LUCAS DIRCKSEN VANDERBURGH

and

DESCENDANTS

First Generation

1. LUCAS DIRCKSEN1 VANDERBURGH first appears in New Amsterdam about 1652. His European origins are uncertain. He was one of the signers of the Lutheran petition[1] in Oct 1657, so his origins may have been German rather than Dutch. Early Manhattan land records refer to Lucas as "Vanderburgh." However, he always signed his last name as "Dircks" or "Dircksen," never "Vanderburgh." The surname "Vanderburgh" was probably applied to Lucas after he arrived in Manhattan. The "burgh" in "Vanderburgh" translates to "fortress" or "castle;" and Lucas lived near the fort in Manhattan. So, Lucas’ full name translates to "Luke, son of Richard, from the fortress" which equals Lucas Dircksen Vanderburgh.[2]

Lucas married, probably around 1652, ANNETJE CORNELIS, the daughter of Cornelis and Adriante (Wallings) Shubber of Durjerdam, North Holland.[3]

Lucas was a "Sergeant in the service of the Honble Company," [Dutch West India Company] and had been in its service since at least 1652. While still a member of the Company, he applied on 16 Feb 1654 at the New Amsterdam City Hall to become a tavern keeper:

Lucas Dircksen, a soldier, requests by petition the privilege of retailing beer and wine, promising to pay the customary excise tax, on which it is apostilled: Petitioner’s request is granted, provided he pay the customary excise of what he shall retail or have.[4]

That same year, Lucas was given a patent for land at Mespat, Long Island, [part of Newtown] on 21 Nov 1654, but never settled there.[5] Lucas was apparently tiring of service for the Dutch West India Company and making plans accordingly. On 24 Aug 1655, he paid 60 guilders for Lucas Hendrickson, a drummer, to take his place in an expedition against the Swedes at Delaware.[6] The following year he formerly made his decision when on 15 Feb 1656 he submitted the following petition asking for his discharge from the Dutch West India Company:

"To the Noble, Very Worshipful, Honorable Director-General and High Council of New-Netherland.

Shows with humble reverence Luycas Dircksen, Sergeant inthe service of the Honble Company here, that he, petitioner has served the said Honble Company for a period of about four years and that he would like now to transport himself with his family to the Southriver of New-Netherland, to settle there, where he has bought a house. He requests therefore, that your Noble Worships will kindly please to discharge him from the service and consent to his removal thither, which doing etca."

[signed] Luycas Dircksen[7]

Lucas’ petition was approved. He did go to the South River [Delaware], where he was granted a patent for land on 10 Feb 1657 near Fort Casmir. His grant was a lot for a house and garden between the lots of Reyer Mol and Claes Pietersz Smith. It also bordered the South River.[8] Lucas was there on 23 Jun 1656 when he made a deposition regarding a suit brought by Isack Israel against Jan Flaman. Lucas and Abraham Rycke stated that they were "aboard the bark named de Fenix between 14 and 15 April towards daybreak, weather and wind being agreeable, did run aground along the shore and remained fast. During the time they were there an anker of brandy belonging to … Isack Isreal was drunk and some cheeses eaten; but they do not remember the number since all beverages and victuals were seized for use in the emergency, without regard to whom they belonged. Likewise, they know that Isack Israel's duffels were used as tents for shelter and beds to lie on." The court advised the parties to resolve the matter in friendship, but if they could not to present the matter again.[9]

Lucas he did not remain near Ft. Casmir very long, since he bought on 30 Jun 1656 a house and lot in Manhattan at present day 21 Broadway. A year later on 1 Mar 1657, he purchased another house and lot adjacent to and behind this lot.[10] Though Lucas kept his Delaware property throughout his life,[11] he always resided in Manhattan.


Lucas was granted the "Small Burgher Right" in New Amsterdam on 13 Apr 1659. This right granted him the privilege of trade and the capability to be appointed to minor or servile office.[12] This right was certified or reconfirmed on 20 Dec 1659 by Martin Cregier the Burgomeister of New Amsterdam.[13]

Lucas became a well known tavern keeper in New Amsterdam. He initially operated his tavern from his home on 21 Broadway, but by the mid 1660s he kept a tavern called "The Signe of the Fort Orange" at present day 16 Stone St. in Manhattan.[14]

Tavern keeping presented occasional debt collection problems for him. One incident resulted in two court appearances versus Ryntie the Mason. On 11 Dec 1656, the court found in favor of Lucas. On 16 Dec 1656, Anthony Back appeared in court for Lucas Dircksen, then sick, with power of attorney, demanding payment of Fl. 170. for board and disbursements. Ryntie acknowledged the debt, explaining that he could not obtain payment from others. The Court ordered Ryntie to pay the debt within three weeks.[15]

Other tavern activity kept Lucas in the public eye. The 29 Jan 1657 court minutes record one of these events:

"Honble de Silla, pltf. v/s Ryck Hendricksen, deft. Pltf. says that deft. about a quarter of a year ago struck one Cornelis Tysen, wood sawyer, at the house of Luycas Dircksen, tavernkeeper, with tongs on his head, which caused a dangerous wound, and wheras he is now cured requests payment for the surgeon for the cure, and for the Honble Schout the fine of fl. 300. according to placard. Deft. answering says, he struck the aforesaid with tongs, saying he was forced thereto; whereas he ran from his work and stopped in the tavern, where he grossly slandered him as a rascal, a meatstealer and such like. The Court ordered the deft. to prove his statement by the next Court day."[16]

Lucas continued to have debt problems with Reintje the mason a year and a half after his first encounter. On 3 Jun 1658, "Luycas Dirckzen appears in Court exhibiting certain judgement against Reintje the mason; demands satisfaction of the same. The Court orders Luycas Dirckzen to notify Reintje the mason."[17]

Further payment difficulties continued the same year when on 21 Oct 1659: "Luycas Dirckzen, pltf. v/s Reinick Gerrisen, deft. Pltf. demands from deft. 8 whole and two half beavers for tobacco pipes and a cap; also fl. 15: 16 in zeawant according to obligation. Deft. acknowledges the debt, but says he has not wherewith to pay. The Court orders deft. to pay the pltf."[18]

Lucas was usually found himself on the positive side of the court when involved in incidents regarding his tavern. However, in 1661 he ran into trouble with the local authorities for serving customers after nine o’clock in the evening. On Tuesday, 5 July 1661, Lucas appeared in court as a defendant against Pieter Tonneman, the plaintiff, who represented the local Dutch government. The court minutes state:

"The Schout [judicial functionary], Pieter Tonneman, pltf., v/s Luycas Dirckzen, tavernkeeper, deft. Pltf. demands from deft. One hundred and fifty guilders for a fine imposed three different times by his deputy Hans Vos, for having tapped for people in the night, after nine o’Clock bell ring, saying that there were, once, over twenty persons, and fifty guilders additional for his servant or deputy having been shoved out of the house by those, who sat there with threats of violence. Deft. says, he denies it all, except that, once, six persons sat in his house about half past nine and that Hans Vos was drunk, when he came there and drew his dagger against which Marten, the sail maker, resisted, which happened when the bell stopped ringing. Hans Vos, entering, denies having been drunk, when he imposed the fine on them, and having drawn the dagger; and he has laid the fine three times. The Officer calls for a fine on the deft. for having called Hans Vos a liar, in presence of the Court. Hans Vos was asked, if he did not know, who sat there? Answers, he knew no one, as they pushed him out of doors; but saw well that the house and table were full of people. Burgomasters town magistrates] and Schepens [aldermen] having heard and understood all, condemn the deft. in a fine of forty two guilders, with costs to be applied, as is proper."[19]

By 13 Sep 1661, Lucas had not yet paid his fine. So, on that date, "the officer Peiter Tonneman requests, that the judgement against Luyas Dircksen, dated 5 Jul 1661 may be put in execution. The bailiff was ordered to put these in execution."[20]

Despite his financial intrigues, Lucas invested in other Manhattan property. On 18 Jul 1661 he bought a plot of land from William Jansen Van Borcklo. He kept this small tract two years and sold it on 21 Jul 1663 to Johannes Verveelen.[21]

Other debt collection problems continued to plague Lucas. One debt was complicated by a wager he had made with Pieter Janzen. On 12 Sep 1662, "Luycas Dircksen, pltf. v/s Pieter Janzen, mason, deft. Pltf. demands from deft. eighty one guilders, five stivers. Deft. says, he does not owe so much; produces a contract made with him in form of a wager amounting to the quantity of three tuns of beer, which he won from him. the W: Court condemn the deft. to pay the pltf. the eighty one guilders five stivers."[22] A week later, on 19 Sep 1662, the money had still not been paid. This time in court, Annetje, Lucas’ wife, petitioned for the payment. "Luycas Dircksen’s wife also appearing demands likewise execution of the judgement, which her husband has obtained against Pieter Jansen Metselaar (mason), dated 12th of this month. Marginal order: The Baliff is ordered to put these in execution."[23] This case dragged on until the following Spring. Evidently, Pieter Janzen had debt collection problems of his own. This caused a third party to complicate the matter. On Tuesday 17 Apr 1663, the issue was readdressed and apparently resolved. "Luycas Dirckzen, pltf. v/s Pieter Janzen, mason, deft. Pltf. concludes in writing, that the attachment on the monies belonging to deft. in Denys Hartooghvelt’s hands shall be declared valid, as he has gained the suit against him and that deft. shall consent to Denys being ordered to bring the money he owes deft. into consignment of this City and that he, the pltf., be admitted to lift, under bail `de restituedo,’ the sum of seven and ninety guilders, two stivers according to specification, with costs. Deft. says, he is willing to pay, on condition of deducting the three barrels of beer obtained from him. Burgomasters and Schepens declare the attachment valid and order Denys Hartooghvelt to bring the money into consignment of this City."[24]

12 Sep 1662 was a busy court day for Lucas. Not only was the long standing debt collection battle with Pieter Janzen begun, but two other payment defaults were also addressed. Hermen Douwzen had defaulted for a second time on a payment. Annetje, again representing her husband, addressed the court: "Pltf’s wife entering demands from deft. according to a/c which she exhibits, the sum of forty four guilders five stivers in seawant. The W: Court order deft. to deposit the money with the Secretary of this City." Evidently, this issue was finally resolved during a 3 Oct Court hearing.[25]

The final debt issue of the day concerned money owed by Denys Isaacken. Evidently, Denys delayed his payment until the following May when at the City Hall on Tuesday, 22 May 1663: "This day Burgomaster Olof Stevensen van Cortlant lifted for Luycas Dircksen the monies brought in deposit to this City Hall by Denis Isaacksen on date...." Lucas appears to have forgotten about the debt, and Steven Cortlandt appears to have forgotten about collecting Lucas’ money.[26] Lucas finally remembered the debt on 15 Jul 1664 when he appeared in Court: "Luycas Dirckzen entering demands, that he may lift the monies, which Denys Isaacksen brought in consignment of this City for Pieter Jansen, mason. Whereupon Luycas Dircksen was informed, that they were taken in date 22d May 1663 by Oloff Stevenzen van Cortlandt, and he must take out an acte thereof."[27]

The Summer and Fall of 1663 were quiet times for Lucas regarding his court appearances. It wasn’t until 18 Dec 1663 that he found himself back in court. This time he was called as a witness regarding an estate settlement: "Gerrit van Tright, pltf. v/s Freryck Flipzen, deft. Pltf. in quality as before demands verification of defts. rendered a/c against the estate left by Elmerhuysen Clein. Deft. says, he took it from the book of Pieter Rudolfus. Pltf. asks, if it has not been paid? to which deft. says, he cannot find so by the books. Then, as Luycas Dircksen was the special friend of Elmerhuysen and if anything be paid, he will know it certainly: whereupon Luycas Dircksen being called in declares he has no knowledge of it; then says, he well knows that Elmerhuysen had some elk hides at Pieter Rudolfus, some of which Pieter Rudolfus received, but cannot say, whether these were in payment or not. Pltf. maintains, that it is strange, if Pieter Rudolfus had not received any payment from Elmerhuysen the last time he was here, that he should not have demanded some obligation from him. Whereas the matter in question is obscure, Burgomasters and Schepens decree, that it be postponed until further explanation be offered, and that Gerrit van Tright, meanwhile, shall retain according to the condition of the estate as much as should belong to deft. according to his claim."[28]

Caught up in the political strife between the Dutch and English in the 1660s, Lucas was among many of the New Amsterdam settlers who showed frustration with Director General Stuyvesant and his council. Stuyvesant and his administrators had been slow in dealing with the English advances toward taking over New Amsterdam. The English made an overt takeover attempt when they positioned several armed ships up the Hudson River at Nyack. In response to this threat, Lucas and 92 others appealed to their leaders on 5 Sep 1664 to negotiate a peaceful agreement with the English:

"Right Honorable. We ... cannot conscientiously foresee that anything else is to be expected for this fort and city of Manhattans (as your Honors must be convinced), than misery, sorrow, conflagration, the dishonor of women, murder of children in their cradles, and, in a word, the absolute ruin and destruction of about fifteen hundred innocent souls, only two hundred and fifty of whom are capable of bearing arms, unless you be pleased to adjust matters according to the conjecture of the time.

Your honors are ... better aware than we, that four of the English King’s frigates are now lying in the road at Nyack, with six hundred soldiers, ... for the purpose of reducing New Netherland to his Majesty’s obedience. In compliance with that commission, the English General hath sent divers letters to your Honors, summoning this city and Fort Manhattan, promising, in case we voluntarily submit, that we shall not experience the least loss or damage ... .

These threats would not have been at all regarded, could your Honors or we, your petitioners, expect the smallest aid or succor. But (God help us!) whether we turn us for assistance to the north or to the south, to the east or to the west, ‘tis all in vain! On all sides are we encompassed and hemmed in by our enemies. If, on the other hand, we examine our internal strength, alas! it is so feeble and impotent that, unless we ascribe the circumstances to the mercy of God, we cannot sufficiently express our astonishment that the foe should have granted us so long a reprieve, inasmuch as he could have delivered us a prey and plunder to the soldiery after one summons."

The petitioners went on to say that "your Honor’s fortress ... is incapable of making head three days against so powerful an enemy." Summing up their plight, the residents affirmed that "... we humbly, and in bitterness of heart, implore your Honors not to reject the conditions of so generous a foe, but to be pleased to meet him in the speediest, best and most reputable manner. Otherwise (which God forbid), are we obliged, before God and the world, to protest against and call down on your Honors the vengeance of Heaven for all the innocent blood which shall be shed in consequence of your Honors’ obstinancy, inasmuch as the Commissioners have to-day informed us, that the aforesaid English General has stated and threatened that he shall not wait longer than this day."

In closing, the petitioners trusted that "... your Honors will exhibit yourselves, in this pressing exigency and sorrowful season, as men and Christians, and conclude, with God’s help, an honorable and reasonable capitulation which, may the Lord our God, in His great mercy, be pleased to grant us. Amen."[29]