HISTORY OF BROOKLYN. 101

rods further up the maize-land till to the woods, northeast by east 85 rods, northeast by north 60 rods, the breadth in the woods till to the land of said Jan Evertsen (Bout) northwest eighty-seven rods, again to the maize land next the land of the aforesaid Jan Evertsen (Bout) southwest and southwest by west 55 rods, through the maize-land to the place of beginning, southwest a little southerly, 137 rods: amounting in all to 19 morgens and 105 rods.”

To this was subsequently added another parcel, making in all 29 morgens.1 This tract may be described as lying between Fulton avenue, Fourth avenue, Nevins and Douglass streets, designated on the map as belonging to Mary Powers and to Nicholas Casthalez.2 It was confirmed by Gov. Nicholls, June 21, 1667, to Albert Cornelissen (Wantenaer),3 who had married Trientje, the widow of Huyck Aertsen van Rossum, deceased. March 7, 1680-1, Cornelissen conveyed, by endorsement on the back of the patent from Gov. Kieft, and the confirmatory one from Gov. Nicholls, the above premises to Michael Hansen (Bergen); also, by a separate conveyance, the adjoining meadows, which he had bought of Theunis Nyssen on the 16th of May, 1656, and which had been confirmed to him by a patent from Gov. Nicholls, dated June 26, 1668.4 The original patent to

1 Patents, G G, 136.

2 It, however, covered rather more than these two pieces.

3 Or “the glove-maker.” Albert Cornelissen, in June, 1643, let himself as a wheelwright to Conyn Gerritsen, for one year (N. Y. Col. MSS., ii. 61). On June 5, 1665, he was tried for killing Barent Jansen, of Brooklyn, by striking him in the side with a knife, of which wound he died the same day. As the deed was done in self-defence, the jury returned a verdict of manslaughter, and he was sentenced to be burned in the hand before the rising of the court, to forfeit all his goods and chattels, and to remain in prison for a year and a day. He was, however, pardoned on the same day by Gov. Nicholls. (Alb. Rex. Patents, vol. i. 165.)

4 These meadows of Teunis Niessen are referred to in Holl. Doe., i. 338, in the Answer of the W.I. Co. to the Remonstrance of the New Netherlands, 1650. Jan Evertsen Bout and J. Van Cowenhoven complained, in that remonsrance, that "after the transfer had been executed of the patents to the proprietor, Kieft had added thereto a little clause which was manifestly contradictory; inasmuch as the patents included the land and valley, and the clause takes the valley (or meadows) back to the Company," &c. The reply (p. 340) says: "We are informed, and therefore say, that the petitioners will not prove the late Director, William Kieft, hath called in more than one patent; and he subjoined with his own hand, that he reserved the valley, not for the Company, but for the town of Breuckelen, In general. The reason for the revocation was because Jan Evertsen Bout, one of the petitioners, who occupies part of the valley, together with others beside him, who undertook to found or improve the town of