
village    of Gravesend, of Anthony Jansen on Coney Island and the land formerly
owned by Robert Penoyer, according to the letters-patent and deeds. Our aforesaid
commissioners will, if it so pleases God, report tomorrow morning and these lines are
to request and admonish your Ladyship to send some persons there, who may take
care of your Ladyship's rights. Recommending your Ladyship with cordial greetings to
God's protection, we remain, my Lady, Your Ladyship's affectionate friend                 
P. STUYVESANT New Amsterdam Septbr 3, 1654.

The case dragged on till 1656. The two records following show the outcome:
20 of June 1656. Resolved and decided in Council that their Honors, the
Director-General and Council of New Netherland proceed tomorrow to the village of
Gravesend on Long Island, to settle the question so long pending about the  
boundaries between said village and Anthony Jansen, Robert Pennoyer and others; if
possible in the presence of some prominent and impartial Englishmen. [Council
Minutes, VIII, 31. Translation in Documents Relating to the Colonial History of the
State of N.Y. 14.]

The Director-General and Council of New Netherland, after having on Wednesday  
last, the 21st of this month, personally inspected the enclosures or posts and rails    
put up lately by the inhabitants of Gravesend and also compared them on the spot  
with the tenor of title deeds, find, that the posts and rails are not put up or placed in
accordance with their patent, which begins at the kil or creek next to Coney Island    
and not at the middle of the bay as their fences stand, and stretches thence not along
the shore of the bay, but to the point, where the land of Anthony Jansen and Robert
Penoyer join each other, thence to the western side of a pond in an old Indian's land,
which meets and bounds have evidently not been adhered to by the people of
Gravesend; therefore the Director-General and Council direct the Magistrates of the
said village, upon receipt hereof, to take up the posts and rails set and put to the land
lately fenced in by them on their own responsibility to the prejudice of the partnership
of Anthony Jansen and William Bredenbent into its former condition; after this has  
been done, the Director-General and Council or their impartial committee shall assign
to them, according to their patent, the limits of the village, to be enclosed in   
obedience to the patent.

In case of refusal and further contumacy the Fiscal [Attorney General] is directed to  
do it or have it done nomine officii and to proceed according to law in regard to the
damages already suffered or yet to be suffered by their contumacy. Thus done in
Council of Director-General and Council of New Netherland held at Fort Amsterdam
the 24th of June Aø 1656.

The people of Gravesend showed their contempt for the Dutch authorities by forcibly
ejecting Van Salee from the land in question. He appealed to the governor and   
council, July 11, 1656. Within a few days two arbitrators, one of whom was Van
Tienhoven, went to Gravesend to set up the markers on the line fixed by the governor
and council on their visit to Gravesend. They failed to do so, and on July 19, 1656,
made a report rather adverse to Van Salee's claims, recommending a survey.
Encouraged by this recommendation, the men of Gravesend drove off twenty-four of
Van Salee's cattle from the disputed land. The governor and council ordered the
magistrates to restore the cattle and to bring suit against Van Salee for trespass if
they thought they had cause for action. [Council Minutes, VIII, 117-118.] The trial was
held in the Fort at  New Amsterdam on August 21, 1656. The result appears from the
following record:

Monday 21st of August 1656. Extraordinary Session at Fort Amsterdam in N.N.
Having heard the debates pro and contra and examined the evidence the
Director-General and Council find, that the complaints of the Magistrates of  
Gravesend are unfounded, because the ocular inspection, made by the
Director-General and Council on the 25th of June, has proved, that the people of
Gravesend without justification of law have fenced in a part of Anthony Jansen's land
and the meadow of William Bredenbent and placed their posts and rails not in
conformity with the consent of the Director-General and Council upon the land   
granted them by their patent, but, as it has been stated, partly upon the land of
Anthony Jansen and through the meadow of William Bredenbent.

The Director-General and Council therefore, by their resolution, ordered, that the
inhabitants of the said village remove the posts and rails put up by them from the land
in question and return and leave the land not belonging to them in statu quo prius, as
directed by the resolution of the 24th of June to which reference is here made.

Although at the request of the said Magistrates this order has been in so far modified
by the Director-General and Council that for the prevention of damage to the grass
and other crops the posts and rails should remain until further order and the gathering
of the harvest; yet, as the inhabitants of the said village without the knowledge and
against the order and intention of the Director-General and Council have let their  
calves and other cattle graze on the meadow in question, which is proved by credible
witnesses and not denied by the Magistrates, thereby causing and inducing Anthony
Jansen, as he declares, to let his cattle also run along the strand upon the same
meadow, so that the subsequent disorders were not occasioned by him, but by the
people of the said village, who by their own authority and in contempt of the supreme
government have acted as parties and judges in the matter, as well as carrying off
Anthony Jansen's cattle, as in making hay from and on land not belonging to them--  
the Director-General and Council to maintain their own authority and the   
administration of law and justice find themselves compelled to detain the said
Magistrates, until they shall give due satisfaction to the Director-General and Council
for the contempt shown their authority, returned the land unlawfully fenced in in statu
quo prius, and paid the costs and mises of law.

Meanwhile Anthony Jansen and Jaques Corteljouw are requested and charged to
gather the mown hay at the expense of the Director-General and Council for the   
future disposal thereof.

143, 156.]
The incident is closed by the two following orders for surveys, leaving Anthony Janse
van Salee victor in the long contest:

23d of August 1656 at Fort Amsterdam. Present in Council GENERAL PETRUS

Jacques Corteljouw is hereby requested and authorized to survey once more with a
compass, according to the tenor of their patents the lands of Anthony Jansen and
Robert Pennoyer to the extent of as many morgens as covered by the patents and to
place marks at every corner. After he has done this he is to draw a line from the  
mouth of the kil, to the easternmost point of Anthony Jansen's land, where it touches
the westernmost point of Robert Pennoyer's; this line is according to the patent the
boundary line of Gravesend; he is to do all to the best of his knowledge, without favor,
dissimulation or regard of persons, also to gather the hay and leave it in hocks on the
place until our arrival. You will be paid for your work. [Council Minutes, VIII, 150.]

On Saturday last [August 26, 1656] the Magistrates and inhabitants of the village of
Gravesend were shown their boundaries persuant to their patent and other title deeds,
beginning at the mouth of the kil the west side of which is nearest to Coney Island,
where their boundaries begin, stretching thence pursuant to their patent along Robert
Pennoyer's and Anthony Jansen's lands, thence north to a point in an old Indian field
[etc.]. This done in Council at Fort Amsterdam in N.N.

Stuyvesant died four years before the death of Van Salee and eight years after the
seizure of New Netherland by the English in 1664. His tomb in the churchyard of St.
Mark's P.E. Church, Tenth Street and Second Avenue, in New York City, may be
visited by all who honor him for his sturdy honesty, his justice, and his courage.

Continued PART II and PART III

Anthony Janse van Salee, and van Vaes of New
Amsterdam and Long Island
Annica, or in Dutch Annetje, one of the daughters of Anthony Janse van Salee,  
married Thomas Southard, who is sometimes called "Schondtwart" and "Suddert" in
New Amsterdam records. He brought suit against his father-in-law before the
magistrates of Gravesend, demanding the fulfilment of what he claimed was a
marriage settlement. Anthony appealed to the Dutch authorities on the ground that   
the Gravesend magistrates had no jurisdiction in cases involving more than fifty Dutch
guilders. The case was apparently dropped by Southard when he found that the action
of the magistrates in imprisoning his father-in-law was illegal. Probably their action  
had been more drastic than anything he had expected or desired, and doubtless he  
felt more than a little ashamed of himself.

On land between the Narrows and the bouwery of Anthony Jansen van Salee, several
Dutch families settled what became the village of New Utrecht soon after 165.   On
August 27, 1657, Director-General Stuyvesant and the council granted to them  130
morgens (250 acres) of valley (meadow) opposite Coney Island, bounding with the
west end on the land of Anthony Jansen from Salee, northeast on the kil where the
Gravesend mill stands, east southeast and south abutting on said kil, southeast on   
the bay of the North river [Gravesend bay]. [Patents and Land Papers, H.H., Part II,

The line between New Utrecht and that part of Gravesend that belonged to Anthony
Jansen strikes the bay at the old church in the extreme northwest part of the present
Unionville. Anthony had land on both sides of this line, and his house stood near to the
line and close to the sea. New Utrecht included, eventually, the land of Fort Hamilton
and the entire region of the Narrows; in recent years all of the enlarged New Utrecht
Township became a part of the city of Brooklyn, and is now covered with dwellings.
The following record shows that Anthony Janse van Salee had purchased some of this
meadow from the Indians, but had neglected to perfect his title by securing a grant
from the Dutch Government:

[Council Minutes of New Netherland, VIII, 941. Translation]: August 13th, 1658.
Tuesday. Received a petition of Anthony Jansen from Salee, showing that the
meadow, now granted to the new village of Utrecht, had been bought by him from the
Indians and paid for on the 26th of September 1651. He requests that a part of it near
his house may be given to him.

After a vote had been taken, it was answered: This is to be placed into the hands of
the people of Utrecht and if it is found that, if petitioner has no meadow for making
hay, a part of the aforesaid land shall be given to him.

On their part, the people of New Utrecht filed the following petition:
[Het Bouk Van Het Durp Utrecht Aø 1657, Lib., A-3A. Kings County Court House;
translation from the Dutch original record]: 1659. PETITION TO THE NOBLE, RIGHT
4. That Antony Jansen Van Sal be ordered to drive his horses, hogs and cattle into the
woods like the others, inasmuch as the meadow is ruined by them and the pasturage
consumed, which tends to the injury of the entire town. We beg, therefore, we be
authorized to put in pound the animals found in the meadow.

5. That Antony Jansen, who claims the meadow is his since he bought it from the
Indians, which could not be except with Your Noble Right Honorables' consent, which
has not been granted, may be ordered to allow us peacable use and possession of
said meadow granted by Your Noble Right Honorables. And the inhabitants of the
Town promise to him, Antony, to let him share like one of them, provided he draw lots
and accept his share, wherever it may be, and bear the expense thereof with the rest.

To these remonstrances the Noble Right Hon. Lords Director General Petrus
Stuyvesant and the Councillors Necasius de Sille, first councillor, and Petrus  
Tonneman and Johan de Deckkre upon the 12th of May 1659 made the following  
reply . . .

As to the fourth and fifth points, the Fiscal [Procureur General] was ordered to
summon Anthony Van Zalee and inform him that he must keep his cattle and hogs out
of the common meadow, or, if he intends to claim any further title in the meadow, he
must make it known to the Director General and Council. And they add that, if in the
future any cattle or hogs are found in the meadow, they shall be impounded as is

Anthony accepted the settlement proposed by the Council, and received lots 23 and  
24 in the division of the meadow made by the town of New Utrecht. The site of
Anthony's house on his Long Island bouwery which extended along the shore from
Coney Island northwestward through the present Unionville and Ulmer Park to
Guntherville, and across the present boundary line between Gravesend and New
Utrecht, is referred to thus by Tunis G. Bergen in his Register of the Early Settlers of
Kings County, page 155:

In 1879, in levelling the sand-dunes on the upland on the edge of the bay a little
southeast of the buildings of Mr. Gunther at Locust Grove, which dunes had been
blown up from the beach, and which had been gradually extending back with the
abrasion of the shore or coast, the remains of two separate pieces of stone wall  
about two feet high and one foot wide, made mainly of unbroken field-stone laid in clay
mortar, with a clay floor between them, were exhumed. These remains were covered
with from four to ten feet of sand, and are probably those of the barn or other farm
buildings of Anthony Jansen . . . Anthony's patent was known as "Turk's Plantation,"
from his being designed as "Turk" on some of the old records.

The bouwery of Anthony Jansen van Salee is said by historians to be the first landing
place on the continent of North America of Hendrick Hudson on September 3, 1609,
when he anchored the Half-Moon in what became Gravesend Bay. On September 3,
1664, Richard Nicoll from his English ships of war, also anchored in the same water,
sent his demand to Stuyvesant for the surrender of New Netherland. In August, 1776,
Sir William Howe's fleet anchored off the Gravesend-New Utrecht shore. Here he
landed his troops, and attacking Brooklyn from the eastern side, won the Battle of
Long Island.

Van Salee's name often appears in the records of the court of the burgomasters and
schepens of New Amsterdam (also called the Manhattoes-Manhattans). His house
stood on the New Utrecht side of the original line of that town, near where the line
reaches the sea. He is called in the records "of Gravesend," never of New Utrecht, the
former town first asserting its jurisdiction over his estate, particularly as to taxes. In
February, 1660, he sold his Gravesend plantation:

[Gravesend Town Records. Deeds, Leases 1653 to 1670, liber II, 127, abstract from
the English original]: ffeburay the 9th 1660: Anthonie Johnson and Nicholas Stillwell   
did come before mee John Tilton, Clerke of the Corporation of Gravesend, and he the
said Anthonie . . . sould all his Rite unto a Certain pcell of Land with ye houseing
Barricke Guarden Orchard; as allsoe all that Hooke of land from the usuall place of his
landing with his Bote to the Secant which was graunted unto him from the Govrnour
Genll of this Province . . . unto Nicholas Stillwell for Sixteen hundred guilders and one
plantation, number Twenty Nyne, with houseing Guarden . . . in Gravesend . . . this 1
of Aprll Ano 1660 in gravesend in the Pvince N. Neatherld.


Deceember 28th 1660. Anthonie Johnsonn rec'd of Nicholas Stillwell the summe of 8
eighte hundred gilders--I saye rec'd 800 G. teste mee JOHN TILTON.

Perhaps the following order issued because of fear of the Indians may have had   
some effect in inducing him to sell the farm to Stillwell, though plantation No. 29,   
taken in part payment, was equally subject to it:

February 1660, the Director General and Council . . . ordered the people living alone
outside . . . to give up their separated dwellings and to demolish or at least to unroof
their houses and to move with their goods to the nearest settlement . . . by the 18th  of
May upon the penalty of fifty guldens:

Thereupon summonses were served . . . among them, one upon Mr. Stilwell who
bought the land of Antoni Jansen Van Sale, the Turk, etc. [A Het Bouk Van Het DVRP
Vtrecht Aø 1657. Liber A-16.]

Stilwell, at least, perceived that the edict would not be permanent and might possibly
be circumvented.  "April 26, 1660. Received and read a petition from Nicolas  Stillwell,
a farmer living on his bouwery between Gravesend and the village of New Utrecht,  
who asks for permission to remain living by himself and to be excused from moving
his house, pursuant to the placat, stating, that with his four farmhands and three sons
he is able to defend his bouwery. It is answered: 'Petitioner shall appear before the
Director-General and Council with his sons and farmhands.' "

Discontented at seeing Stilwell continue in possession, while still owing him eight
hundred guilders for the property, Anthony sought to recover what he had sold:

February 9, 1662. Order on a petition of Anthony Jansen from Salee, praying that he
be released from a sale to Nicholas Stillwel of some of his land near Gravesend, on
the ground that it was sold too cheap. [Council Minutes of New Netherland, X, 48.]

Stilwell's defense, as laid before Stuyvesant, is recorded in the register of Solomon
Lachaire (City Clerk's Office of New York), pages 228-231. Stilwell's declaration
contains data of genealogical importance and must be quoted (translation):

No. 2. The declaration of Thomas Morrel. Deponent saith that he was at the house of
Mr. Nicolaes Stillwil with Anthony Jansen, and the said Anthony went with them out by
the old barn, and showed or explained to them all the hook of land from the usual
landing place down to the seashore to Coney island, saying that it belonged to him. In
the presence of the Magistrates of Gravesend, the 23d January 1661. [Signed] The
mark H of Thomas Morrel. Will Goulden, Clerk . . .

No. 4. This witnesseth for whom it may concern That I, Gerrit Seggers, being formerly
employed on the land of Anthony Jansen, to wit, that land or bouwery which the above
named Anthony lately sold to N: Stillwil, that he, the said Anthony Janse had leased to
me a certain portion of land to plant thereon, to cultivate and to make use of for a
certain time, in which was included the Hook of land lying near by the seashore, which
is at present in dispute between the above named Anthony and Nicolaes Stillwil which
aforesaid hook of land he, the aforesaid Anthony, had further leased to me, claiming it
at that time as his own land, which I also declare to be the truth, and in testimony of
the truth have signed on the 31st January 1662. [Signed] GERRIT SEGERS.

1662, 10 February. The Declaration of Nicolaes Stilwil concerning the difference or
point in dispute between him and Anthony Jansen of Gravesend exhibited before the
Director General and Council of New Netherland

HONORABLE: The above named Declarant says that said Anthony Jansen came to  
his house about one month before the last payment, being Eight hundred guilders, fell
due and asked what the Declarant will give for pay; if corn he would go to the
Manathans and agree with the Brewers: Whereupon Declarant answered, You can
well save the trouble of agreeing with any of the brewers, for, I said, your money is
ready--and thereupon showed him about six hundred guilders in Wampum, saying, the
balance being two hundred guilders, I shall immediately point out to you where to
receive it, on condition that you give and deliver to me what you have sold to me
according to the bill of sale thereof signed by you.

About three weeks afterwards the above named Anthony returned for the second time,
with two or three others, when the Declarant again said, the Money is now ready for
you, provided that you on your side, perform all that you are bound to do according to
the bill of sale. Whereupon the said Anthony showed his patent which was read aloud
before the friends present; after which the Declarant said to Anthony Jansen, Is there
any mention in the patent of the hook of land on the seashore, which is particularly
specified in the bill of sale. Whereupon the above named Anthony Jansen replied that
the above named hook was his own land, having obtained a patent thereof which is in
the hands of Jacus, [Jacques Cortelyou.] the surveyor. Whereupon his brother in law
[Meaning son-in-law] there present said, "Father, you have made over your right out of
your hand and now it appears that the differences stand upon trifles."

Finally, the Declarant offered that if he, the abovenamed Anthony, would choose two
impartial men on his side, he would in like manner, name two, and refer the matter to
them, to be decided wholly between them, which Anthony Jansen refused. Further the
Declarant, on the 27th December, 1661, accompanied by the Schout and clerk of
Gravesend went to the house of the abovenamed Anthony Jansen, saying to him that
his pay was then ready, and would be now ready if, and so soon as he performed the
condition according to the bill of sale; telling him again in the presence of the
aforesaid Schout and Clerk that he would unwillingly go to law, and would rather if     
he would leave their difference to the decision of four impartial men. The Declarant
offers to prove by sufficient witnesses the truth of all that is hereinabove mentioned,
if necessary.

Stuyvesant declined to render a verdict in behalf of either party, leaving them to settle
out of court; so the opinion of Anthony's son-in-law that the "differences stand upon
trifles" prevailed. Anthony and Stilwell composed their differences, but the particulars
are not of record. Stilwell, on February 28, 1664, sold the land adjoining Gravesend   
to Francois de Bruynn, who obtained a confirmatory patent for it from Nickolls, the  
first English Governor of New York, and named it "Bruynnsberg." A subsequent owner,
Jan Hansen of New Utrecht, on June 1, 1696, in transferring his half, one hundred
acres, of that estate to Barent Joosten, described it as one-half of the "Turk's
Plantation"--this nineteen years after the death of its first owner, Anthony Jansen van
Salee. As an indication of the ancient value of this half of the estate, 38,750 guilders
wampum value, about $15,340, was paid for it when Albert Coerten van Voorhies
bought it on December 11, 1693. The present value of the same land is reckoned in
millions of dollars. In 1756 this half of the original bouwery was held by the Voorhees

Two months after Anthony's failure to recover the property from Stilwell, he obtained  
a warranty deed from Stilwell for the plantation that he had accepted in part payment
for the land that adjoined the bay and Coney (Guisbert's) Island. This deed was
witnessed by one of Anthony's sons-in-law, our ancestor, Willem Jansen from Borculo
in Holland, whose children used Van Borculo (Barkelo) as their surname, though their
father did not always use it, being frequently recorded as Willem Janz, Janse, and
Jansen. In his signature to this deed he did not write Borculo after the "Van," though
the omission may well be the fault of the recorder:

Aprll 28th Anno dmo: 1662 st: no: Nicholas Stillwell and Anthony Johnsonn  comeing
before us. . . . The said Nicholas then . . . sould all his rite . . . unto a certain parcell   
of Land with the houseing Guarden Orchard . . . in Gravesend in the Province of niewe
Neatherlands . . . knowne by the name of Number twentie nyne . . . unto Anthony

presence of WILLEM JANZ VAN [and] JOHN TILTON. [Gravesend Town Records,
1653 to 1670, liber II, 149.]

Anthony Jansen van Salee also sought to acquire title to the western part of Coney
Island. This part was known as Guisbert's, and was once separated from the central
and eastern part of the present Coney Island by a small creek. A patent was granted
on May 24, 1644, to Guisbert Op Dyck for Conynen Eylandt, as the Dutch called it.
This was after Anthony Jansen had settled on the mainland near to that western part
of Coney Island. With three of his four sons-in-law (the other son-in-law, Thomas
Southart, having removed to Hempstead, Long Island), Anthony petitioned
Director-General Stuyvesant and the Council of New Netherland for the island,
Guisbert having vacated it, with the following result (translation):

"March 31, 1661. Received and read the petition of Anthony Jansen of Faes, Willem
Jansen of Berkeloo, Jan Emans [This Jan Emans came with his father, Andries
Emans, an Englishman, in the ship St. Jean Baptist in 1661 from Leiden in Holland to
Gravesend, Long Island, and had a son recorded as an adult in 1699 as "Jan Emans
Jr." The father married Sara, daughter of Anthony Jansen van Salee, prior to August,
1676, and had a daughter Cornelia and other children {T. G. Bergen, The Emmans
Family MS.}] of Cologne, and Ferdinandus Jansen of Sechelen [He was usually called
Van Sicklen, which appellation became the fixed surname of his children, none of   
them being recorded as Jansens.]  who ask for a certain small island south of
Gravesend called Gysbert's Island, and the meadows belonging to it." The answer
was: "The request is denied for good reasons." [Council Minutes, IX, 576.]

Ferdinandus Jansen van Sicklen probably was living at the time with his wife's father,
Anthony. Jan Emans was also at Gravesend, and William Jansen van "Berkeloo" lived
at Flatlands some two miles away from Anthony's house. An illuminating side light  
upon the mind and character of Anthony Jansen van Salee, at this time about sixty
years old, is afforded by the petition which ten men, of whom he and his son-in-law,
Jan Emans, were two, prepared and signed two months after Anthony had sold his
farm to Nicholas Stilwell and had taken up his residence on plantation No. 29.  
Although Gravesend was an English settlement, of the ten petitioners Nicholas Stilwell
was the only one known to be a native Englishman. The others were Dutch, save Jan
Emans whom the ancient record previously quoted calls of Cologne, but who is stated
in Bergen's Register of the Early Settlers of Kings County to have been a son of
Andries Emans from Leyden, Holland, and who is "entered as of English extraction on
the assessment rolls of Gravesend of 1693 and in the census of 1698." [Documents
Relating to the Colonial History of the State of New York, XIV, 460, translation from
the Dutch]:

To the Noble, very Worshipful, Honorable Director-General and Council in New
Some of the undersigned inhabitants of the village of Gravesend, your honors'
subjects, very respectfully show the licentious mode of living, the desecration of the
Sabbath, the confusion of religious opinion prevalent in this village, so that many have
grown cold in the exercise of Christian virtues and almost surpass the heathens, who
have no knowledge of God and his commandments: the words of the wise King
Solomon are applicable here, that where prophecy ceases, the people grow savage
and licentious and as the fear of the Lord alone holds our promises of temporal and
eternal blessings and as we, your petitioners, to our sorrow and constant regret see
no means by which to make a change for the better, we have concluded to address
ourselves to your Honors, as being the only hope for us and the wellbeing of this
community, and humbly and respectfully to ask and pray, that a preacher or pastor be
sent here that then the glory of God may be spread, the ignorant taught, the simple
and innocent strengthened and the licentious refrained. Then we shall be able to live   
in greater peace and in the fear of the Lord under your Honors' wise administration  
and government; whereupon relying we await your Honors' favorable reply and so
doing &c.

The marks XX--XX made by ANTHONY JANSEN and his brother-in-law(*) JAN
EMANS. April 12th 1660. [Signed by the marks of four others and by four more men
by written signatures.]

(*) Meaning, in this case, son-in-law, for this Jan Emans is proved the husband of
Sara, daughter of Anthony Jansen van Salee. The same mistake or inexact rendition
occurs again in O'Callaghan's modern translation of "The Declaration of Nicolaes
Stilwil" of February 10, 1662, originally written in English for Stilwell by some scribe,
and translated therefrom into Dutch in 1662 by Notary Lachaire (whose Register
reveals his charge for the translation) and from whose old Dutch copy the modern
translation into English, again, was made. In this latest translation of Stillwell's
declaration, the latter in referring to another of Anthony's sons-in-law (probably Willem
Jansen) is made to say: "Whereupon his brother-in-law there present said 'Father,  
you have made over your right out of your own hand,' " etc. Thus the word "Father"
contradicts the translation that calls that speaker "brother-in-law." Both Jan Emans  
and Willem Jansen were schoonzoons (sons-in-law) of the said Anthony, but each
appears in modern translations of separate records as "brother-in-law." The most
eminent translator of ancient Dutch records in America, A. J. F. van Laer, clears up
this contradiction by explaining that it arose because of the old use of the word
swaeger, which in the 17th century meant son-in-law as well as brother-in-law.

Received the foregoing petition, whereupon the following reply was given: The
Director-General and Council of New Netherland are well pleased with the
remonstrance and the request made therein, and upon the first opportunity shall make
such arrangements, as circumstances admit. April 12th 1660.

The petition that Anthony signed did not result in any improvement, and within four
years the Dutch dominion of New Netherland had become the English province   of  
New York. The minutes of the Council of New Netherland bear an entry dated May 24,
1663, to the effect that Anthony Jansen from Salee had inquired whether he was
indebted to the West India Company in any way in the matter of the land he held near
Gravesend. This referred to plantation No. 29 that he had received from Mr. Stilwell in
part payment for his original bouwery of 1639. It seems that the title was clear.

Although he must have chiefly resided on this plantation No. 29, the records of New
Amsterdam show that he was frequently on Manhattan Island, where he owned land,
and that he carried on much business there. Consequently it is impossible to  
determine whether his wife Grietje died there or at Gravesend. She had died before
1669. Her death and his second marriage may have led to his permanent removal to
New Amsterdam about 1669. The change on September 6, 1664, from Dutch to
English authority does not seem to have materially affected Anthony on Long Island,
though he may have regretted the fall of Dutch power. It was in the year 1669 that he
conveyed to his son-in-law, Ferdinandus Jansen van Sichelen [Sicklen], who had
married his daughter, Eva Antonise, plantation No. 29 at Gravesend. This deed was
written and recorded in English, since Gravesend was an English town and kept its
records in that language. Naturally in this deed his name is given in the English style.

December 6th 1669. This presents witneseth that I Anthony Jonson of gravesend one
longe Island in the west Redeing of yorke sheire doe by vertue heare of Acknowledge
absolutely to have sould Asigned and make over from mee my heares Excutors
Administrators and asignes all my Reight title interest and Clame unto A Certaine
percell of lands lying and being in gravesen as aforesayd with the housing garding and
orchard with all the priviledges and appurtynances thereunto belonging the wch I am  
at present possesed withall and knowne by the name of nomber 29 unto fardinandoe
from sickelen of the same towne his heares excutors administrats and asignes for  
ever and for him the sayd fardinandoe to enioy in as large and ample manner in every
respect as I the sayd Anthony Jonson might or could doe by vertue of any purchase
guift grant or towne order in witnise where of I the sayde Anthony Jonson have here
unto sett my hand the day and yeare Above written.

ANTHONY XX JONSON his marke Wittnise WILL W WILKISE his marke, RALPH +

Seventeen days after this sale, the three living daughters of "Anthony Jansen,
commonly called Turk," petitioned the English Governor of the province of New York
for relief, setting forth that they were likely to be deprived of their mother's estate. It
was ordered that Anthony and the others concerned appear on the sixth of January
next. [Colonial Records at Albany, cited in The Historical Magazine, VI, No. 6, 173.]
These daughters were Anneke (Antonise) Southard, Sara (Antonise) Emans, and Eva
(Antonise) van Sicklen, all children of Grietje (Reiniers), deceased wife of Anthony
Jansen van Salee. The other daughter, our ancestress, Cornelia (Antonise), the first
wife of Willem Jansen van Borculo, was then dead, but her daughters, Cornelia and
Jannetje, were represented by their father in the petition as heirs by the death of their

The marriage of Anthony to the widow, Metje Grevenraet (or Gravenradt) of New
Amsterdam, had either occurred before this petition or was about to occur. It is
evident that the daughters feared the second marriage would prevent their securing
their part of their mother's estate; especially so since, before marrying Metje
Gravenraet, he and she had entered into an agreement that if one of them should die,
the survivor should have all of the estate of the other.

The house and lot (seventeen rods, six feet deep) in Brugh Straet, New Amsterdam,
purchased May 24, 1643, by Anthony from Abraham Jacobsen van Steenwyck, was
still owned by him as late as April 24, 1666, for on that date he sued the tenant for
unpaid rent. Metje Gravenraet was still residing in the Bridge Street house in 1686, ten
years after death of her second husband, Anthony Jansen van Salee, as is shown by
her name and place of residence as given in the list of church members of New
Amsterdam in 1686. [New York Historical Society Collections, 2 ser., I, 359.] It is
highly probable that Grietje (Reiniers) Jansen died after April 24, 1666. Certainly
Anthony Jansen van Salee did not marry his second wife till after 1665, for Metje
Gravenraet lived in Marckveldt Street (which crossed the southern end of Bridge
Street), in 1665 as a widow. She was assessed one florin toward paying for the
lodging of English soldiers [ibid., 2 ser., I, 395].

Metje Gravenraet has been described, probably erroneously, as a Quakeress. The
only suggestion of it is that she and her husband, Anthony Jansen, received a Quaker
into the hospitality of their house in Bridge Street, though perhaps unaware of the
man's religious status, as will appear. She is recorded as a member of the Dutch
Reformed Church. That she was an estimable woman is suggested by the fact that her
son Isaac, by her first husband, had become a prominent man in New Amsterdam
before her second marriage, and had been made a schepen (magistrate) of the city of
New Amsterdam, being one of the last schepens under Dutch rule. He took the oath of
fealty to the English Government in 1664, and in 1673 the Dutch Governor, Colv ,
appointed him sheriff of Swaenenburgh, Hurley, and Marbletown. [Manual of the
Corporation of the City of New York, 1852, p. 385.]

In addition to the land and house in Bridge Street bought in 1643, he secured a grant
from Director-General Kieft of some land on the Graft, Manhattan Island, at the corner
of Hoogh Street and "the Ditch" (now Broad Street). This lot was back of his house lot
in Bridge Street. He did not improve this land by building upon it or cultivating it, as the
terms of the grant required; so on September 16, 1647, it was patented to the
prominent shipping merchant, Govert Loockermans, who sold it, before 1654, to Jacob
van Couwenhoven, the brewer. This land is now the northwest corner of Broad and
Stone Streets, extending up Broad to Mill Lane, near Wall Street. Upon the diagonally
opposite southeast corner of Broad and Stone Streets in 1655 and thereafter stood
the tavern of Solomon La Chaire. This property that Anthony lost by failure to improve
it, became, after his death, worth far more than his Bridge Street house lot which
anciently had a pleasant outlook over the East River.

From the entries in the Dutch minutes of the court of the burgomasters and schepens
of New Amsterdam, for the period between 1653 and the time of Anthony's return to
his Bridge Street house on Manhattan Island about 1669, we present some extracts. It
is obvious from a study of Anthony's last seven years of residence in the Bridge Street
house that he retired in 1669 from agricultural pursuits, but that he still continued in
general trading, in money lending, and in conducting a tavern. Only brief extracts can
be given concerning some of his appearances in court between 1654 and 1669, for
each of which appearances he came to the city from Gravesend (translated from the

CITY HALL, Monday, the First of June 1654. Anthony Jansen, mulattefarbig, pltf., vs.
William Strengwits, deft; for payment of two months' services at 120 lbs of tobacco
per month. Parties being heard on either side, it is decided that Will Strengwits shall
pay Anthony Jansen for the two months he served in the place of Willem Shepmoes.
[Court Minutes, I, 204.]

CITY HALL. Monday October 5, 1654. Anthony Jansen van Vaes, pltf. vs. Pieter
Caspersen van Naerden, deft. Pltf. demands payment of rent both for the present and
for the last year, announcing the seizure of the furniture as deft. intends to quit the
house. Deft. acknowledges the debt and requests delay. Parties being heard, the
Burgomasters and Schepens declared the arrest valid until deft. has paid the rent or
satisfied the pltf. [Ibid., I, 248.]

This action seems to refer to the house in Bridge Street, New Amsterdam, at a time
when its owner was residing near Gravesend.

TUESDAY, February 8, 1656. Extraordinary session. Jacon Teunissen pltf. vs.
Anthony Jansen van Salee, deft. Pltf. complains that deft. has caused his goods at
Gravesend to be arrested. Requests reason for arrest. Deft. acknowledges that he
has arrested the goods because the pltf. hired as his servant for one year and
absconded from his service. Antony Jansen says; After Jacob Teunissen had come to
him and had hired with him Antony, he said, he should first learn if he were free, and
Jacob Teunissen thereupon went to Gravesend and said he had settled with Lourens
and was free, and that he thereupon hired him for one year. Jacob Teunissen denies
same. Deft. undertakes to prove same, exhibiting (1) by declaration of William Wilkens
that Jacob Teunissen has said he was free of Lourens and may hire with any one; (2)
by declaration of two persons that Jacob acknowledged he had hired with Anthony as
servant, but that he should not remain as he got no earnest money, Whilst deft.,
offering to prove he had hired him, the Court granted Anthony until the next court day
to so prove. [Ibid., II, 37.]

MONDAY, March 13, 1656. And whereas the weather is bad and Antony Jansen
cannot well come [from Gravesend] he was still granted eight days. [Ibid., II, 61.]

MONDAY, March 20, 1656. Jacob Teunissen appears in court requesting despatch,
as Antony Jansen van Vaes has failed to this time to prove etc. according to previous
order of the court. The Court discharge Jacob Teunissen from the claim which
Anthony Jansen may make on this account, and declare the aforesaid arrest invalid.
[Ibid., II, 169.]

This suit was followed on June 26, 1656, by another brought by Jacob Teunissen for
forty florins for ten weeks' work. And whereas the court messenger declares he has
summoned the deft. who has now twice defaulted, he is condemned for his contempt,
to deposit the demanded money within eight days from date with the Secretary here.
[Ibid., II, 124.]

Anthony sailed in his boat from Gravesend to New Amsterdam on Sunday, July 2,
1656, and on the next day he appeared before the burgomasters and schepens of
New Amsterdam:

MONDAY, July 3, 1656. Jacob Teunissen, pltf, vs. Anthony Jansen van Zalee, deft.
Deft., having paid two defaults, says he did not hire pltf. either by day, week, or
month, but by the year, and if pltf. had put in his year, he should have paid him, but
now that he has absconded from his service, maintains that he owes him no hire.

The court minutes give no verdict in this case, which is of interest to us for the various
forms in which the defendant is designated in it. Four years elapsed before Anthony
Jansen van Salee was again in court. This time it was occasioned by his next-door
neighbor, in Bridge Street, New Amsterdam, though Anthony was then residing on
Long Island. During his absence on his Gravesend bouwery, one Hendrick Jansen,
Smith, encroached upon Anthony's house lot in Bridge Street, and with the hope of
maintaining his encroachment, October 26, 1660, began a suit against "Anthony
Janzen van Salee," who was reported as too sick to come from Gravesend; so also on
November 2, 1660, when he is called Antony Janzen van Vaas. On January 18, 1661,
he was again summoned and again did not respond; whereupon the court declared
"deft. Anthony Janzen van Vaas does not belong to this jurisdiction. The Court order
pltf. to arrest and summon him when he comes here" [ibid., III, 249].

Although Anthony Jansen van Vaes (as he is more often called than Van Salee in the
New Amsterdam court records after 1655) did not honor either of the three
summonses of October 26, November 2, 1660, and January 18, 1661, served upon
him at the instance of Hendrick Jansen, Smith, he was not too indifferent soon to
devise, with the aid of his daughter Cornelia's husband, William Jansz van Borculo or
Barckelloo, a means of defeating this opponent who had appropriated a part of the
land in Bridge Street. The name "Hendrick Jansen, Smit," appears on the Innes map  
at page 80 of New Amsterdam and Its People as the owner of the house lot on the
northern side of Anthony's house lot; hence the encroachment must have been on that
side. Anthony brought a counter suit against Hendrick Jansen:

[Minutes of the Court of the Burgomasters and Schepens of New Amsterdam, III, 289.
Translation]: TUESDAY May 3, 1661. Anthony Janzen van Vaas. pltf., vs. Hendrick
Janzen Smitt, deft. Pltf. exhibits an account for the sum of twenty-six guilders for costs
and loss of time caused to him by deft. Whereas the dispute between the parties
consists mainly about division of a lot, the case was therefore referred to Daniel van
Donck and Abraham Jansen, (* This man was not the "Abraham Jansen of Sylee,
commonly called Turk," a possible brother of Anthony Jansen from Salee, who died
shortly prior to April 9, 1659.) carpenter, to discuss the matter in presence of the
Surveyor and to reconcile parties if possible; if not to render a report of their action to
the Court.

[P. 321.] TUESDAY 21 June, 1661. Antony Janzen van Vaas, pltf. vs. Hendrick Janzen
Smith deft. Pltf. demands from deft. seventy seven guilders eleven stivers for costs of
unnecessary suit, according to account exhibited in Court. Deft. demands three feet of
a lot coming to him of the ground which he bought. Burgomasters and Schepens   
found that Anthony Janzen's lot agrees with his ground brief and that Hendrick Janzen
Smitt has two feet and a half of ground more than his ground brief mentions, order
Hendrick Jansen Smitt to content himself with the aforesaid measurement and
condemn him to pay pltf. the sum of forty guilders, the further costs remaining at the
charge of the pltf.

[P. 338.] TUESDAY 5th July, 1661. Willem Jansen van Borckelo, attorney of Anthony
Jansen van Vaes, requests execution on the judgment against Hendrick Jansen Smitt,
dated 21 June, 1661. The Worshipful Court order the Bailiff to execute these.

This Willem Jansen had come from Borculo in the county of Zutphen and province of
Gelderland in Holland as early as 1657, residing first at New Amsterdam; after his
marriage to Cornelia, daughter of Anthony Jansen van Salee and his wife Grietje
Reiniers, which occurred between that date and June 21, 1661, when he saved his
new father-in-law a day's trip from Gravesend to New Amsterdam by appearing in
court for him, he lived at Flatlands near Gravesend, Long Island, and at Gravesend. In
1664, he purchased a farm at Gravesend near his father-in-law's. Soon after he
appeared in court for his father-in-law in July, 1661, he returned to Holland, but came
back to New Netherland in 1662. This may have been the honeymoon journey of
himself and his wife Cornelia, as their daughter, Jannetje, was old enough May 1,
1679, to marry Jan Barentsen van Zutphen, of Flatlands and Gravesend.

Anthony Jansen van Salee's business affairs in New Amsterdam must have been  
many if one may judge from the number of lawsuits in which he figured. Some of his
civil suits are unimportant, and are omitted; others give highly valuable evidence as    
to his character, movements, and affairs:

[Court of the Burgomasters and Schepens of New Amsterdam, IV, 176, 177.
Translated extract]: TUESDAY, 9th Jan'y, 1663. Antony Janzen van Vaes, arrestant  (*
Arrestant. This is an awkward word. It simply means that the plaintiff had sued out an
attachment ) and pltf. vs. Evert Dirckzon, woodcutter, arrested and deft. Pltf. demands
from deft. twenty-eight guilders ten stivers arising from the purchase of an ox which his
predecessor had bought of the said Anthony. Deft. says he knows nothing of it;
requests time that he may pay. The Worshipful Court order the deft. to satisfy and  
pay the pltf. [This is the last appearance in court of Anthony Jansen van Salee under
Dutch rule; hence the records thereafter are written in English.]

APRIL the 24th, 1666. In the difference between Anthony Jansen van Sale, pltf. and
Thomas Cocx, deft. for the balance of rent, the Worshipful Court appoint as
arbitrators, Mr. Samuel Edsal and Pieter Wolfertsen van Couwenhoven, to reconcile
the parties, [etc.]. [Ibid., V, 350.]

JUNE 30, 1668. John Marshal plt: vs Anthony Jansen, deft., in an accon of debt to the
summe of 225 plankes. This Worshipful Court did Decree that the deft. should make
payment of the sd Plankes within the space of Eight dayes with Costs of Court. [Ibid.,
VI, 137.]

JULY 7th. 1668. Anthony Janz, Plt. vs Robbert Joanes, Deft. The Plt. declareth that
the Deft. is Indebted unto him fl.(* Florins, which term superseded the Dutch "guilders"
under English rule. A florin was equal to forty cents.) 122: 14 in wampum for wch he
prayeth Condemnation with Cost. This Worshippll Court doe Condemne & order the
Deft. to make payment of the sd 122:14 wampum in 14 dayes time wth Cost of Sute.
[Ibid., VI, 139.]

JUNE 22d, 1669. Lambert van Neck vs Anthony Jansen. The Plt. demands the summe
of fl. 242:14 wampum. The deft. ownes the debt to the summe of fl. 233 as also the
surplus in case it be not discounted in the last acct The Worshipll Court did decree &
order (arrest) against the defendant, who is called the gearresteerde, translated by
Fernow as the party 'arrested.' " A. J. F. VAN LAER. that the defendt. should pay the
sd. debt in wampum within 14 days next ensuing or sooner in case the plt. should
depart for holland before the sd. time, and in the meane while the deft: is to give in
security not to depart this Towne before the debt be Satisfied together with Cost of
suit. [Ibid., VI, 182.]

Thus in June, 1669, seventy-six days before Anthony conveyed, September 6, 1669,  
all his real estate on Long Island to his son-in-law, Ferdinandus Jansen van Sichelen   
or Sigelen (Van Sicklen), he was residing on that estate, as the record indicates that
he was present at New Amsterdam on June 22, 1669, on account of the suit; hence
was ordered not to leave that jurisdiction until the judgment was paid. All the time,
however, since 1643, he had owned the house and lot in Bridge Street, New
Amsterdam; and within a few weeks after June 22, 1669, he entered into residence in
that house and there resided until his death in 1676. This removal, and the sale in
September, 1669, mark the death of his wife Grietje Reiniers, and the time of his
second marriage to the widow, Metje Gravenraet. Anthony's daughter, Cornelia, who
had married between 1657 and 1660 Willem Jansen van Barkelo, also had died by
1666; hence her name was connected with the petition of Anthony's three remaining
children dated December 23, 1669, only as having been the mother of her minor
children in whose behalf the petition was also made. Doubtless Anthony and Metje,
being well-to-do and about seventy years old, preferred to take their ease in the city  
to having the cares of the Long Island plantation.

Between June, 1669, and October, 1671, Anthony was the plaintiff in three suits at
law, and defendant in two. His house on the west side of Bridge Street, the third house
from the corner of the present Broad Street, is represented in a crude, imperfect
drawing of that part of New Amsterdam made in 1652 by Justus Danckers. This view,
enlarged with additions taken from the ancient Visscher Views, appears at page 104
of New Amsterdam and Its People. The chief defect of the drawing is that it depicts
the houses in Bridge and other streets as being built together; whereas the land
records prove that the private houses were detached, each standing surrounded by its
own open ground. The drawing also shows the houses smaller than some of them
must have been; especially Anthony's house as it was in 1669, for he turned it into an
inn and must have enlarged it before 1669 for that purpose. The drawing, while not
defining the street alignments properly, does serve to indicate correctly by whom the
houses were owned, and serves to show them in true order as one passed up the
shore of the East River, though for convenience the original delineator crowded the
houses together into a space much shorter than they actually covered. In fact,
Anthony's house lot, nineteen rods deep, is crowded out.

The drawing now in the State Library, Albany, New York, from Montanus, "Nieuwe en
Onbeken de Weereld," reproduced on steel in The Documentary History of the State
of New York (IV, 76), more accurately portrays the same houses, facing the East
River, and in their more detached and extended settings. This view is the best of New
Amsterdam, 1650-60. In the center of this view are the three attached stone houses of
the West India Company, each of two stories with a high attic above. Between these
houses and the first tree to the right, is the Bridge Street house of Anthony Jansen van
Salee, the second tall house to the right, with other low houses in front of it. The
two-and-a-half-story house at the extreme right side of the picture is the City Tavern,
built about 1652, afterward used as the Stadt Huys, the City Hall, in which our Anthony
Jansen so many times appeared in litigation.

One of the financial transactions of Anthony Jansen van Salee is referred to on page
98 of liber 1-2 of the records of the Court of the Surrogate of the City of New York:

The Last Will & Testament of John Willson. . . I give & bequeath unto Anthony Jansen,
Turk, all my Tooles wch is at present in the House of Henry Morris in New Jersey, In
consideration of a certain debt I owe to the said Anthony Jansen, as also what ever I
have at present in the House of Anthony Jansen, or elsewhere in America under what
Denomination soever, & all my Land scituate, lyeing & being in New Jersey according
to the records of the said Towne (namely Elizabeth Towne) Always Provided That the
said Anthony Jansen shall well and truly pay my just & due Debts. . . . Robert Bone &
Henry Morris of New Jersey Executors. 10th day of October Ano 1672. JOHN

[P. 99.] Letters of Administracon of ye Estate of ye abovewritten Jno. Willson granted
to Anthony Jansen Turk of this City as Principall Legatee. . . . Upon the Request of ye
said Anthony Jansen & to ye End the Estate bee the sooner & better secured both for
the benefitt of the Creditors & those concerned: These are to certify that the said
Anthony Jansen is admitted as Principal Legatee of the whole estate of the said John
Willson deceased. . . . And the said Anthony Jansen hath hereby full power & lawful
Authority to enter into possession of the Premises; or otherwise to dispose thereof
with the Advice & Consent of the said Executors or Trustees according to the tenor of
the said will as an Heire or Principall Legatee by the Civill Law & the Lawes of this
Governmt are allowed to doe. Given &c: this 15th day of Octobr 1672.

While Anthony Jansen's real estate was no longer extensive in area or large in value,
he was included among the wealthy men to be assessed in the 1674 tax list of New
Amsterdam. The entry in that list reads "Anthony Jansen Van Sal 1000." This was a
tax on 1000 guilders in real estate, the same amount as assessed upon the property
of Bay Roosevelt and upon the Dutch burghers whose descendants have since come
to possess great fortunes in New York. Anthony's descendants did not inherit and hold
his land in New York, but the descendants of his next-door neighbor, Hendrick
Hendricksen Kip, did, with results in increased value, in time, that would amaze that
founder could he but see the figures. While the Dutch were holding the city as New
Orange, he figured in several court actions of unusual interest:

[Minutes of the Court of the Burgomasters and Schepens of New Orange, VII, 43]:
COURT HOLDEN AT CITY OF N. ORANGE; 17th Jany Aø 1674. Schout [Sheriff] A.
De Mill, pltf., vs Anthony Jansen Salee, deft. Pltf. says that the deft. sold four mutejens
of drink to the Indian, who was lately shot by the sentry, and as he is the cause of the
consequent accident etc. Defts. wife appears and denies that she gave any drink to
the Indian, and offers to confirm the same by oath. The Worshipful Court dismiss the
pltf's complaint unless he can prove his statement.

Three to four months later occurred the attempt to prosecute Anthony Jansen for
giving shelter for a night to a Quaker. This was preceded by a singular incident, of
which but a fragment now remains of the original record. It is reproduced at page 331
of Volume XXIII, Part II, of the Calendar of Historical Manuscripts in the Office of the
Secretary of State (now in the State Library at Albany):

April 16, 1674. Fragment of an affidavit setting forth that Samuel Forman of Oyster
Bay came to the city where he lodged at the house of Anthony Jansen from Salee,
and, by inspiration of Christ Jesus, intended to repair to the church during divine
service and exclaim: "O cry wath shall I cry, all flesh is grass, grass is the flower of the
field, the flower falls and the grass withers, but the word of God Obeids forever."

Two weeks later came the formal charge by the sheriff:
[Minutes of the Court of the Burgomasters and Schepens of New Orange, VII, 82]:
Schout de Mill pltf. vs. Anthony Jansen Sale, deft. Pltf. makes his charge in writing.
Deft.'s wife appears and says that the Quaker was brought at Nine o'Clock in the
evening to her house by Margriet Philips' daughter who told her at the same time that
the Schout was already notified of the said Quaker etc. Deft. is ordered to prove her
statement at the next Courte day.

[P. 82.] CITY HALL OF CITY OF N. ORANGE 22nd May Aø 1674. Schout De Mill,
pltf. vs. Anthony Jansen Sallee, deft. Pltf. says that in the night between the 28th and
29th of April the deft. suffered an Englishman, named Edward Bambri, dwelling at
Martenaer's Neck to sleep (at his house) which is directly contrary to the Placard of
the Honble Governr General enacted on that subject: therefore he concludes that the
deft. ought pursuant to the said Placard be condemned to a find of fl. 600(*) with costs.

The Worshipful Court, having heard pltf's demand asked the defendant if she could,
pursuant to the order of the last Court day, prove, that when Margt Philips daughter
brought the Englishman to her house, the said daughter stated, the said Englishman
was already returned to the Schout etc. Deft replies that she has no other proof than
her husband and child. The Worshipful Court having heard the denial of Margt Philips
and her said daughter hold the case in deliberation until the next Court day. Meanwhile
their worships shall further examine the Placard.

Anthony Jansen was alert over the possible results of the denial of the Philips woman,
so, quitting the defensive attitude, he took aggressive and determined action, viz.:

Anthony Jansen Salee pltf. vs. Margriet Philips deft. Pltf. says that the defts. daughter
brought an Englishman to lodge at his house, saying that the Schout was already
notified about him, but such not being the case (as to such notification), the Schout
now proceeds against him. Deft. denies it and says she never saw the Englishman
before, but that he came to her house and requested a night's lodging, whereupon
through charity she gave him one English and one Holland shilling and sent him with  
her daughter to the pltfs. to find out where the said Englishman could lodge for
money--but never ordered her daughter to say so--who being called in denies having
told the pltf. so. The Court postpones the case until the next court day. [Ibid., VII, 84,

Hall of the City of N. Orange the 29th May Aø, 1674. Present Capt. Willem Knyff,
Anthony De Mill, Schout; gidius Luyck, Johannes van Brugh, Johannes de Peyster,
Burgomasters; Jeronimus Ebbingh, Jacob Kipp, Lowrens v: Spiegel, Guilaine
Verplanck, Schepens.

Schout Anthony de Mill, pltf. vs Anthony Jansen van Salee, deft. Pltf. says that the
deft. furnished lodging in the night between the 28th and 29th April to an Englishman
named Edward Bambri, residing at Martenaer's Neck, which is directly contrary to the
Placard made on that subject: he concludes, therefore, that the deft. shall be
condemned according to said Placard to a fine of fl. 600 in beavers with cost.
Burgomasters and Schepens having heard defts. excuse condemn him (for reasons)
only in a fine of one beaver with costs . . . June 19, 1674. The Schout demands
execution of judgment on Antony Jansen van Sale, of twelve florins in all [$5.75].

This affair having occurred while Holland and England were at war, and while the  
Dutch were holding New Netherland by force of arms against the English, the placard
was posted to prevent the lodging within the city of any Englishman from without, until
previous notice had been given to the sheriff, regardless of the visitor's religion or
business. The fine of six hundred florins' worth of beaver skins was very heavy, but
being mitigated to one skin, it became merely a nominal judgment of a few shillings'
value with costs of court.

Two valuable records illuminating two periods of the ownership and occupancy of that
property while Anthony Jansen was residing on Long Island have been found, which
indicate that Anthony was on friendly terms with the Kips, though not with Hendrick
Jansen Smit, viz.:

[Registry of Deeds, City of New York, Liber A, 85, 86, translation from the Dutch
original. Abstract]: We the undersigned Schepens of the City Amsterdam in New
Netherland do hereby declare that before us came and appeared Anthony Jansen van
Vaes at present residing on Long Island who declares to cede and to convey to and
for the behoof of Isaac Kip, a certain portion of his lot situate within this City in the rear
or to the South of Jacob Kip's house between the lots of Hendrick Jansen Smith and
Jacob Kip's lying in the rear of the appraiser's lot where formerly a part, or an oblique
strip of about 3 or 4 feet was taken off on which one end of Isack Kip's house stands
in compensation or payment for which so much is again taken and given to him
Anthony Jansen by Hendrick Kip senior. . . . In witness whereof these presents are
signed by the Cedant and the Worspll Schepens Jacob Strycker and Will Beeckman
this 21st novr. 1656 at Amsterdam in New Netherland.

This is the mark of ANTHONY JANSEN VAN VAES X made by himself. To my

That deed is indexed "Anthony Jansen van Fez." Although he purchased this house  
and lot in 1644, he did not reside in it with his family before 1669, save for the period
of his lease to Edmund Adley of his bouwery on Long Island--September 6, 1646, to
September 6, 1651. But he seems to have used a room in the house whenever he
came from Long Island to remain over night in New Amsterdam. His situation as to this
house between 1651 and 1669 is interestingly defined in two of the leases he made of
the property:

[CITY CLERK, CITY OF NEW YORK. Powers of Attorney, Acknowledgments,
Indentures of Apprentices, Inventories, etc. Translated abstract]: 1655. May 26,
Antony Jansz Van Vaes rents to Claes Tysen, cooper, part of a house and lot in New
Amsterdam, on the East River, between Handrick Kip's and Hendrick Jansz's, namely,
the front part of the house and half of the loft, with the place and lot belonging to the
house. Said lease to continue one year, at an annual rent of 140 Carolus guilders, or
so much longer as lessor and lessee shall agree upon. Witnesses, ISACK KIP,

[CITY CLERK, CITY OF NEW YORK. Translation of Register of Walewyn van der
Veen Notary Public of New Amsterdam 1662-1664, p. 68]: This day, the 30 March
1663, before me Walewyn van der Veen, Notary Public, admitted by the Right Honble
Director General and Council, residing at Amsterdam in New Netherland, and before
the undernamed witnesses, appeared the worthy Anthony Jansen van Fes, called van
Salee, to me the Notary known, who declared to have leased, as he hereby doth, his
house and lot standing and situate in the New Bridge Street, between the houses of
Hendrick Kip and Hendrick Jansen Smit, to Egbert Meyndersen who also appeared
and accepted the said lease, and that for the term of two consecutive and following
years, beginning the first of May 1663, and ending on the same date 1665, for which
lease the tenant shall be bound to cover the said house with good tiles at his own
expense, to wit:

He shall defray the expense of the tiles and back thereunto required together with the
labor-wages, on condition that the tenant shall, over and above his occupation,   
receive from the lessor thereto, in January of the coming year 1664, one hundred
and sixty-two guilders, ten stivers, payable in wampum or corn in the value thereof,
and fifteen vuyren plank; further, the wood work and dependencies with the builder's
wages belonging to the frame of said roof shall be at the expense of the lessor.

It is therefore conditioned that the lessor shall enjoy at his convenience in said
house a suitable sleeping place, and may store therein one or two Chests; all which  
aforesaid the appearers promise each for himself punctually to perform and observe
under bond of their respective persons and properties, submitting the same to all
courts and judges. Thus done and executed at the city aforesaid, in the presence of
Resolvit Waldron and Jacobus van de Water, witnesses hereunto invited who have
subscribed these presents with the appearances and me the Notary on the date as

This is the mark made by the own hand of ANTHONI JANSEN VAN FES.
12 June 1663 gave engrossed copy hereof to Anthony Jansen.

In 1671 while Anthony Jansen van Salee was residing in Bridge Street, New York City,
the town of Gravesend again encroached upon the property that formerly was his, and
which was held by Francois de Bruijne. Whereupon on December 5, 1671, De Bruijne
petitioned the Executive Council of the Province of New York for relief. [Executive
Council Minutes, I, 114.] Victor Hugo Paltsits, when State Historian of New York,
arranged and edited the executive council minutes, and he informed us, on December
10, 1924, that among the papers in the case of Francois de Bruijne v. the town of
Gravesend on December 5, 1671, which he examined was one bearing the testimony
of Anthony Jansen van Salee, who had been summoned because of his being an   
aged and worthy man esteemed for his knowledge of the old boundaries of land on
Long Island.

These papers [says Dr. Paltsits] were destroyed in the fire of 1911 in the State
Library; but I recall that Anthony Jansen van Salee was described in them as a man
highly esteemed for his knowledge of land bounds, and that his evidence was
accepted as important and trustworthy.

On the map of Manhattan of 1639, entitled De Manatus op de Noort Rivier, now
owned by the Italian Government, and preserved in the Villa Castello near Florence,
Italy, is seen, among the names of the landowners in that year, the name "22 Bou van
Antoni du Turck"--Bouwery of Antoni the Turck, marked on the map by the number 22.
This map, being of the entire island with large sections of New Jersey and Long Island
included, gives no details of that bouwery, other than showing, by the number 22, its
approximate location among the eleven bouwerys then extant on the island. The
Iconography of Manhattan Island (by I. N. Phelps Stokes, in five volumes), the most
exhaustive, elaborate, and remarkable work ever prepared upon the subject of the
land of any American city, and, perhaps of any city in the world, refers to this map of
1639 and to "22 Bou van Antoni du Turck," viz.:

The farm of Anthony Jansen, of Salee or Fez (Fees or Vees) in Morocco, called, on
account of his having embraced (*This is inaccurate. He did not embrace
Mohammedanism. It embraced him--in his youth. He had no choice in the matter when
young. He threw off all influence of it after coming to America, and became a Christian
and an estimable and honorable burgher of Manhattan.) Mohammedanism, "the  
Turck." He is mentioned as early as April 29, 1638. The position of this number [22]  
on the Maps seems to correspond with the early transport to Van Fees (date
unknown) of land which was regranted to Govert Loockermans, September 15,
1646--Liber G.G.: 158 (Albany). This land lay on the east side of the Ditch (Broad
Street), and extended from the present Stone to South William Street.

Anthony Jansen owned, also, at this time another farm on Manhattan Island, bounded
westerly by Hendrick Jansen, tailor, and easterly by Philip de Truy. This upper farm  
he deeded, on May 7, 1639, to Barent Dircksen. . . . This plantation was afterwards
granted to the provincial secretary, Cornelis van Tienhoven. . . . It lay north of Maiden
Lane and east of Broadway.

The Iconography of Manhattan Island (II, 382) in the citation of the Dutch land grants
gives further and more minute particulars about the house and land in Bridge Street,
New Amsterdam, that Anthony Jansen van Salee bought in 1644, and which he held   
at his death in 1676, and on which he had resided continuously since 1669. In view of
the truly wonderful bird's-eye view of the streets, houses, and gardens of New
Amsterdam in 1660, shown in the great drawing made for The Iconography of
Manhattan Island, which drawing depicts the house and garden of Anthony Jansen,  
we quote the description of that house lot (II, 382):

The Dutch Grants, Block E, Lot 13. 1644. May 24. deed. Abraham Jacobsen Van
Steenwyck to Anthony Jansen Van Fees; lot containing 17 rods, 6 feet, 2 inches 5
grains, being the most westerly part of the lot of Abraham Jacobsen, where the lot of
Hendrick Kip lies westward of it, extending in breadth in front of the house of Anthony
Jansen, 2 rods, 3 feet and 7 inches; on the east side its length is 9 rods, 5 inches; its
breadth for the length of 1 rod and 7 feet, measured on the West side, is 2 rods, 3
feet and 7 inches; for the length of 5 rods, 2 rods 4 feet and 4 inches; for the same
length being an inward point (angle), 1 rod, 3 feet, 7 inches; for the length of 3 rods
(being the North end of the lot of Anthony Jansen aforesaid) 1 rod 3 feet 7 inches, 5
grains, amounting in all to the aforesaid 17 rods 6 feet 2 inches, 5 grains--[pepper

So far as is determinable, Anthony Jansen van Salee passed his last days at his home
in Bridge Street, the third house southward from the Graft, now Broad Street, facing
the East River. His widow was residing therein ten years after his death. About seven
months after he passed away his property was taxed:

An assesmt and Tax made The 10th Day of November 1676 for ye defrayinge of the
Charges of the New docke & Payinge the Citty debts and other Publique dutyes att
One penny halfe Penny P Pounde . . . 150--Anthony Jans Turke--00-18s-09d [Minutes
of the Common Council of the City of New York, I, 29.]

That is next to the last record of Anthony. The next tax list preserved was taken
sixteen months and some days after his death, but his name occurs in it in connection
with some real estate in the Marckveldt (now Whitehall Street) or between that street
and Winkle Street (closed up in 1680); in the same list his widow's real estate, very
near by at the foot of Broadway, is also named. The land taxed was a part of his
intestate estate in July, 1677, when his estate was being settled in the Surrogate's
Court. The house occupied by the English Governor of the province of New York was
close to the house that Anthony's widow owned both before and after he married her;
the Governor's house and lot were taxed only two and a half times the widow's tax.

CITY OF N. YORK. A Rate of taxacon made this 24th Day of July 1677 by ye Mayor
and Aldermen upon houses and Vacant Lands within this Citty for ye Defraying and
discharging ye Citty Debts and expenses to be payd as followeth Vizt: The one Moety
or halfe thereof Imediately and ye other 25th of 7ber next ffollowing. . . . The Markett
Feild & Broadway: Mattie Greverart, 0-4s-0d. Governor Lovelace -0-10-0. Paulus ye
Turk -0-6-0 . . . The Marvelt Street & Winkle Street: Anthony Jonson -0-8-0. [Ibid., I,
52, 53, 62.]

The death of Anthony Jansen van Salee and van Vaes in March, 1676, and the
disposition of his estate to his widow, instead of to his children, are known from other

to Nov. 1677, pp. 80-82]: Citty of Newe Yorke. The Cort of Record of the Citty
aforesaid holden att the Citty Hall within the Said Citty the XXVI dayth day of
September 1676 Before (etc.) . . .
To the Worppll ye Mayr and Aldrmen--. The humble Peticon of Thomas Southward
Wm Johnson John Emans & ffardingando Van Stickland (all who) Entermarried with
Annica Cornelia Sara and Eva--Daughters & heirs unto Anthony Johnson late of this
Citty who dyed intestate about Six months Since--

Sheweth--That Metia Graverod Widdow unto ye intestate hath not brought into this
Court a true Inventerie of his Estate--Therefore Prays yt the sd Metie Graverod may
be Compelled by this Worshippfull Cort to there to p'duce an Inventorie according to
Law & yt yor Peticoners may have their Equall shares & Portions of the said
Intestate's Estate. And they Shall pray &c.

[New York City--Surrogate. Liber 1-2, p. 158]: Administration granted to Mtti
Grevenraet, of her husband's Estate. EDMUND ANDROS ESQR [Governor]
Whereas Anthony Jansen of this Citty dyed Intestate and Metti Grevenraet, his Widow
& Relict haveing in order to her takeing out Lettrs. of Administracon Exhibited an
Inventory of her sd husband's estate into ye Mayors Cort of this Citty, & likewise
produced a Contract made between her sd husband, & her before Marriage, that ye
longest liver of them should remaine in the ffull possession of the whole Estate during
the Survivor's life, the proofe whereof was allowed of by the Cort & Recomended to
me for Lettrs of Administracon: These prsents may Certify and declare that the sd.
Metti is admitted & confirmed to all intents and purposes, Administratrix of her sd
husband's Estate, & She hath hereby full Power & Authority to act in ye prmises, as
Administrator by ye Lawes of this Governmt are to do, She giveing Security to pforme
the Contract, accordingly. Given under my Seale ye March 25th 1677.

The inventory of the estate was filed with the court, but was not recorded. The filed
papers in this court of the surrogate were removed to Albany when the seat of
government was removed. Having failed to find the inventory there, it is possible that it
was burned in the State Library fire of 1911 when two hundred thousand printed
volumes and thousands of ancient manuscripts were destroyed, perhaps as the result
of a lighted cigarette's being thrown into a waste paper basket. Among the burned
manuscripts was the petition of December 23, 1669, of Anthony's living daughters and
heirs for the conservation of the estate of their deceased mother, Grietje (Reiniers)
Jansen, together with the evidences of such agreement as was reached between  
them and their father. The ultimate recipient of the Bridge Street house and land that
Anthony Jansen van Salee left to his wife is not clear. She as his widow was residing
there in 1686, but did not bequeath the property by will or convey it by any deed now
of record. It may have gone to one of her own children by her first husband, as none  
of the children of Anthony appear in any connection with it after his death.

In the list of church members in New Amsterdam for 1686, when the Rev. Henry
Selyns was pastor of the Dutch Reformed Church, we find: "Brug Straat. Metje
Grevenraedt, weduwe van Anthony Jansen." [New York Historical Society Collections,
2 ser., I, 359.] Her neighbors in that short street were the Kips, Van Cortlandts, Van
Vorsts, Gerretsens, and a few others.

"He is said to have been a man of prodigious strength," says Thompson on page 171
of Volume II of The History of Long Island. The Early Settlers of North America
(Holgate, p. 23) in referring to the Jansens-Johnsons of Gravesend and Brooklyn,
states: "This family has been distinguished for extraordinary strength. Antonie himself,
the ancestor of the family, was a man of great vigor." Earlier than either of these
publications appear the results of an interview, prior to 1845, with General Jeremiah
Johnson of Brooklyn (born in 1766) by Nathaniel S. Prime, who related the same on
page 361 of his History of Long Island, published in 1845. On page 360 Prime alludes
to "the prodigious stature and strength" of Anthony Jansen van Salee, and on the next
page adds:

The reputed stature and strength of this individual may not be without foundation, and
is rendered probable, by the occasional reappearance of the same peculiarities in the
line of his posterity. His [great-great] grandson, William Jansen, (* William Jansen,
born July 4, 1718, son of Barent Jansen, the eldest son of Jan Barentse van Zutphen,
who married Jannetje daughter of William Jansen van Borckelo. The latter's first wife
was Cornelia, daughter of Anthony Jansen van Salee. ) of Gravesend, is known to
have been six feet four inches in height; and on one occasion, to give a specimen of  
his strength, he carried ten bushels of wheat from his barn to the house, and up the
chamber stairs. Gen. Johnson says that, when in his youth he visited his great-uncle  
at Gravesend, he inquired into the truth of the statement, and the manner of
performing the act; to which the old gentleman replied: "I took one bag on each
shoulder, one in each hand, and one in my teeth"; and then opening the chamber   
door, he showed the staircase which he ascended, and the place where he deposited
his load. He died in the early part of the present century, being above eighty years of
age. Another descendant of Antonie Jansen, by the name of Ruleph Vanbrunt, in New
Utrecht, being attacked, in the time of the last war [1812] by two workmen whom he
caught stealing melons in his field, seized one in each hand, and holding them at   
arm's length, pummeled their heads and bodies together, till, being let go, they were
glad to run away, without making any further aggression. The mother of this Vanbrunt,
a granddaughter [great-great-granddaughter] of Antonie Jansen, is now [1845] living  
at Yellow Hook, in New Utrecht, at the advanced age of ninety-five years. . . . The
descendants of this family [Jan Barentse van Driest [Zutphen] whose children took   
the same surname (Jansen-Johnson) as his wife, Jannetje Jansen van Barkelo,
granddaughter of Anthony Jansen van Salee], now invariably write their name  
Johnson, which although differing in orthography, varies very little from the Dutch
pronunciation of the original name. . . .

The same physical prowess, courage, and longevity will be found characterizng the
personalities of other and later descendants of Anthony Jansen van Salee. Today  
none of them own any of the property that was his in Broadway, New York, unless
they are stockholders in the National Park Bank that stands upon the northwestern
(Broadway and Ann Street) corner of what was Anthony's bouwery in 1639, or upon
that bouwery's southwest (Broadway and Maiden Lane) corner held by the Title
Guarantee & Trust Company, or in the Federal Reserve Bank, at Maiden Lane and
Nassau Street.

Anthony Jansen, having died on the island of Manhattan, may be supposed to have
been buried in the graveyard that occupied the present site of numbers 29, 31, 33, 35,
37, and 39 Broadway on the western side of that street. His first wife, Grietje Reiniers,
died when they were living near Gravesend, and so she may have been buried there,
even if he was not. A record of the death of Metje Grevenraet has not been
uncovered; nor has a record of what she did with the real estate she received from
Anthony at his death been found. The sumptuous five-volume Iconography of
Manhattan Island, by I. N. Phelps Stokes (II, 261) states as to Metje: "his widow was
living with his two sons, Jeremias and Abraham in New Amsterdam on the  'Brug
Straet' as late as 1686." It is true that persons of those names were then living in that
street; but by no possibility could either this Jeremias Jansen and this Abraham  
Jansen have been sons of Anthony Jansen van Salee. The latter had been living for
twenty years in America when Abraham Jansen came from "Zuydtland" in Brielle,
South Holland, and married on August 10, 1659, Trintje Kip of Bridge Street. This
marriage caused this man to reside near or on the property of his wife's relatives, the
Kips, in 1686. As to Jeremias Jansen, he was an adult defendant in the court of New
Amsterdam on March 22, 1661. [Records of New Amsterdam, III, 253.] There is no
evidence that he ever lived on Long Island or was in any way connected with Anthony
Jansen van Salee or either of the latter's two wives. In fact in the office of the City
Clerk of New York, in Volume II of Minutes of the Orphans' Court, under date of
November 26, 1660, is written--"Jeremias Janzen is authorized to inventory the estate
of his father Jan Jans Hagenaer," and under "April 14, 1661, Jeremias Jansen
Hagenaer is 22 years old." The author of the Iconography was misled by the fact that
these two Jansens were residing in Bridge Street in 1686 at the same time as
Anthony's widow was residing in the third house on the west side of that street from
Broad Street. She did not marry Anthony until nine years after these two men appear
in the records as adults. Nor did either of these men reside in her house in 1686; nor
did they inherit that property. Jeremias is then recorded as living in a house by himself;
while Abraham lived in a part of a larger house shared by his wife's relative, Abraham
Kip. [Collections of New York Historical Society, 2d ser., I, 395.]

The Iconography is not a genealogy and does not attempt to delve into early family
history. It treats of real estate and who owned it, and gives some details about the
owners. It adds (II, 261), when mentioning the land between Bridge and Stone Streets
owned by Anthony Jansen van Salee, that he was "A Hollander whose father, possibly
in the course of commercial ventures to the Barbary States, is said to have embraced
the tenets of Islam."

In the Manual of the Corporation of the City of New York, 1863, at page 484, occurs a
facsimile of the bold characters with which Anthony Jansen signed important
documents. The representation is given under the heading: "Fac-Similes of the original
Autographs of Burgomasters, Schepens, and many other distinguished individuals of
this City," viz.--"Anthony Jansen Van Fes, 1663."

From:  The Washington Ancestry and Records of the McClain, Johnson and Forty
Other Colonial American Families, by Charles Arthur Hoppin, Greenfield, Ohio:
Privately Printed 1932.        
Jim Wilkinson