168 HISTORY OF BROOKLYN.

case; therefore the minister advised that this difference be referred and submitted to the Honorable the Consistory of New York.”1

On the 14th of October, 1680, the following was agreed to, being article 7 of a new agreement with the minister, viz.:

“Those of Flatbush shall provide that the minister’s field be enlarged two morgen, in order that the minister may keep a horse and suitably attend to the service of the Church, and also make all necessary repairs to the fences, dwelling, kitchens, well, and appurtenances, with earnest desire and integrity of heart.”

The interference of the British authorities, who then hold the Dutch colonies in subjection, with the concerns of the Reformed Dutch churches, produced much uneasiness and a considerable show of opposition among the inhabitants of the four towns. And in 1680 the Church Council, assembled in synod at Flatbush, formally resolved that the charge and management of church lands and property belonged to the Church Council, and was secured to them by the Charter of Freedoms; and furthermore, that the English officials were, by their oaths of office, bound to protect and not to abridge the rights of the church.2 They also chose church masters, to take charge of the church property; and these officers were reappointed for several successive years.

1 Translation of the second resolution of the session of the four towns, held at Flatbush the 1st of February, 1680.

2 Translation. “In Synedrio Midwoudano. The following was done on the lot of February 1679 (-80):

"Whereas the Church Consistory judged that the charge of the goods and lands of the Low Dutch Church ought to be intrusted to the Hon. the Church Council, because it accords with the freedoms granted to us in this land,

“Therefore, the said Consistory provide (as it may not accord with their service in the church) that the right of choosing Church-Masters should be given to them, in connection with the Hon. Constables and Overseers, not because they judged that the English officers bad any power over the church, or church property, as that would be contrary to the Dutch freedom, but simply to cause the aforesaid officers faithfully to maintain and protect the church and church property, which is not contrary to their oath or trust, etc.

“Whereupon, collectively with the Hon. Magistrate and Church Council, Joseph Hegeman, Adriaen Reijersz, Dirck Jansz Vander Vliet, were appointed as Church Masters in the place of the retiring officers.”

This action was continued in 1680,1681,1683.