[811] O'Callaghan, Names of Persons for Whom Marriage Licenses Were Issued, p. iii.
[812] Addressed to the vice-director and his council: Fernow, Doc. Rel. to Col. Hist. of N. Y., XII, 137 (Dec. 29, 1655). For a similar application see ibid., XII, 153, 154. For further record of entry of banns before the "mayor of New York" (1670-71) see Records of New Amsterdam, VI, 262, 334.
[813] Dec. 24, 1657: Fernow, loc. cit., 156.
[814] For a discussion of the divorce jurisdiction of the Dutch courts see chap. xv, below.
[815] Valentine, Manual of the Corporation, 1845-46, 368; Records of New Amsterdam, I, 155.
[816] While these proceedings were in progress, another appeal, growing out of the case, came from the schout, burgomasters, and schepens, in the city hall, special session of Feb. 8, 1656. Case of "Maria Verleth, pltf. v. Joost van Beeck, deft." The defendant maintains, as the marriage between Johannis van Beeck and Maria Verleth is not yet declared legal, that certain "letters are not her's, until the marriage be legalized." But should the marriage be declared lawful by the court, supreme council, and consistory, he consents that she shall have them. He only wants his right. The court lets Maria have the letters provisionally, because it has never been informed that the marriage has been declared illegal, and it has already announced that it must respect the proclamation of the church and the "marriage tie of said young people."—Records of New Amsterdam, II, 36.
[817] Ibid., I, 159, 160.
[818] Ibid., 164, 165. Earlier on the same day, the record says, van Beeck prays "that disposal be made of petition and remonstrance;" but no action was taken because the bench was not complete: ibid., 163, 164.
[819] Records of New Amsterdam, I, 173, 174.
[820] See the reference to power of attorney in Stuyvesant's letter, p. 269, above.