Document: Judgment in the case of the farmer of the excise vs. Daniel Litschoe

Warnaer Wessels, farmer, and the lord fiscal, added plaintiffs against Daniel Litscho, innkeeper, defendant. The plaintiffs say that the defendant took in 3 anckers of spirits without declaring them properly.

The defendant responds that an Englishman by the name of Anthony Ricss, who was staying with him, had to have three anckers of spirits from Johannes Verbrugge at his house, which the Englishman requested of him because he didn’t know his way around here to receive the three anckers for him, so that he consequently has declared the aforesaid anckers for the Englishman and in the Englishman’s name, and obtained a spirits certificate for them because the Englishman shall export them.

In response the plaintiffs request confiscation and observance of the placards. [several lines lost] of [ French ] no anise spirits [ ] and the anckers in question [ ] brandy but [ as ] spirits were found and verifies to some degree the maintenance [ thereof ], but as no tappers according to the general ordinance are permitted to receive in their houses or cellars any wines, beers or distilled spirits, as with the ordinary tappers’ excise, the director general and councilors consent for this time that the parties come to an agreement with one another in a civil manner. Done at the session in Fort Amsterdam, the 27th of September 1656.