We, the subscribed commissioners, authorized by the honorable director general and councilors of New Netherland to settle to the best of our ability the dispute between the magistrates of New Middelburgh and Tomas Stevensen, have gone to the farm or plantation of the aforesaid Stevens, located on Long Island in the jurisdiction of New Netherland, on the 18th of September 1656.[i] There the magistrates of the aforesaid village appeared before us, who made complaint in presence of the aforesaid Thomas Stevensen. [several lines lost] [ First. That the said Stevensen had closed the wagon road from New Middelburgh to the East River near his house and turned it farther down to ] a deep river [ or kil ], over which he has [ built a dam of ] wood and other materials, and as he has constructed the same at a right angle, it is very difficult to handle the carts and wagons coming from above, and therefore they could miss the same dam (with great danger to their animals), they request that the old road be restored. Stevensen maintained that the old road separating his house from his barn prevents him from fencing them in together or defending his place, and that he had therefore made the change. He maintains that the new road was suitable enough to use. After having listened to the parties and inspected the place, we are of opinion that the common interests will be preferred to individual interests, and that the old road (being straighter and more convenient than the other), will be reopened for the use of the village of New Middelburgh; however, on the condition that the same be laid out from the house of aforesaid Stevensen to the wagon path, that runs from the new road to the meadow, as the new road is convenient from there to the river.
[ Second. The neighbors of Stevensen complained that he has dammed up a certain run of water, generally used, for his own private convenience, so that the kil is always ] dry below the dam and remains without water to their damage and loss, [ because there is ] no fresh water elsewhere for their livestock. Thomas Stevensen maintains that the dam [ built ] by him does not injure his neighbors, because the kil has no source or spring, but receives its water only from the rainfall, which soon runs off on account of the steep grade of the kil and because he has made a sluice in the dam, which he opens when it rains.
Having looked at the place we think for the reason alleged by said Stevensen that the aforesaid dam is neither injurious nor prejudicial to the neighbors, because they can build a similar dam below the first and gather thereby sufficient quantities of water for their use.
Third. The same neighbors complained that the aforesaid Stevenson has run his fence into the river and thereby obstructed the passage of their animals coming from the woods, which causes the same [ frequently to return into the woods to their great disadvantage. The said Stevensen said that he had placed his fences into the water to save further labor and expenses and that there was room enough behind the land for the cattle to come home. After having heard the parties and examined the title deeds of the said Stevensen ] , we found that
Stevensen’s boundaries run along the river and not into it; therefore, we are of the opinion that the aforesaid Stevenson has deprived his neighbors and others (contrary to people’s rights) of the use of the shore and should now leave it for public use.
Fourth and final. The magistrates of New Middelburgh complained that the said Stevensen had against the general rule of the aforesaid village fenced in all his meadows with one enclosure, and they maintained that the meadows should be divided into three equal parts, one of which was to remain in his possession, while the two others were to be for use of the common good and he should receive for them two similar shares in the large meadow. Thomas Stevenson answered that he owned and used the said meadowland by virtue of his patents, which being produced, it was found that the honorable director general of New Netherland had granted to the aforesaid Stevensen the meadow in question, [containing twenty morgens. The magistrates replied, Stevensen had obtained the said patent from the director general by trickery, as he had not stated that the meadow belonged to Middelburgh territory, which seems credible, for the director general had promised them that no patents should prejudice their rules] and as we could find [no decision (moderatie) in this controversy,] we concluded to submit the case to the honorable lord director general, being the best exponent of his promises and of the patent itself. (and was signed:) La Montagne.
