Pearson's genealogies are useful place to go for clues, but everything should be verified. I have yet to find a fmaily with a substantial number of members that Pearson got entirely right. Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Hayes" <RAHayes@chartermi.net> To: <dutch-colonies@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 7:32 AM Subject: Re: [DUTCH-COLONIES] Mebie Family > Hi Marge Smith, > > I have these persons in my file at www.angelfire.com/ga4/myhayes_family > > 7 x GGrandparents: > Casper Pieterszen MABIE, Bp. 15 Feb 1660 in New Amsterdam DRC. , m. > Lysbeth > SCHUERMANS, b. September 1665 on 14 Dec 1687, the first banns were made on > 18 Nov 1687, probably in the New Amsterdam DRC > > 8 x GGrandparents: > Pieter Casparszen van NAERDEN, b.c. 1610, m. Aechtje Jans van NORDEN > Pieter Casparszen Mebie immigrated from the Netherlands about 1647. He > married Aechtje Jans van NORDEN about 1650. I have 6 children for them. > Pieter Casparszen died between 1662 and 1665 in New Amsterdam, NY. Aechtje > Jans died after Dec 1697 in New York City. > > You can find addition information on the Mabie family in Pearson's "First > Settlers of Albany County", p. 79 or Pearson's "First Settlers of > Schenectady County", p. 118 or here : > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~smabie > > Richard > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Would anyone have access to GENEALOGICAL DATA FROM ADMINISTRATION PAPERS and/ or GENEALOGICAL DATA FROM INVENTORIES OF NY ESTATES, both by Kenneth SCOTT please?? I am interested in finding out if there is any more information in these books regarding Sarah UNDERHILL, widow of Bartow UNDERHILL. Research notes state: On 26 March 1786, Sarah UNDERHILL, widow of Bartow UNDERHILL of Cortlants Manor, yeoman, deceased, renounced her right to administer the estate in favour of his brother Israel UNDERHILL. Israel was granted administration the next day, with bond put up by himself and nephews Benjamin and Nicholas (Gen Data, Admin Papers). Inventory was taken 1 June 1786 and the account filed 1 October 1790 (Gen Data, Inventories NY Estates) I realise that the UNDERHILLs are not Dutch, but hope that someone has access to these books, as I would love to have any additional information that they may contain, especially inventory details (love them!) Thank you Marg Smith Mardi, NSW Australia

And hullo again from Australia. My other Dutch (so I have just discovered) ancestry line, again starting with a SYFFERs connection, is listed below. Any comments, corrections or cousins.. this is just a brief list, so anyone interested or connected please contact me to compare notes. I am still a little unsure about recording surnames as well, with so many variations so if anyone can see any glaring errors, please let me know. I'm still learning!! Annatie NAMBURGH's line is very short! Any ideas? 5 x GGrandparents: Agie (Effie) MABIE, b. August 1745, m. Petrus SYFFER, b.1739 6 x GGrandparents: Jeremyas MABIE, b. June 1699, m. Annatie NAMBURGH 7 x GGrandparents: Casper Pieterszen MABIE, b. 1659/60, m. Lysbeth SCHUERMANS, b. September 1665 8 x GGrandparents: Pieter Casparszen van NAERDEN, b.c. 1610, m. Aechtje Jans van NORDEN Frederick Harmenszen SCHUERMANS, b.c. 1630, m. Christina Jans van WESTERHAUT, b.c. 1640 Cheers Marg Smith Mardi, NSW Australia

Hullo again from Australia. Following my posting in March, I have progressed a little further with my Dutch ancestors, thanks to list members, and the New York and New England B&G Societies, and especially Heritage Quest!! Any comments, corrections or cousins.. this is just a brief list, so anyone interested or connected please contact me to compare notes. I am still a little unsure about recording surnames as well, with so many variations (OOSTEROM for example!!) so if anyone can see any glaring errors, please let me know. I'm still learning!! 6 x GGrandparents: Lea BUYS, b. 25 May 1731 m. Johannis SYFFER 7 x GGrandparents Pieter BUYS, b. 12 December 1679, m. Geertje HOPPE, b. 1682 8 x GGrandparents: Adrian Pierterse BUYS, b.1650, m. Trentje Hendricks van OOSTEROM, b. 1654 Willem HOPPE, b. 1653/4, m. Mynno Jemima JURCKSE, b. 1655 9 x GGrandparents Hendrick van OOSTEROOM, m. Tryntje LUBBERTSE Andries Willemszen HOPPE. m. Geertje HENDRICKS Paulus JURCKSE, m. Christina (Styntie) JANSE, b.c. 1630 10 x GGrandparents: Lubbert GYSBERTSZEN, m. Divertje CORNELIS Cheers Marg Smith Mardi, NSW Australia

Dear Marg, Since this is not my Buys ancestral line (I'm from Jan Cornelius Buys), I am not sure about the dates. However, I do have a suggestion on handling all the various spellings of names such as OOSTEOM, BUYS etc. I sort of settle on one spelling that seems most reasonable, then for certain records where it is spelled differently, I put that spelling into the notes section of my computer program for that individual. That way all the heading surnames line up, but I can keep track of variations in the surname as to date and place and source of the variation. In my line that comes down to DUMOND in the Kingston area, I have Peter HEIMBACH. That is spelled every-which-way as the Dutch tried to orally deal with the German and then the English tired: HINPAW, HINEPAW, HIMPAW, KINPAW, HINEBAUCH,HIMBAUGH HINBACK,etc. :-) Good luck with your research! Elsie Wilson At 11:58 AM 4/29/2007 +1000, you wrote: >Hullo again from Australia. > >Following my posting in March, I have progressed a little further with my >Dutch ancestors, thanks to list members, and the New York and New England >B&G Societies, and especially Heritage Quest!! > >Any comments, corrections or cousins.. this is just a brief list, so >anyone interested or connected please contact me to compare notes. > >I am still a little unsure about recording surnames as well, with so many >variations (OOSTEROM for example!!) so if anyone can see any glaring >errors, please let me know. I'm still learning!! > >6 x GGrandparents: >Lea BUYS, b. 25 May 1731 m. Johannis SYFFER > >7 x GGrandparents >Pieter BUYS, b. 12 December 1679, m. Geertje HOPPE, b. 1682 > >8 x GGrandparents: >Adrian Pierterse BUYS, b.1650, m. Trentje Hendricks van OOSTEROM, b. 1654 >Willem HOPPE, b. 1653/4, m. Mynno Jemima JURCKSE, b. 1655 > >9 x GGrandparents >Hendrick van OOSTEROOM, m. Tryntje LUBBERTSE >Andries Willemszen HOPPE. m. Geertje HENDRICKS >Paulus JURCKSE, m. Christina (Styntie) JANSE, b.c. 1630 > >10 x GGrandparents: >Lubbert GYSBERTSZEN, m. Divertje CORNELIS > >Cheers >Marg Smith >Mardi, NSW >Australia > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without >the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Elsie H. Wilson 5620 Harris Cir. Fitchburg, WI 53575 (608) 835-6791 ehwilson@charter.net

Hi Marge Smith, I have these persons in my file at www.angelfire.com/ga4/myhayes_family 7 x GGrandparents: Casper Pieterszen MABIE, Bp. 15 Feb 1660 in New Amsterdam DRC. , m. Lysbeth SCHUERMANS, b. September 1665 on 14 Dec 1687, the first banns were made on 18 Nov 1687, probably in the New Amsterdam DRC 8 x GGrandparents: Pieter Casparszen van NAERDEN, b.c. 1610, m. Aechtje Jans van NORDEN Pieter Casparszen Mebie immigrated from the Netherlands about 1647. He married Aechtje Jans van NORDEN about 1650. I have 6 children for them. Pieter Casparszen died between 1662 and 1665 in New Amsterdam, NY. Aechtje Jans died after Dec 1697 in New York City. You can find addition information on the Mabie family in Pearson's "First Settlers of Albany County", p. 79 or Pearson's "First Settlers of Schenectady County", p. 118 or here : http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~smabie Richard

Hi all, From: "Steve Brewer" <slbrewer@fuse.net> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [DUTCH-COLONIES] "Buying and Selling Real Porperty in New Amsterdam" Howard, >Thanks, I'll read it this evening. It looks like it was the final payment because Adam filed suit against Hendrick just short of three months after they agreed to the sale.< >1645-05-02 – Adam commenced suit against Hendrick Jansen for his refusal to deliver the deed to the property purchased on 1645-02-21 (CDM: 94). “May 2, 1645: Adam Brouwer, plaintiff, vs. Hendrick Jansen, locksmith, defendant, about the purchase of a house. Plaintiff demands delivery of the deed. Defendant is willing, provided the plaintiff binds himself for the payment of the account rendered to him. Ordered that in the deed the house be mortgaged until the defendant shall be paid.” < I'm getting the feeling the reason Adam got the patent may not be known. I've had a few additional thoughts, though. The dimensions of the lot were not delineated in the sale contract (which you sent earlier). Perhaps Adam wanted all that nailed down and surveyed, which happened with the patent. Perhaps Hendrick was dragging his feet on delivering the deed, or maybe Adam wanted a clean document to recognize that he had paid off the mortgage. Looking at the bigger historical picture, I was apparently wrong in thinking earlier that there may have been a change in the Freedoms and Exemptions. New ones were issued in 1640 and seem to have been the same in the period in question. Apparently Kieft (1638 - 1647) was the first to issue "ground briefs". [Gotham by Burrows and Wallace, p. 35] They go on to say: "Soon enought the inhabitants of New Amsterdam were buyin, selling, and leasing land among themselves, just like the inhabitants of settled European communities..." On 5 May 1645 Stuyvesant was appointed director. I assume that news reached NN a few months later. But Stuyvesant did not arrive until 11 May 1647. It is intersting to look at the number of patents issued by Kieft in half year intervals: 1644 H1 10 1644 H2 1 1645 H1 0 1645 H2 30 1646 H1 20 1646 H2 10 1647 H1 62 (I got these numbers by quickly counting in Book GG; neglecting the few shown out of date order.) So, I'm thinking that maybe Adam (and perhaps many others) wanted to nail down their rights under the known Kieft, not knowing what Stuyvesant would do. There certainly was a flurry of activity shortly before Stuyvesant arrived. Regards, Howard hswain@ix.netcom.com

I have a note here, but no book number and I don't have any more info than this: Marriage record from Amsterdam (Netherlands): 21 July 1621. Philippe Dutrieux of Roby aged 34 and living in the Runtstreat, worsted dyer, widower of Jacquemyne Noiret, to Susanna du Chesne, of Sedan aged 20 years, orphan, assisted by Jean Pinson her cousin. This would make Susanna du Chesne's age about 44 at the baptism of Jacob du Trieux on 2 December 1645. While Susanna is old enough to be a grandmother in 1645, it's still entirely possible to have children at age 44 and beyond. Adult males can father children at almost any age. Did Isaac or Jacob du Trieux name any daughters 'Jacomyntje'? Thanks, Liz J

Jean: Great pictures. It was good to see your name on the web. Margery Freas -----Original Message----- From: dutch-colonies-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dutch-colonies-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Jean Bout Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:14 PM To: dutch-colonies@rootsweb.com Subject: [DUTCH-COLONIES] Photos of New York City 1800s-early 1900s To view the interesting photos of New York City taken in the late 1800s and the early 1900s, click http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5010 Enjoy yourselves. Jean Boutcher JeanBout@juno.com ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Thank you Howard for your assessment of the situation and thanks to Richard Hayes for providing the baptisms of Isaac and Jacob. At this point without further documentation or evidence which, as you point out, may not exist, I find it pretty much a 50/50 case and may simply have to be satisfied with an either/or as to Sr or Jr. Purely subjectively I lean towards Phillippe Jr but my notes will clearly indicate the uncertainty. Thanks again to all who took time to look at this. Holly Timm -----Original Message----- From: dutch-colonies-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dutch-colonies-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Howard Swain Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 1:59 PM To: dutch-colonies@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [DUTCH-COLONIES] Isaac du Trieux,son of Phillippe Jr or Phillippe Sr? The 1653 court case documenting the deaths of the two Philips is in RNA I:114-115. This was unfortunately before the establishment of the orphan chamber. I don't find any other documentation on how the orphans (whoever was their father) were to be taken care of. As to ages -- On 15 Aug 1639 Philip de Truy aged 53 years makes a deposition. On 15 Dec 1640 Philip de Truy aged about 55 years makes a depostion. [NY Hist. Mss.: Dutch, vol I, Register of the Prov Sec. pp 214-5, 312-3.] So we might conclude he was born in 1685 or 1686. Let's assume 1685. If Philip, Sr., were the father of Jacob, then Philip would be 60 when Jacob was baptised. If Susanna du Chesne were 18 when she married in 1621, then she would be 42. I wondered if I knew of anyone else in this timeframe who had children at similar ages. I thought of Thomas Fredericskszen and Marritie Adriaens. Thanks to the recent article by Pam Sears: "Thomas Frederickszen and Maritje Adriaens: Origins of the Cadmus Family...," NYGBR; vol 137, no. 3 (July 2006), pp 179-187 we know that Thomas was bp. in 1611 and Marritie in 1628. Their last child was bp. 4 Feb 1672 in NY. So, Thomas was 61 and Marritie was 44. So, having children at the ages that Philip Sr. and Susanna would be is not unheard of, even in the 17th C. As to spacing -- Unfortunately, there do not seem to be bap. records for many of the later children of Philip and Susanna. I looked at this awhile back and assuming 3 year intervals for the unknown births, it looked reasonable as to _their_ marriage dates and there was only a 5 year gap between Rachel and Isaac. But looking at it again, if we assume a more usual 2 year spacing, then there is a 9 year gap there. You might want to play with this some more and see how these various birth years play out for all these children with their marr. dates and the birth dates of _their_ children. I notice that for the bap. of Isaac and Jacob the parent is shown only as Philip du Trieux. When there was a Sr. and a Jr. but no designation is shown, which should one assume they meant? It seems to me you might make a weak case that Sr. was the default -- especially since we know he was married. You may never have a definitive answer, but I hope this gives some things to think about. Regards, Howard hswain@ix.netcom.com ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I have one through Maria, one through Isaac (whichever Phillippe is the father) and then four (!!!!) through four children of Rebecca and her husband Simon Groot. -----Original Message----- From: dutch-colonies-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dutch-colonies-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of THOCHULI@cfl.rr.com Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 4:03 PM To: dutch-colonies@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [DUTCH-COLONIES] Isaac du Trieux,son of Phillippe Jr or Phillippe Sr? Holly, YOu and I have the same exact Truax line.. Two from Maria, one fromRebecca and one from some sort of Phillip.. Who knows father and son. I felt like you that the ages for the senior was wrong. No proof that I can see in either directions. Steph

Hi all, From: "Holly Timm" <htimm@comcast.net> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 11:25 AM Subject: [DUTCH-COLONIES] Isaac du Trieux,son of Phillippe Jr or Phillippe Sr? > > Some researchers say Isaac who married Maria > Williamse Brouwer is the son of Phillippe Sr by his second wife Susanna. > Others say Isaac is the son of Phillippe Jr by an unknown wife. snip > I understand the reasoning here but it seem to me that the simple lack of a > widow's claim for Phillippe Jr could be explained by his wife having died > prior to his death possibly even leaving the two sons, Isaac and Jacob in > the hands of their grandparents, Phillippe Sr and Susanna. Susanna's age > weighs against being the mother of Isaac b ca 1642 and Jacob b ca 1645 > although certainly not impossible as well as a significant gap between > Susanna's other children and the two boys. Certainly both these boys are of > an approximate age to be considered as sons of Phillippe Jr. Thus, is the > following scenario impossible? Phillippe Jr born 1619 in his early 20's > marries say in 1641 and has Isaac 1642 and Jacob 1645. His wife dies > sometime between Jacob's birth and the 1652 killing of both Phillippe's. The 1653 court case documenting the deaths of the two Philips is in RNA I:114-115. This was unfortunately before the establishment of the orphan chamber. I don't find any other documentation on how the orphans (whoever was their father) were to be taken care of. As to ages -- On 15 Aug 1639 Philip de Truy aged 53 years makes a deposition. On 15 Dec 1640 Philip de Truy aged about 55 years makes a depostion. [NY Hist. Mss.: Dutch, vol I, Register of the Prov Sec. pp 214-5, 312-3.] So we might conclude he was born in 1685 or 1686. Let's assume 1685. If Philip, Sr., were the father of Jacob, then Philip would be 60 when Jacob was baptised. If Susanna du Chesne were 18 when she married in 1621, then she would be 42. I wondered if I knew of anyone else in this timeframe who had children at similar ages. I thought of Thomas Fredericskszen and Marritie Adriaens. Thanks to the recent article by Pam Sears: "Thomas Frederickszen and Maritje Adriaens: Origins of the Cadmus Family...," NYGBR; vol 137, no. 3 (July 2006), pp 179-187 we know that Thomas was bp. in 1611 and Marritie in 1628. Their last child was bp. 4 Feb 1672 in NY. So, Thomas was 61 and Marritie was 44. So, having children at the ages that Philip Sr. and Susanna would be is not unheard of, even in the 17th C. As to spacing -- Unfortunately, there do not seem to be bap. records for many of the later children of Philip and Susanna. I looked at this awhile back and assuming 3 year intervals for the unknown births, it looked reasonable as to _their_ marriage dates and there was only a 5 year gap between Rachel and Isaac. But looking at it again, if we assume a more usual 2 year spacing, then there is a 9 year gap there. You might want to play with this some more and see how these various birth years play out for all these children with their marr. dates and the birth dates of _their_ children. I notice that for the bap. of Isaac and Jacob the parent is shown only as Philip du Trieux. When there was a Sr. and a Jr. but no designation is shown, which should one assume they meant? It seems to me you might make a weak case that Sr. was the default -- especially since we know he was married. You may never have a definitive answer, but I hope this gives some things to think about. Regards, Howard hswain@ix.netcom.com

Hi Holly, Here is a copy of the baptism records for Isaac and Jacob, sons of Philip du Trieux and Susanna Du Chesne from the New Amsterdam Baptisms: 21 Apr 1642; Philip du Trieux; Isaacsen; Mr. Herman Reyniers, Jan Willemszen Schut, Philip Gerritsz., Sara du Trieux, Sara Roelofs (my ancestor) 2 Dec 1645; Philip du Trieux; Jacob; Jan Evertszen Rout, Marie du Trieux, Sara du Trieux It does seem logical that these children could be the sons of Philip Du Trieux, Jr. Philip Du Trieux, Sr. would have been 55 at the birth of Isaac and 59 at the birth of Jacob. Who was the wife of Philip Du Trieux, Jr.? Philip Du Trieux, Jr. is listed as #3 The House of Truax, NYGBS, Jul 1926, p. 211. He was married, but name of wife unknown, 2 children. Those 2 children could have been Isaac and Jacob. Richard

Hi, Have you checked Sloat? The Pre-Revolutionary Homes book gives Sloat, Slot, & Slott all together. Donna ----- Original Message ----- From: "John VanBuskirk" <jvanbus1@twcny.rr.com> To: <dutch-colonies@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 2:25 PM Subject: Re: [DUTCH-COLONIES] Van Buskirk, Van Orden Van Norden > Hi Yes I have Mrs Shoemakers book, and I did correspond withn her > nmanyyears while we were both collecting data. I was checking one line > for > another Vqn Buskirk deescendant, when I rea;ized thre were 3 separate Van > Orden / Van Norden connedtions. My appeal was really to someone with Van > Orden records-perhaps they would have a reference to Dorothy identifying > who > that John was (it is in the stray, or unplaced section) I said it was a > needle in a haystack queriy, a new attempt to place one more stray > family. > The names of John and Dorothy's children are similar to those in the > family > of Antje Van Buskirk m David Van Norden. Since her brother was one of > those > who left for Canada, there could be another brothe or nephew in he line so > far undetected. I was hoping there might be a lead to open a new avenue > for > research. I had most of my success in pre computer days checking all if > the > inlaw families Allied Families sections of genealogies etc. I had not > looked for Van Orden before, I note the Slot spouse as another target to > check out. I know about the Dutch naming pattern of children for > grandparents or near relatrives. It does not always work, but it is a > lead > worth pursuing. The name of David Van Orden, made me think of the > Demarests > affinity for that name. I found several Slot - Demarest marriages in my > file. I was looking to connect the dots. It is circumstantial evidence > so > far, was hoping to someone could supply the missing link. I asm always > happy to share the datta I have, I do get queries from Van Buskirks, and > try hard to match the line they have to families that are traced in Mrs > Shoemakes book, and a few lines I can add or adjust at times, that she > did > not find. Several of her stray families seem close to matching traced > lines with probably a single generation missing. As you know this > research > is never done, there is always more to be found. Thank you for your help, > and twor three other replies I have had today > JOHN C VAN BUSKIRK > http://www.geocities.com/vanbus1/ > jvanbus1@twcny.rr.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dorothy Koenig" <dkoenig@lmi.net> > To: <dutch-colonies@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:51 PM > Subject: Re: [DUTCH-COLONIES] Van Buskirk, Van Orden Van Norden > > >> Dear John, If you have been researching the Van Buskirk family for >> many years, you are probably aware of the massive, two-volume work >> published in 1990 on this family by Irene English Shoemaker. It is >> titled, "Van Buskirk, a Genealogy". On page 1090 of volume 2 she >> says of your first couple of interest: >> >> "Pieter Van Orden >> Born 12 July 1707 >> Married 18 April 1734 at New York Lutheran Church >> Parents: Adam Van Orden and Volkertje Slot >> >> Jannetje (Janje, Johanna) Van Buskirk (Major Thomas-2, Laurens A.-1) >> Born Decemebr 1705 >> Baptized 17 November 1706 at Hackensack, NJ >> Parents: Major Thomas Van Buskirk and Margrietje Brickers >> >> Issue of Pieter Van Orden and Jannetje Van Buskirk: >> >> Adam, born 3 March 1735 >> Jon P., born 18 September 1741" >> >> For your last couple of interest, see page 1604 of Volume 2: >> >> "John Van Buskirk >> Married 30 June 1760, license issued at Hackensack, NJ >> >> Dorothy Van Norden >> Born about 1740 >> >> Issue of John Van Buskirk and Dorothy Van Norden: >> >> 1) Theodosia, born about 1761 at Elizabeth, NJ. Married 1) Simon >> Banta and 2) John Pullis >> 2) Lawrence, born 13 January 1764; died 20 May 1844. Married 1) >> Elizabeth Banta and 2) Violetta Van Horn >> 3) John, married Elsie _____. Moved to Pennsylvania in 1817. >> 4) Gabriel, born 1722, died in Liverpool, England, 17 March 1818, age 46 > years >> 5) William, blacksmith in New York City >> >> Information on this line was contributed by Carl Kuesthardt, New York >> City, from records of Anita Van Buskirk Kuesthardt, deceased." >> >> I hope this helps fill out your jigsaw puzzle a bit :-). >> >> Dorothy >> >> >Hi This is a needle in the haystack question. I have been >> >researching Van Buskirks for many years. I recently came across 3 >> >separate couples, all in the 1700s in New Jersey. >> >1) Antje Van Buskirk m, David Van Norden son of Adam Van Norden and ??? > Slot. >> >2) Jannetje or Joanna Van Buskrik m Peter Van Orden son of Adam Van >> >Orden and Volketje Slot (sounds like the same family, different >> >spelling) >> > and a John Van Busirk m Dorothy Van Norden -no spedcific ID. I >> >hope that someone has the early data on this family thatmwill >> >connect the dots. These could also solve connetions to Van >> >Buskirks, Demasrest. Banta, Westervelt, etc families in that area I >> >have more specific dates, and a some clues -like a jig saw puzzle >> >with one large piece missing, that perhaps you may have. >> >thank you! JOHN C VAN BUSKIRK >> >http://www.geocities.com/vanbus1/ >> >jvanbus1@twcny.rr.com >> > >> > >> >------------------------------- >> >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> >DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> >without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.5.463 / Virus Database: 269.6.1/776 - Release Date: 4/25/2007 > 12:19 PM >> >> > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > >

Dear Annie, Yes, please send me the improved information, and I'll see what I can do :-). Dorothy >Would you consider running the information on the Claes Cornelissen Van >Schouw DNAproject again. >So far we have 3 Clawsons, 1 Garrabrant and 3 Petersons with great matches. >Let me know and I'll send info to you, with correct spellings, etc. >Annie Peterson Johnson >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Dorothy Koenig" <dkoenig@LMI.net> >To: <dutch-colonies@rootsweb.com> >Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 11:45 AM >Subject: [DUTCH-COLONIES] Queries for "New Netherland Connections" > > >> Dear Friends, I am now putting together the May 2007 issue of New >> Netherland Connections. I have on hand only a few queries; so now >> would be an excellent opportunity for you to send me off-list a >> statement of your longstanding brick wall or your current research >> interest. >> >> Queries (of any length) are a regular feature of NNC, and they are >> free to subscribers and to non-subscribers alike. Though many >> readers are regular participants in this D-C discussion group, quite >> a number are not. Here is a chance to get help from a wider audience. >> >> Dorothy >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without >> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> > > > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Howard, You are a wizard! You find the most incredible things on the internet. I found the article to be both interesting and informative. For me it underscored how very different Roman/Dutch law is from English common law. However, I do not feel that it addressed the original question regarding the issuance of a second land patent to the grantee named in a deed, which had conveyed the subdivided portion of a parcel of land, for which an original patent had already been issued. The issuance of the second land patent for the subdivided parcel indicates to me that the Dutch authorities were keeping much tighter control over their colonial settlers than their English counterparts were. For instance, William Penn's dream of a "greene country towne", which would extend from the west bank of the Delaware River to the east bank of the Schuylkill River between Race and Lombard Streets, was dashed to pieces when Penn's grantees discovered that they could legally subdivide their lots without his permission. Consequently, Philadelphia hugged the west bank of the Delaware River for more than a hundred years. However, unlike the Dutch, when William Penn conveyed land to his settlers, he reserved only the right to free and common socage. As R.W. Lee observed Roman/Dutch law has no equivalent for free and common socage. In Pennsylvania free and common socage was collected in the form of a nominal quit rent, which in many cases was not collected in a regular and timely manner. However, real estate taxes were collected regularly. I also found the forfeiture provisions discussed in the article to be absolutely mind boggling. Leslie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Howard Swain" <hswain@ix.netcom.com> To: <dutch-colonies@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 2:04 PM Subject: [DUTCH-COLONIES] "Buying and Selling Real Porperty in New Amsterdam" > Hi all, > > See: > http://www.nnp.org/nni/Publications/zwieten.pdf > > I'm not sure this answers Steve's original question, but it does > give a good background with many references. > > And it does mention paying in installments. I think Steve > is right that that 25 guilders mentioned is only the last payment > and Adam had paid more earlier. > > Regards, > Howard > hswain@ix.netcom.com > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Howard, Thanks, I'll read it this evening. It looks like it was the final payment because Adam filed suit against Hendrick just short of three months after they agreed to the sale. 1645-05-02 – Adam commenced suit against Hendrick Jansen for his refusal to deliver the deed to the property purchased on 1645-02-21 (CDM: 94). “May 2, 1645: Adam Brouwer, plaintiff, vs. Hendrick Jansen, locksmith, defendant, about the purchase of a house. Plaintiff demands delivery of the deed. Defendant is willing, provided the plaintiff binds himself for the payment of the account rendered to him. Ordered that in the deed the house be mortgaged until the defendant shall be paid.” Steve ---- Howard Swain <hswain@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > See: > http://www.nnp.org/nni/Publications/zwieten.pdf > > I'm not sure this answers Steve's original question, but it does > give a good background with many references. > > And it does mention paying in installments. I think Steve > is right that that 25 guilders mentioned is only the last payment > and Adam had paid more earlier. > > Regards, > Howard > hswain@ix.netcom.com > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Holly, YOu and I have the same exact Truax line.. Two from Maria, one fromRebecca and one from some sort of Phillip.. Who knows father and son. I felt like you that the ages for the senior was wrong. No proof that I can see in either directions. Steph ----- Original Message ----- From: Holly Timm <htimm@comcast.net> Date: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:39 pm Subject: [DUTCH-COLONIES] Isaac du Trieux, son of Phillippe Jr or Phillippe Sr? To: dutch-colonies@rootsweb.com > > > I'm going in circles with my early du Trieux [Truax] part of my > lines. It > seems clear that my maternal line goes back to Phillippe Sr > through three of > his children. Two of these are Maria, daughter by his first wife > JacquelineNoiret, and Rebecca, daughter by his second wife, > Susanna du Chesne. The > third line is my problem. Some researchers say Isaac who married Maria > Williamse Brouwer is the son of Phillippe Sr by his second wife > Susanna.Others say Isaac is the son of Phillippe Jr by an unknown > wife. > > > > The only documentation I have seen cited at all is Dorothy > Koenig's post to > Truax-L 8 Sep 1998 that states: > > > > "Lisa, Here is the footnote on page 25 of volume 1, number 1, of > my "New > Netherland Connections". The original sentence is "[Philippe's] > second son > [Philippe] produced two sons. Then the footnote: > > Subsequent research has indicated that Isaac and Jacob were sons of > Philippe, Sr., rather than Philippe, Jr. At the time of the deaths > of both > Philippes [killed by Indians in 1652], Susanna Du Trieux > [Philippe, Sr.'s > second wife -- Susanna Du Chesne] claimed wages due to her son, > Phillipe,Jr. There is no record of a widow's claim for him of any > kind. Philippe, Sr. > would have been in his middle to late 50s and Susanna in her early > to middle > 40s at the time of Isaac and Jacob's births. There is no record > for a > marriage of Philippe, Jr. although mariages for all the other > children are > well documented, with the exception of Abraham." > > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/truax/1998-09/0905293408 > > > > I understand the reasoning here but it seem to me that the simple > lack of a > widow's claim for Phillippe Jr could be explained by his wife > having died > prior to his death possibly even leaving the two sons, Isaac and > Jacob in > the hands of their grandparents, Phillippe Sr and Susanna. > Susanna's age > weighs against being the mother of Isaac b ca 1642 and Jacob b ca 1645 > although certainly not impossible as well as a significant gap between > Susanna's other children and the two boys. Certainly both these > boys are of > an approximate age to be considered as sons of Phillippe Jr. Thus, > is the > following scenario impossible? Phillippe Jr born 1619 in his early > 20'smarries say in 1641 and has Isaac 1642 and Jacob 1645. His > wife dies > sometime between Jacob's birth and the 1652 killing of both > Phillippe's. > > > > I would appreciate any comments or additional documentation on this > situation. Although it is clear that my mother goes back to > Phillippe Sr, it > would be nice to know whether it is through Isaac as son of > Susanna or Isaac > as grandson of Jacqueline. > > > > Holly Timm > > sent both to Dutch-Colonies and Truax mail lists > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to DUTCH- > COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I'm going in circles with my early du Trieux [Truax] part of my lines. It seems clear that my maternal line goes back to Phillippe Sr through three of his children. Two of these are Maria, daughter by his first wife Jacqueline Noiret, and Rebecca, daughter by his second wife, Susanna du Chesne. The third line is my problem. Some researchers say Isaac who married Maria Williamse Brouwer is the son of Phillippe Sr by his second wife Susanna. Others say Isaac is the son of Phillippe Jr by an unknown wife. The only documentation I have seen cited at all is Dorothy Koenig's post to Truax-L 8 Sep 1998 that states: "Lisa, Here is the footnote on page 25 of volume 1, number 1, of my "New Netherland Connections". The original sentence is "[Philippe's] second son [Philippe] produced two sons. Then the footnote: Subsequent research has indicated that Isaac and Jacob were sons of Philippe, Sr., rather than Philippe, Jr. At the time of the deaths of both Philippes [killed by Indians in 1652], Susanna Du Trieux [Philippe, Sr.'s second wife -- Susanna Du Chesne] claimed wages due to her son, Phillipe, Jr. There is no record of a widow's claim for him of any kind. Philippe, Sr. would have been in his middle to late 50s and Susanna in her early to middle 40s at the time of Isaac and Jacob's births. There is no record for a marriage of Philippe, Jr. although mariages for all the other children are well documented, with the exception of Abraham." http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/truax/1998-09/0905293408 I understand the reasoning here but it seem to me that the simple lack of a widow's claim for Phillippe Jr could be explained by his wife having died prior to his death possibly even leaving the two sons, Isaac and Jacob in the hands of their grandparents, Phillippe Sr and Susanna. Susanna's age weighs against being the mother of Isaac b ca 1642 and Jacob b ca 1645 although certainly not impossible as well as a significant gap between Susanna's other children and the two boys. Certainly both these boys are of an approximate age to be considered as sons of Phillippe Jr. Thus, is the following scenario impossible? Phillippe Jr born 1619 in his early 20's marries say in 1641 and has Isaac 1642 and Jacob 1645. His wife dies sometime between Jacob's birth and the 1652 killing of both Phillippe's. I would appreciate any comments or additional documentation on this situation. Although it is clear that my mother goes back to Phillippe Sr, it would be nice to know whether it is through Isaac as son of Susanna or Isaac as grandson of Jacqueline. Holly Timm sent both to Dutch-Colonies and Truax mail lists

I'm going in circles with my early du Trieux [Truax] part of my lines. It seems clear that my maternal line goes back to Phillippe Sr through three of his children. Two of these are Maria, daughter by his first wife Jacqueline Noiret, and Rebecca, daughter by his second wife, Susanna du Chesne. The third line is my problem. Some researchers say Isaac who married Maria Williamse Brouwer is the son of Phillippe Sr by his second wife Susanna. Others say Isaac is the son of Phillippe Jr by an unknown wife. The only documentation I have seen cited at all is Dorothy Koenig's post to Truax-L 8 Sep 1998 that states: "Lisa, Here is the footnote on page 25 of volume 1, number 1, of my "New Netherland Connections". The original sentence is "[Philippe's] second son [Philippe] produced two sons. Then the footnote: Subsequent research has indicated that Isaac and Jacob were sons of Philippe, Sr., rather than Philippe, Jr. At the time of the deaths of both Philippes [killed by Indians in 1652], Susanna Du Trieux [Philippe, Sr.'s second wife -- Susanna Du Chesne] claimed wages due to her son, Phillipe, Jr. There is no record of a widow's claim for him of any kind. Philippe, Sr. would have been in his middle to late 50s and Susanna in her early to middle 40s at the time of Isaac and Jacob's births. There is no record for a marriage of Philippe, Jr. although mariages for all the other children are well documented, with the exception of Abraham." http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/truax/1998-09/0905293408 I understand the reasoning here but it seem to me that the simple lack of a widow's claim for Phillippe Jr could be explained by his wife having died prior to his death possibly even leaving the two sons, Isaac and Jacob in the hands of their grandparents, Phillippe Sr and Susanna. Susanna's age weighs against being the mother of Isaac b ca 1642 and Jacob b ca 1645 although certainly not impossible as well as a significant gap between Susanna's other children and the two boys. Certainly both these boys are of an approximate age to be considered as sons of Phillippe Jr. Thus, is the following scenario impossible? Phillippe Jr born 1619 in his early 20's marries say in 1641 and has Isaac 1642 and Jacob 1645. His wife dies sometime between Jacob's birth and the 1652 killing of both Phillippe's. I would appreciate any comments or additional documentation on this situation. Although it is clear that my mother goes back to Phillippe Sr, it would be nice to know whether it is through Isaac as son of Susanna or Isaac as grandson of Jacqueline. Holly Timm sent both to Dutch-Colonies and Truax mail lists