Old Taverns of New York. Bayles William Harrison

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ for which Van Borsum, if the record is correct, charged him three hundred and ten florins, or at the rate of nine dollars per plate; and it appears that it was worth the price, for although Beaulieu was sued by Van Borsum for the bill, his defence was that he was to pay only one-half of the expense, the other half to be paid by a few of the other guests. No complaint was made that the amount charged was excessive. Annetje Van Borsum testified before the Court that she made the arrangement and bargain with Beaulieu alone and looked to him for payment. The Court took this view and gave a verdict against Beaulieu for the full amount. Annetje Van Borsum must certainly have been a fine cook, and the dinner must have been served with some expensive accessories, of the nature of which we can hardly surmise. It serves to show that New Amsterdam, even at this early period, was not entirely devoid of expensive luxuries (for such must have been the case). After the death of Egbert Van Borsum, his widow, Annetje, continued the business for several years, she herself managing the tavern, and her son, Hermanus, attending to the ferry. In her declining years she retired to the city of New Amsterdam where she died at a green old age.

      In 1655 Solomon Peterson La Chair, a gentleman of the legal profession, made his appearance in New Amsterdam, and, as there was not a promising prospect in that line of business, he rented the house of Teunis Kray, on the Graft, and petitioned the Burgomasters and Schepens for permission to keep it as a tavern, which could be managed by his wife in his absence on legal business, and would be of great assistance to him in gaining a livelihood. Permission was granted. He afterwards bought the house of Kray, agreeing to pay for it in instalments; but as Kray had formerly sued him for the rent he had now to sue him for the very first instalment; and he never succeeded in paying for it, the money, even when he had it ready, as he says, slipping through his fingers. He did not pay anyone he owed until forced to. He used every means which his learning in the law and his own ingenuity could devise to avoid paying his just debts. He was impecunious and improvident and constantly in trouble; yet he was a man of considerable learning and ability, as evinced by his register of business as a notary, a volume of some three hundred pages, which was discovered in the county clerk’s office some years ago. He obtained a license to practice as a notary in 1661. La Chair, defaulting in payment, Kray came again in possession of the house he had sold, and La Chair moved to a house in Hough Street, where he continued to keep a tavern until his death, a few years later. There was much discussion in the little town on political matters, and La Chair, as a man versed in the law, could probably attract many to his house, where, no doubt, such subjects were thoroughly discussed.

      November 26, 1656, a petition was presented to the Burgomasters and Schepens from Metje Wessels, requesting permission “to follow the trade of an eating house and to bring in and tap out wine and beer,” which was granted.

Metje Wessels’ Tavern

      Metje Wessels’ house was situated on The Water, which was what is now the north side of Pearl Street, between Whitehall and Broad Streets, in the busiest part of the little city, and not far from the City Hall. It became a noted place for Burgomasters’ dinners, and was a popular place for festivities of all kinds, characteristic of the taverns of this period. The Burgomasters and Schepens of New Amsterdam had discovered the toothsome terrapin, for which their successors, the aldermen of New York City, were, years ago, known to be particularly partial, and their dinners at the widow’s tavern were no doubt supplied with this delicious viand. Van der Donck, writing in 1656, says: “Some persons prepare delicious dishes from the water terrapin which is luscious food.” Here men went on the arrival of a ship, to meet the skipper and hear the news from the fatherland or from other foreign ports. Here were discussed the tidings from up the river, where many young men were making adventurous excursions among the Indians, in the far-off northern wilderness, in the profitable business of gathering furs. The trade in furs, the Indian troubles, the military expeditions, the Dominie’s sermons and the Director-General’s proclamations, – these, and a great many more, both public and personal matters – were talked over. It was a sort of business and social exchange where were gathered and distributed news and gossip of all kinds.

Dutch Festivities

      The Dutch of New Amsterdam had a large capacity for enjoyment and in their holiday season of Christmas and New Year, gave themselves up to every kind of festivity and sport that the place could afford. We find from records that some of these were firing of guns, beating of drums, dancing, playing of tick-tack, bowling, playing of ninepins, sleighing parties or wagon rides, etc. The taverns and taprooms were full of life and there were likewise many family festivities and amusements, where the tables were loaded with all the good things to eat and drink that were obtainable. Not only was it the season of the delight and enjoyment of the young and gay, but the older and graver citizens joined in the sports with enthusiasm and encouragement. Even the Burgomasters and Schepens, with the other officials, when the season of festivity approached, closed the public offices temporarily. “Whereas,” it is recorded, “the winter festivals are at hand, it is found good, that between this date and three weeks after Christmas the ordinary meetings of the Court shall be dispensed with.”

      Gathered together to celebrate one of the anniversaries of the festive season, the flickering lights from oil lamps and tallow candles, reflected from the whitewashed walls of Madame Wessels’ assembly room, shone on as happy and gay hearted a gathering as is found in the magnificent and brilliantly lighted halls of our present grand city. They shone on “fair women and brave men.” Notwithstanding the humorous caricatures of Washington Irving, the women were comely and the men were a sturdy and adventurous lot. Here was the government official, with his sword at his side. Here was the prosperous trader or merchant in his silk or velvet breeches and coat flowered with silver lace, with gold or silver buttons, lace neck cloth and silk stockings. He also wore a sword. The common burgher in his homespun breeches and Kersey coat also took a part. Handsome dresses, displayed on female forms were not numerous but there were some that indicated the success and prosperity of the heads of the families represented by the wearers. Gowns of thick embroidered silk and petticoats of cloth and quilted silk graced the festive dance.

      May-day was also celebrated with great spirit and on this occasion the people were accorded by the city magistrates the greatest license. It was announced that “any damage which may come from the general rejoicing within the city on May-day shall be made known to the Burgomasters at the City Hall immediately thereafter when means shall be taken to furnish reparation.”

      But Governor Stuyvesant had no sympathy for such “unprofitable customs,” and such “unnecessary waste of powder.” He forbade on New Year and May-days, the firing of guns, the beating of drums or the planting of May-poles, and ordered that at these times there shall not be “any wines, brandy-wines or beer dealt out.” It is supposed that this ordinance was not strictly enforced and that its restrictions were little observed.

      Stuyvesant also, in February, 1658, forbade the farmers and their servants to “ride the goose” at the feast of Bacchus and Shrovetide, which brought a protest from the Burgomasters and Schepens, who felt aggrieved that the Director General and Council should have done so without their knowledge and consent. “Riding the goose,” or “pulling the goose,” was a cruel sport, but it was not the fate of the goose that moved the tender heart of Stuyvesant. He says in response to the protest that “in their time it has never been practiced here, and yet, notwithstanding the same may in some place of the fatherland be tolerated and looked at through the fingers, it is altogether unprofitable, unnecessary and criminal for subjects and neighbors to celebrate such pagan and Popish feasts, and to practice such evil customs.” He then gives the Burgomasters and Schepens a sound scolding for their presumption, and informs them “that the institution of a little bench of Justice under the title of Schout, Burgomasters and Commissioners does in no wise interfere with or diminish aught of the power and authority of the Director General and Councellors in the enacting of any ordinance or making any particular interdict, especially such as tend to the glory of God and the best interests of the Inhabitants.”

       II

      New York and the Pirates

The English in New York

      When СКАЧАТЬ