Wednesday, October 4, 1656[1]
The honorable officer, plaintiff, against Henderick Hendericksen Backer, defendant.
The officer says that the defendant was fined by the court twenty-four guilders for having baked lightweight bread and ten guilders for using abusive language, which sentence he has refused to comply with and to satisfy. Also, that on account of his refusal he was prohibited from baking, which order in contempt of the court he has also refused to obey.
He answers that he has never baked bread for the Christians that was found short of weight, but as to the Indians, he declares that he did not know that it was forbidden.
Asked whether he was not fined thirty-four guilders by the court, he answers. Yes.
Whether the first and second time that notice was served on him, he refused to comply with and satisfy the sentence?
Answers, That he put it off until the arrival of the officer.
Whether, upon further refusal, he was not enjoined by the court from baking for the space of six weeks?
Answers, That the court messenger served notice on him to that effect, but that he gave the court messenger for answer, “Why should I stop baking? My money is ready.”[2]
The court messenger being thereupon personally examined and the writ returned by him being inspected, his report is that the defendant answered: “I’ll just have to keep on and see what comes of it.”
Being asked further whether he has been obedient and stopped baking? Answers, No.
The officer demands that he be fined the double amount and be suspended from the exercise of his trade for the period of three months and remain under arrest until the fine is paid.
A vote being taken, the defendant is by a majority of those present condemned to pay the fine demanded and as an example to others suspended for the space of six weeks, or else ordered to settle with the officer.
